Elect Them?

Wow, wow, and WOW! Senior Civil Servants in Singapore will be paid 8 months bonus for last year's stellar economic growth of 14 plus percent! And these include government ministers, who already receive million dollar annual pay packages. Do the math. As many have observed, even Barack Obama doesn't get paid this much to run the world's only superpower government. Well, ok, there are uncertainties in politics. One day you are a minister of such-and-such, and the next day you may be out on the streets, booted out by the electorate. But senior civil servants - the perm secs and all, they can pretty much stay around forever so long as they don't 'mess up'. And that's really the problem about them receiving such large bonuses. You get rewarded, hugely, for keeping the status quo! And my bonus with tax rebates and all annoiunced in the budget last month now looks a pittance in comparison!

Don't experiment. Don't fix anything which is not broken. Just don't do anything and you will get your bonus, and 8 months at that. How this is related to a stellar economic perrformance eludes me. And the local press, such as the Strait Times are trying too hard being apologists for the government. They deconstruct the 8 month figure to show that it is actually 3 or 4 months, citing that the 8 months is based on the basic pay amongst a total package that includes various other variable components. Well, it is either 8 months or it is 3 months. Why the need to deconstruct? To make it more palatable for the man in the street, who I surmise, is shocked at the quantum. But this is enshrined in the law, they would say. And it certainly is.

Which is why we need more good opposition minds in Parliament who can pour over legislation and prevent such madness from ever being instituted again, or at least make it much more difficult to do a 'walkover' by the government. Come on Singapore, we owe it to ourselves to make sure that the people's money is not frittered away by some senior civil servants on gourmet trips to France while the rest of us have to earn double incomes to service that 30-year mortage, send our children for tuition classes, pay the bills and, perhaps, keep the car. If Singapore is as resilient as it is for its leaders to be rewarded with 8 months bonus, a couple of fallen ministers does not matter, does it?

Let your votes count this year!

Elect Them

The Government just announced a $13B budget that has most workers salivating. But of all the comments made about this budget, I like the one from Mr Chiam See Tong, the Member of Parliament for Potong Pasir. He called this a "Fantastic Election Year Budget". Spoken like a true politician!

Unlike many opposition politicians in Singapore, who cannot say anything good about the government, Mr Chiam gives credit where credit is due. But in so doing, he manages to put forth the opposition view, and that is this is pork-barrel politics at play. Mr Chiam does not dismiss out of hand that this is indeed a people's budget. It is obviously very good for the man in the street. Come on, what can beat being given cash, and legally at that? So we go off with a clear conscience that this is not a bribery. Of course some will read this as a sort of 'bribery' in an Election year. Well, you can't please everybody, not even after forking out S$3.2 billion giveaways. I venture to speculate, though, that this largesse will have little impact, if at all, on the additional votes that the PAP can pull in some time this year. The ROI just won't do justice to the amount of money spent.

But then again, some would say that the money is the people's in the first place, so no big deal when it is given back to them. And since its theirs, they'd probably make a bee-line for the Casinos to gamble it all away, and then wait for next year to come. Just make sure that the chicken that lays the golden egg is not inadvertently, and prematurely, slaughtered.

To those who still say that the budget could have been better for the man in the street, I say, get real. Opposition for the sake of opposition is way past its used-by date. They should take a leaf out of Mr Chiam's approach. He has credibility and integrity.

We have grown

I think that we, as Singaporeans, have gotten so used to hanging on to every word that our MM Lee Kuan Yew says that every time he does say something disagreeable, Singaporeans go into a fit - as if he is God who has just pronounced an infallible truth. The most recent example is  where he was quoted as saying that Malay Muslims are "distinct and separate". This had the Malay community up in arms with all manner of accusations, both by the Malays and opportunistic people, flying left and right that LKY is a racist. There has even been the observation that the government is complicit in his remarks for if it were anybody else, you can be sure that the ISD will be knocking on his door. Well, the ISD stayed home, so people observed.

What is my take on this whole affair? I have lived my life largely under Singapore's firstt PM - MM Lee Kuan Yew. I have lived through the years when Communism was still the greatest threat on earth, with US and the former USSR training their most lethal missiles at each other, and inventing and building new 'strategic' ones all the time for the same purpose. So the threat of being over-run by the China-supported CPM, or at least the perception, was very real for Singaporeans. But more than that, there has always been tension between the majority Malays rulers of (the former) Malaya and those who believed in multi-racialism in Singapore. I say political because on the ground, the Malays couldn't be nicer and agreeable people. But the years of experience naturally brings a certain concern, if not fear, about how society is developing. So I can understand where MM is coming from.

I had another chance to speak to this Malay acquaintance who taught religious classes in the Mosque. He let on that his children, who are all schooled in Madrasah's, didn't manage to do well enough to take the PSLE. Nevertheless, he had hopes that one day, they would be good enough to proceed to Al-Azhar University in Egypt to pursue the ultimate Islamic education in order to provide leadership to the Muslim community in Singapore.

Among the many reasons he may have in putting his children through this unconventional Islamic education route was that he felt that children needed a moral compass. If left to themselves, he feared that they would stray. This had been a particularly Malay youth problem though they do not have a monopoly on this concern.

I thought this was enlightening. In the highly competitive society that Singapore is today, religion can be an anchor to ensure that people do not go astray. Thus far the Christians, and increasingly the Buddhists, have youth programmes in religion to provide this moral compass. Enlightened Muslims are doing though largely confined in the Mosques and their religious schools. It would be best if they could bring this out of these institutions into the wider community, if only to let others know about their moral principles beyond just the ritual fasting and food abstinences, and more so about their view on life and society in order to remove perceptions of extremism and exclusivity that MM has spoken of. The ball really is on the Malay-Muslim community, not to prove anything, but to demonstrate their involvement and integration into the wider community within the context of Islam.

Whose Singapore?

I have reflected again on what I wrote in my last post, about Singapore Malays begin less easy to get along with nowadays, compared to 30 more more years ago during my younger days. I must say, in all justice, that I know many Malays who are as friendly and 'mild' (i.e. not militant) as those that I called my best friends in the days of my youth. Now, I even know a person who teaches religious lessons at a Mosque. In my conversations with him, I have found him to be anything but extreme. Instead, he goes for 'secular' courses to upgrade himself, thinks of a whole bunch of options, not quite decided yet, of where to head towards - career-wise. Obviously he is not quite the same as those Malays I have known a long time ago, where striking out on a high performance career was the last thing on their minds. As a religious teacher, he was anything but militant in his outlook nor extreme in his views. And there is one other I know who is so full of life and fun and enthusiasm for life. Being around her can be infectious, and she doesn't spout militancy or separateness. In fact, I have seen recent photos of her in China sans the Tudung - a form of the hijab worn among Malay women. I don't think she is being a hypocrite - just being pragmatic.

I do not want to generalize. There is ample evidence to show that some Malays have become 'apart' but there are others who still are very much my fellow citizen, if not a friend who lives next door. And they can even be nicer than your own kind in some respects. So in this sense, Singapore's race policy has succeeded. While a bad apple may spoil the whole basket of them, there remains a certain resilience in the "regardless of race, language or religion" ethos that has characterized Singapore for well over 40 years.

If this were not so, Singaporeans will be making a bee-line for the exit.

In a sense, this is not Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore, it is S Rajaratnam's Singapore.

Live and let Live

Would you rather that someone be open and honest with you, or that that person is pleasant and agreeable in front of you but say all sorts of un-sayable things behind your back? I think most, if not all, would rather the former than the later. But there are people who are so unsure of themselves, so sensitive and so lacking in self-confidence that you'd better watch what your are saying. They would rather the latter because if you tell them the truth, they cannot handle it (which reminds me of the movie, "A Few Good Men"). I am referring to the sensitive nerves that Mr Lee Kuan Yew has (again) managed to prick among Singapore's northern and southern neighbours, which are majority Muslim countries. Mr Lee made the 'offending' remarks in the newest book on him "Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going". And I agree with what he has said. There was a time when, growing up in a multi-racial community, one didn't think that a Malay or an Indian or a Chinese made that much difference.

Sure all of us looked different, spoke different languages, believe in different gods and exhibited peculiar mannerisms that one can put down to culture, social habits of particular peoples, and yes, religion. But beyond that, we called them friends, some even best friends though there were some who we didn't get along with. We just avoided these, err, let's just say disagreeble, people's company. I certainly didn't avoid them because of religion, nor they me. We, at least I, felt that whatever you believed is a personal matter and should not form any kind of barrier to good relations. I even got invited to meals at these different friends' homes. That was a much more enlightened period if only because religion was not a barrier that it is today, and here I must agree with Mr Lee. Islam in the last 2 decades or more, has become exclusive. Not only that, in some quarters they have become so sensitive about the exclusivity of their faith that they cannot tolerate others. What had happened between then and now? I will not venture an answer. Historians are probably more qualified to do an objective analysis and provide some answers, some day.

For me, I can only reminisce of the time when the many peoples in my neighbourhood, in the worst case, just live and let live.

Truth be told

The government's decision to gazette The Online Citizen (TOC) was a surprise, and a warning to myself. TOC started out aggregating blog posts by Singaporeans, such as mine. In fact, a search of TOC shows that I still have one blog post on their blog site. I thought this was swell - I get publicity and some bit of recognition for my writing. And I have never had any problems with them at all although I haven't been that active in the blogosphere for the past half year due to other pressing commitments.

I suppose that TOC has, over time, become more vocal about the Singapore political scene. It is now more like a newspaper, reporting and commenting on social and political issues of the day.  The suspicion is whether they have been 'taken over' by external parties (read: foreigners) who may be driving their agenda. Truth be told, I am totally ignorant about this, but I do notice that it isn't as 'innocent' as it once used to be.

Personally, I am not too comfortable with blog sites reporting about the issues of the day as if they knew best. If it is opinion, then I can accept it. My discomfort arise from the fact that you really don't know who are doing the reporting, and what their agenda might be. I have been around long enough to know that you take online content that purports to report on the 'truth' (expose is what they call it) with a pinch of salt, unless you know who are doing the reporting and what their credentials are. But things are evolving this way, and serious people who lack a license to publish often now do it online. This just can't be stopped, and shouldn't be stopped. But I can see how certain controls do make sense, if only to ensure that what is reported is done responsibly.

Of course, you can take all of the above with a pinch of salt.

Atypically Singapore

Yet there are some things that happens in Singapore and nowhere else in the world. You see, Singapore is an eat-out nation. People tend to finish their work day after 6 and after factoring in the traveling time, reach home around 7, or later. So in a family where both husband and wife work, there just isn't the time to whip up a home-cooked meal. Eating out during the weekdays is fairly common, so anyone in Singapore for the first time always remark that Singapore is a food paradise. Paradise to them, but a necessity for the locals, really.

Thus when it was reported that a new food centre was being built in Bedok (yeah...that Eastern Revamp again) to replace the existing one, it wasn't really new. What was interesting is what existing stall operators were concerned about.Some asked that when (not "if") they moved over to the new food centre, they'd be charged higher rentals,. This is something that happens all the time with spanking new facilities. One operator was quoted as saying "We don't want to raise our food prices because of the rent...this is a place for HDB Heartlanders to have their three meals" (Sunday Times, 16 Jan 2010 page 2). Funny this. You would think that these businesses are acting out of character. As a business, isn't it their concern to bring in a profit? They shouldn't need to care if rentals go up because they can then justifiably charge more to sustain their margins. Let the government worry about the people's complaints. Yet in Singapore, the government always chorus that market prices should dictate and reflect the true cost of doing business. So if rentals go up, so be it, they'd say. There is very little by way of effort to keep the old prices, as far as the government goes. New means progress, Progress comes at a higher price. That's the mantra that always gets chanted. In this instance, you'd wonder who better represents the needs of the residents - the food operators or the government?

The tender system is probably one of the culprits behind the incessant rise of prices. We do not yet know if the NEA or private developer is building this new place. If a private developer comes in, the result is a foregone conclusion. Look at the development of Kopitiam Square in Sengkang. From the tender exercise, the winning bid was easily close to a quarter million dollars more than the second highest bid. As a result, food prices must be charged at a level that can sustain this cost. In other words, higher prices must be charged. We ask who benefits from all these and you are right - the government coffers. Now isn't that a good thing, since this means the government can dish out more goodies come the year end, or during budget time? But that's the point. They get to decide how to spend that money, and in the process either arm-twist or make people beholden to them. Now isn't that dandy? Using your money to fulfill their own purposes?

Before I get gazetted, let me just say that if you do not agree with me, you can always leave a comment - the very policy advocated by the Singapore government - the right of reply.

And no, I do not receive a single cent from my mother for blogging, much less from foreigners.

Typically Singapore

Singapore is very much like elsewhere in the world.

Take for example the grand plans that are being rolled out in the past 2 months, the latest of which is the improvements promised to that part of Singapore called Bedok. Touted as the great Eastern Revamp (Sunday Times, 16 Jan 2011, pages 1 & 2), it promises a slew of improvements, including new MRT stations, transport hubs, sports and recreation centres...(come to think of it, none of these are really new nor creative). When these things take place, you know the elections are coming. Well, no surprise really as there has been talk about this for the last couple of months. But it is very common for the government to make massive improvements, or at least PROMISE to make those improvements as a form of enticement for votes. Nothing wrong with that. That's the benefit of incumbency. But promises are just that - promises. They never tell you about the fine print - that if the votes are not forthcoming, oh, say, in the high 70%, the promises will remain promises, until the next elections. Well we are not kids, and even kids will know when the adult is lying when promises keep getting broken, not that this has happened in a widespread manner, i.e.

So let's see how the election fares, in places where plans for significant improvements in civil facilities have been promised. You can't blame me for being cynical sometimes, if you have lived in Singapore for a while.

Murderous Youth

If you had followed the local news in the last 3 months, you would have asked the question, "What is wrong with Singapore's Youth today?" Frankly, if it were anywhere else except Singapore, this question would have been passe - what is wrong with youth has always been wrong with youth. But in the usually orderly and systematic Singapore, a country where you can reputedly walk the streets at night alone without beings harassed or mugged, youth gangs fighting other youth gangs, and in some instances youth attacking by-standers, this is unusual to say the least, and very worrying for everyone - the government, society and parents. Now every parent is worried any time their teenage children are spending time out on an evening, no matter where. We parents advise them to 'walk away' when there is any hint of people turning aggressive - better to be a living 'coward' than to be a dead 'hero'. At least you live to 'fight' another day for society and become a real hero.

But really, what is wrong with youth in Singapore today? Some are still reported to be involved in fights at the very same locations that shocked Singapore. Downtown East is at risk of gaining the unwelcome reputation of being a den of gangs. It first got into the news with the murder of a Polytechnic students on its premises. Of late, another 3 assault cases have been reported at Downtown East, by youth to youth. Downtown East, in various forms, has been there since I was a youth, and that is many many years ago. It used to be a quiet place for a family-and-friends-BBQ getaway. It still is. It was redeveloped over the years and has become a much more hip-and-happening destination for the family, but more so today for youth who descend on its holiday chalets, amusement parks, live shows and the great variety of food. It appears that many hot-blooded youths are attracted to it in droves and at all hours of the day. It used to be a members-only place - you had to pay an entrance fee to get into its premises. Now it is wide open. Anyone can walk in and out of the place any hour of the day, except for the holiday chalets.

Yes, there have been gang fights elsewhere on the island, some reported and some kept quiet, but Downtown East is the focus of youth mis-behaving today in Singapore. Many have written and speculated on why Singapore youth have turned out this way. But to put it in perspective, it is after all just a handful compared to the generally well-behaved youth in Singapore. And we should suspend our judgments until the original murderous youths are brought before the Courts. Then perhaps we can better understand what has gone wrong. In the meantime, we should advise our children to be cautious and not get into meaningless arguments and fights, and above all, not to stare at anyone. For some people, this is even worst than pointing with the middle finger. Bravado counts for little when you get a black eye for no good reason.

Leaky Hypocrites

And I thought that wikileaks was an American problem. Apparently not. Since the leak about Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew's view of North Korea's Dear Leader, there have been further juicy leaks of Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affair's officers view of India, Malaysia and Japan, You can't deny that these news sell, and embarrass at the same time. In a sense, it titillates our baser instincts to uncover the way top leaders describe each other. It certainly is not gentlemanly talk, but that's the point. These conversations are not meant to be available to the public, so our protagonists let fly with colourful phrases about each other. I am sure that for every colour adverb used by person on another, at least another in like is made in return. You let loose under cover of confidence. Its fair game.

And aren't we all like this anyway? We say the damnest things about somebody behind their backs but are very civil in front of him/her. And we do so not merely out of spite, but to express our most honest views to the people closest to us because they know where we are comng from and the circumstances leading to those views (the context). And, truth be told, it is very useful communication. I am not trying to apologise for anyone, just that I agree that certain things are best left unsaid in public.

Which is why I don't support the growing chorus of voices in support of wikileaks. If you do, then can you also say what you say in private in public the next tine, and every other time? If not, then don't be hypocrites.

Unkindest Cut

When all is said and done, nobody, except perhaps the radicals (and I don't mean the Muslims), would disagree that Mas Selamat Kastari's (MSK) relative - his brother, sis-in-law and niece, deserve to go to jail.

Whatever is said, that perhaps sympathy and blood ties are too strong for the niece not be have done anything to help MS, she is guilty as charged. Certainly she wouldn't have wanted to turn MSK in, but to disguise a known fugitive for his escape? There is certainly more than it being a lapse of judgement. There is deliberate will and action to condone the actions of MSK (he escaped from a state prison) and sympathise with his cause. What does that make her if not a closet terrorists cut from the same clothe as MSK?

I wonder how many are still out there in Singapore, going around like normal people, perhaps even teaching in some government school in Singapore, but deep down, are just waiting for the opportunity to disrupt innocent people's lives, all in the name of religion.

Riddle me, Batman

Revelation of how close relatives of Mas Selamat Kastari (MSK) helped him eventually to escape to Malaysia 2 years ago certainly raised more questions that it answered. The authorities are not willing to reveal more at this moment as to how MSK walked all the way, in bright orange prison garb, from Whitely Road to Tampines Housing Estate in the eastern end of the island, amidst the island-wide alert of his escape. It's surreal. Certainly great material for several Prison Break episodes.

What is on everyone's mine is: why our normally efficient and effective police never thought to search and monitor MSK's close relatives? Given MSK's apparent familiarity with where exactly his brother stays, one cannot but speculate that he has been in contact with these relatives until recently (i.e. during prison visits perhaps) before his escape. How else do you explain the quickness and purpose that MSK headed for this relative's house half way across Singapore island? How would he know who would be home and who would be away, as news reports, citing the account given by the authorities, would have us believe? I hardly visit some of my relatives, perhaps once a year, and then only during Chinese New Year. Truth be told, I don't exactly know where they live, and when they will be at home. It's normal practice to call ahead so we don't end up facing an empty house. MS must have powers of telepathy beyond us mortals, if we are to believe what we have read so far.

I am not calling anyone a liar. I am sure that some things need to be kept confidential, but so far, what has been revealed has tended to insult my intelligence. Or maybe I am not that intelligent. But I leave that to the more intelligent people (authorities?) among us.

Come and Gone

Too many well-known and well-loved Singaporeans have died this year, and the year is not yet over. First it was Mr Goh Keng Swee, then it was Mrs Lee Kuan Yew (Mdm Kwa Geok Choo), and now, even before our tears are dried, our favourite footballer, Encik Dollah Kassim has passed away. Sure he was in a coma since last year, but he was still with us.

2010 is turning out to be a very bad year, mortality-wise, for our best and brightest, whichever field they graced. One hopes that before the year comes to a conclusion, we will not have any more of these sad occasions.

The collective psyche of Singaporeans probably cannot take another...

A death observed

Perhaps Singapore has already been expecting this for some time now, but the news nevertheless shocked and saddened many of us, going by news and views on the internet. I first read the announcement over Yahoo's Fit to Post, and the way the headline was phrased stunned me for a moment: "Mrs Lee Kuan Yew dead at 89". I looked closer and somewhat relieved to note that it was MM Lee's wife, not MM. Why relieved? Dead is never a happy thing. It means you will never see this person in the flesh anymore, never feel the strange comfort, familiarity and assurance when that someone is around. And if that person has been your constant companion throughout your life, it is that much more difficult to bear. If that is your mother, your grief will be doubly great - the loss of the person who gave birth to you, and who raised you, and the same grief you must feel for her companion who is left to carry on life's journey.

Coincidentally, this 2nd October is also my 17th wedding anniversary, which, of course, is far from the 61 years that Mr and Mrs Lee spent together.

Yet in this case, there is relief because it also marked the end of whatever suffering Mrs Lee would have endured for the last 2 years. I do not know her personally, and have never met her, yet we, Singaporeans, seem to know her from the many pictures of her in the press over her long life as the person always beside MM Lee. Yet for all the exposure, she always kept her life private, unlike wives of some national leaders who just cannot keep themselves out of the news, and in the process, attracting gossip of one sort or another. Maybe the press in Singapore is strict and the government frowns on gossipy news, especially when it comes to MM Lee, but that does no detract from the fact that we hear so little about Mdm Lee's life in spite of her visibility.

As a Singaporean, and one who grew up on the island during much of the time that MM Lee was the Prime Minister, let me convey my condolences to MM Lee and his family on this sad occasion. And may I wish MM the strength to bear in this difficult period.

God bless.

Education Freedoms

The Singapore education system has been a subject of discussion lately. And no, I am not referring to the initiatives proposed by the Government through PM Lee's National Day Rally speech. Rather it has more to do with the cost of education. For some time now, parents have been engaging private tutors for their children. I don't know how many subjects, on average, that their children gets help from private tutors. If my experience is anything to go by, its probably between 2 and 5 subjects. The tuition industry, if one can call it that, is reportedly worth about $182 million per annum, not exactly small potatoes for a service that once used to be on the peripherally - for the really desperate, and for those whose parents have the aspirations for their children to gain admission to the top-top schools in Singapore.

Compared to private schools, such as those run by and for expatriates, the cost to Singapore citizens being schooled is really low. There are no school fees for the first 6 years of primary education - public education is free for citizens of Singapore. Students only have to pay a monthly supplementary fee of S$5.50, plus an additional S$5.50 discretionary fees. In the 4-5 years of Secondary School, fees are subsidized so much so that a student only pays S$5.00 a month - less than the price of a McDonald's meal, plus $8.00 supplementary fees and another S$8.00 discretionary fees. Yet when you add in the additional costs of private tuition, I daresay that education in Singapore is not all that free. In fact, the cost approaches half, if not more, of the monthly school fees that the expatriates among us pay for their children's education (about S$2,000 a month).

As so many who have written in to the newspapers recently on the issue of private tuition, this cost is not really discretionary. Yes, you can choose not to spend the money and see your otherwise brilliant child suffer the ignominy of being placed perennially in the bottom half of the class, or you can bite the bullet the spend the money in order to rescue your young child's morale and self-esteem. Is there any question what most parents must do? It is sad, no, it is a tragedy. Our schools are no longer the great leveler it used to be. Now those who have the means can ensure that their children move ahead, over and above others, educationally, at the expense of those less well-off. It is no longer a matter of whether one has the grey matter that matters. It is now loaded against those who cannot afford private tuition, or those who stubbornly DO NOT believe in private tuition for the reason that they believe the schools should have covered the bases. Education is free, isn't it? The schools provide equal education and instruction for every child, don't they? Private tuition is meant for the weaker students, right? Well, as many parents in Singapore now realize, this is a fallacy only the people in the Ministry of Education believe in.

How did we ever get to here, anyhow?