Does the labour chief know labour laws? Last week, the DBS Bank carried out a two-day retrenchment exercise of 900 employees, invoking sharp criticism from NTUC secretary-general Lim Swee Say, who is also a PAP cabinet minister.Airing his disappointment, Mr Lim said that the bank had not sought prior consultation with its union counterpart - the DBS Staff Union - of which he is an advisor but does he realise that its move, while leaving much to be desired, isn't entirely its fault, for it had to keep within the ambit of the very laws set by the PAP government itself?Based on the Industrial Relations Act, Part III, Section 18, Sub-section 2:"[...] no trade union of employees may include in a notice setting out proposals for a collective agreement a proposal in relation to any of the following matters: [...] (d) the termination by an employer of the services of an employee by reason of redundancy or by reason of the reorganisation of an employer’s profession, business, trade or work or the criteria for such termination; [...]"Further below, the clause in Section 29 states:"Any person who or any trade union which enters into negotiations in relation to industrial matters otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Part [...] shall be guilty of an offence."How is the DBS able to broach a taboo topic, avoid the challenge of contravening the PAP government-made laws and adopt a consultative approach towards the PAP-affiliated NTUC at the same time, despite my view that the brickbat was well-deserved.Discussions on rationale for retrenchments have long been discouraged at the level of rank-and-file unionists and is what has been taught in Singapore's industrial relation courses, which is why a landmark proposal of the Workers' Party way back in the 2006 general election manifesto stated:"Instead of just negotiating on retrenchment benefits, trade unions should be allowed to discuss with the management the rationale for retrenchments. This would enable unions to be involved and explore with the management if an alternative solution might be viable."- WP Manifesto 2006, Chapter 14: Labour Policy and CPFAs if in immediate response, the Ministry of Manpower, through Minister of State for Manpower Gan Kim Yong, announced an initiative to review existing guidelines for retrenchments.Firstly, why does the government not amend the laws to allow unions more say in retrenchments instead of strengthening non-imposable guidelines and creating potential stalemates.Would this end up like the political freedom cases where activists would take the constitutional argument and the police, the legalistic argument.Secondly, why now, when at the first dawn of the economic crisis in 1998, several companies, with Seagate being most prominent, started massive retrenchment exercises as early as in 1999, with the union umbrella's blessings.The NTUC appeared to support their moves because it wanted to preserve the survival of these companies or prevent them from shifting their operations to cheaper alternatives overseas.Did it ensure those companies then were not retrenching as the first resort?Do the unions now not fear that the DBS may move a large part of its functions overseas?To put matters in perspective, Mr Lim said unions are still not against retrenchments except that they merely wanted to be consulted.Therefore, if the DBS had informed that they were not retrenching as the first resort, 900 employees would still be axed, so what difference would it make?Just for labour leaders to feel important for being consulted? Cash grant for buyers of HDB flats The HammerThe Workers' PartyIssue No: 0802Once again, Singapore is seeing an upswing of the property market, with private property prices surging 31%, and the HDB resale market rising 17% since early 2007. Although prices have cooled down in the later part of last year, they are still at relatively high levels. More new HDB flats have been put on sale with higher price tags, while virtually all resale flats in the open market today are selling above valuation.Rising property prices inevitably make owning a flat less affordable, especially for young couples who have just started work and are planning to get married.Opting for a new "build-to-order" (BTO) HDB flat is one solution, but because of the high values of resale flats, there is now a long queue for BTO flats; applicants have to wait up to 3 years on average before getting their keys. Those who cannot wait that long have been forced to source for flats in the resale market.On 18 Feb 2008, National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan said that HDB resale flats were still relatively affordable, citing government assistance such as CPF grants, low-interest loans and subsidies. (The Straits Times, 18 Feb 2008). However, he did not give the full story - many first-time HDB flat-buyers cannot afford to purchase a resale flat because of the cash-over-valuation (COV) amount that they have to pay the sellers. The COV in the present market could amount to $10,000 or more, for a three-room flat in a shorter-lease block on a low floor without lifts servicing its level or amenities in the vicinity. For a well-renovated five-room flat located on a high floor at lift-level and in close proximity of an MRT station or amenities, the cash portion could reach as high as $80,000.Hence, while Mr Mah may not be wrong to say that "recent buyers of new HDB flats use only about 20 per cent of their monthly household income to service their housing loans", he is not entirely correct in saying that buyers do not need to fork out cash up-front because of such assistance schemes.Presently, there is no assistance for COV. High grants or subsidies are rendered ineffectual for flat-buyers who cannot pay for the COV amount. A solution that has been suggested was to allow loans to cover the selling price of a resale flat instead of just the valuation price. However this is risky and not encouraged, as Singaporeans may buy bigger and more expensive flats without thinking of the long term ability to keep up with mortgage payments, especially if the loan is taken from a bank at high interest rates.One idea that the government should seriously consider is to give cash grants to cover the COV amount, in lieu of the existing CPF grant. Issuing such cash grants will not mean giving buyers money up-front, as these cash grants will be withheld by HDB until the buyers have chosen their flat.In a way, this cash grant works like the CPF grant except that the former covers the COV part instead of part of the valuation price. If the cash grant is unable to cover the COV, then the buyer has to fork out the remaining amount in cash. On the other hand, if the cash grant exceeds the COV, the remaining amount will be converted to a CPF grant to cover the outstanding valuation price.Should the buyer purchase a HDB resale flat at or below the valuation amount, then the cash grant to cover the COV amount will not apply. Instead, the government will give the normal CPF grant.Giving a cash grant for the COV, however, means that the mortgage loan amounts will increase since the grants have already been used to offset the COV. However, HDB can ease this problem by lowering the current loan interest rate of 2.6%, especially for first-time buyers.In all, giving a cash grant instead of the usual CPF grant will help to make flats more affordable, especially for young couples with minimal cash in hand. A change in government marking a change in society Singaporeans will probably not see this happen in their country in a long time.For the Americans - and the rest of the world who woke up to it - the election battle is over and a new president, a new government, is in place in the largest global superpower.In the United States, a change of political parties in power is likely to signify little to its citizens, for it has happened umpteen times in its two hundred-odd years of independence.But with his victory, Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama, who was triumphant over Republican Party's John McCain, became the country's first president of African descent.Given my lack of knowledge in U.S. politics - and I don't read a lot about it either - my gut feeling often led me to being a sympathiser of the Democrats, rooting for Al Gore and John Kerry in 2000 and 2004, both whom went up short against the outgoing president and the Republican's George Bush.Obama is certainly one extraordinarily charismatic person.Despite his ethnic minority status, he stood out among the three Democrat contenders at the initial stage - the other two were heavyweights Hillary Clinton and John Edwards – and I instantly took a liking to him.He was my personal preferred choice during the Democrat primaries pitting Obama against Hillary, the wife of former president Bill Clinton - noticeably, any one of them would make history as either the first black or first woman president if elected - and I hardly took notice of the Republican camp.There was also this official Facebook group for Obama, which I joined in.However, ten days into polling day, I read, for the first time, what each candidate stood for and decided to hope for McCain's victory instead.The "switch" had nothing to do with his race or religion - else I wouldn't have started out rooting for him in the first place - but on the issues I personally felt strongly for, McCain represented them more than Obama, never mind that the latter could make history for the former and his running mate, Sarah Palin, could also in the same wave become the oldest president to take office and the first woman vice president respectively.Firstly, Obama wants to establish "network neutrality" in the U.S. and McCain is against it, and as blogger, I am of the opinion that "network neutrality", while seemingly to create price equity, may end up preventing service providers from offering cheaper internet services, which may have an impact on other nations.Secondly, McCain is a strong advocate of free trade and Obama, likewise albeit wanting to impose more stringent conditions on their partners where labour and the environment are concerned but while he comes with good intentions, who is to ensure the U.S. meets the same standards it sets?Thirdly, McCain is open to the idea of an independent Taiwan, largely in sync with mine, or at least, for China to seriously ponder over the feasibility of a "one-country-two-systems" model it introduced for Hongkong, and on the other hand, Obama has no stand on this issue.To the present, I remain fonder of Obama than McCain as a person but my agreement is to McCain's positions and I found him more Asia-oriented and internationally favourable compared to Obama.Hence, the kind of support I gave Obama is different from that of McCain and while I felt it was only appropriate to leave Obama's Facebook group, I did not join McCain's group either, which, by the way, entails a smaller number.Not withstanding that, Obama's themes would appeal more to me if I were a U.S. citizen with voting rights - I would have cast my ballot for him if I were one - but from the perspective of an Asian resident, I believed having McCain as U.S. president would be better for Singapore.Ironically, it was the first time I supported a Republican candidate and this also made it three in a row that I rooted for a defeated candidate in the U.S. presidential election, perhaps underlining my pattern for the underdog, obviously being in the form of McCain, who was trailing in opinion polls despite his party's incumbency.Nevertheless, Obama, who now carries the responsibility of resolving the economic crisis on his shoulders, wouldn't fare too badly as U.S. president, based on my limited observations.His victory also denotes how far the U.S. has progressed in terms social development and acceptance to the stages of bridging racial divides significantly.Has Singapore reached a similar stage, away from the days when Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, then prime minister, said Singaporeans were not ready for a prime minister of Indian ethnicity?Now, probably the gravest concern of many is the speculation of assassination attempts on the new U.S. president by "white supremacists".In my view, these inane racists ought to comply themselves to this democratic outcome, for by plotting such absurd attempts, successful or otherwise, sets the very society they live in backwards, inevitably to their own detriment. Of reserves, auctions and the elected presidency Yesterday on 21 October 2008, Parliament passed changes to the Constitution to allow the Singapore Government to utilise more of the national reserves.In the ensuing debate prior to the passing of the Bill, Workers' Party Members of Parliament gave their not-too-often seen support to a change made by the PAP government.Personally, I share the same sentiments of the WP MPs and back the changes although coming down to the intricate details, may not see agreement with.Over the years, Singapore's opposition has been advocating for the government to dip into the reserves to help the people and an argument against it that is remotely close to the subject can hardly be generated.Economically speaking, excessive savings are unhealthy; if a PAP minister that I cannot remember once called for the Singapore people to spend more during the last financial crisis, it goes to show that this theory is not off the mark.However, when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in his speech, cajoled the WP to cease campaigning against the elected presidency scheme due to this, it got me all confused.What has the use of reserves got to do with supporting or not supporting the EP scheme?Other than the fact that the Elected President possesses custodial powers over the reserves, the closest I get when connecting the twain produces a contrary sound.Precisely, it is the reason why WP supports using the reserves that it rejects the EP scheme.As elaborated by Hougang MP, Mr Low Thia Khiang, who is also WP Secretary-general, a political party other than the PAP that comes to power may see the President obstruct its plans to touch the reserves for good intentions.A former PAP stalwart could become President under a non-PAP government; under the stringent EP criteria, most PAP cabinet ministers are eligible to run for the post.Even if this was done not out of gaining political mileage but keeping to the PAP's tradition of conservatism, it could impede governance, which was why, in the first place, the PAP government "clipped" the "wings" of the EP when the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong was President.This same conservatism exists in even the existing PAP MPs who were reserved about the reserves (no pun intended) whereas the opposition MPs and even Nominated MPs were less measured.Finally, it was notable for PM Lee to say that Singapore elections should not become "auctions".One wonders what can be described of the upgrading carrots dangled by the PAP government in front of voters in opposition wards at the last three general elections in 1997, 2001 and 2006.Although in this case, the funds for upgrading are drawn from budget surpluses and not reserves, they are national monies.Are these not "auctions" in a very large way?The PAP government should lead by example by not employing the votes-for-upgrading strategy any more, starting from the next GE due in 2011. WP members visit DAP HQ and Malaysia Parliament A handful of Workers' Party members including myself embarked on a study visit to Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya, Selangor between 11 and 13 October 2008 and to meet with members of our Malaysia opposition counterpart, the Democratic Action Party.This is the second trip by the same group across the Causeway this year following the last visit to Penang during the Malaysia general election in March 2008 where we followed the DAP on its campaign trail in Pulau Pinang, although there was a slight composition change.Initially planned for next year, we decided to go there earlier due to being informed by our main host Loke Siew Fook, DAP Member of Parliament for Rasah, State Assemblyman for Lobak (Negeri Sembilan) and DAP Socialist Youth Secretary, that the Malaysia Budget Debate would commence on 13 October 2008.The DAP, a reform of the defunct Malaysia extension of Singapore's ruling People's Action Party in 1966, made a breakthrough in that GE, winning the highest 28 seats it has bagged to date in the Dewan Rakyat and, combined with the Parti Keadilan Rakyat and the Parti Islam SeMalaysia, holds 82 out of 222 seats under the three-party Pakatan Rakyat opposition alliance.We were also informed of an invitation to a Hari Raya open house on 12 October 2008 hosted by opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who heads the PR alliance and the PKR and was a former deputy prime minister of Malaysia under the ruling Barisan Nasional government.The group arrived in the evening on the first day and there was little time for anything else apart from checking-in and dinner.In the morning of the second day, we went to Kelab Sultan Sulaiman at Kampung Baru, KL where the open house was and met with Mr Anwar and his wife, Dr Wan Azizah Ismail, who were greeting arriving guests at the entrance.The politician pair was a warm, mild-mannered and pleasant couple, quite unlike the firebrands portrayed in various media; one of our members expressed appreciation for Mr Anwar's visit to the wake of Singapore's late opposition leader J B Jeyaretnam.Outside at the backyard where a large tent was erected to host another function, I spotted Selangor chief minister, PKR stalwart and former corporate guru Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim but had no opportunity to approach him as the function was for different guests.Later, Mr Loke introduced us to DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and his father Lim Kit Siang, the DAP's Parliamentary Leader, who were seated at a table in a VIP room; the younger Mr Lim was especially friendly and broke ice quickly with his sense of humour.Also present at the same table were DAP leaders Fong Kui Lun, MP for Bukit Bintang, Tony Pua, MP for Petaling Jaya Utara (both in Selangor) and Teresa Kok, MP for Seputeh (KL) who was in the news in September 2008 for her incarceration under the Internal Security Act for a week and subsequently released.Another WP member expressed support and sympathy over the trials recently suffered by Ms Kok, who reciprocated the gesture and also mentioned the passing of Mr Jeyaretnam as a loss to the Singapore opposition.By the afternoon, the group headed for the DAP headquarters in Paramount Garden, PJ; there was a little incident when we arrived at the wrong place, which was their older office that had now been converted to a storage hub but thankfully, Mr Loke had anticipated this and took the trouble to locate us at the wrong venue.At the DAP headquarters, State Assemblyman for Bahau (Negeri Sembilan) Teo Kok Seong and other members of the DAP were there to receive us and after the customary introductions, Mr Loke showed us around their headquarters - a stylish but non-extravagant two-storey building.Following that, members of our two political parties sat down in a conference room for interesting and lively discussions and exchanging information on the political situation on each other's countries.We also learned that the DAP had not maintained contact with the PAP ever since Singapore's separation from the Federation of Malaysia but the Penang DAP state government desired to engage the Singapore PAP government for economic purposes, something our group members felt was pragmatically-speaking a good idea.On the third day, we visited the Malaysia Parliament and accessed the public gallery in time to witness Mr Anwar deliver his speech for the first time since eviction from office in 1998, this time as an opposition MP but in his same old seat of Permatang Pauh (Penang), which was held by Dr Azizah during his ostracise.What raised our eyebrows was that one side of the chamber was about 80% empty while on the other, 90% full, and this created was a demarcation that allowed us to distinguish between seats belonging to BN and those to PR; for some reason, a large number of BN MPs were notably absent.In addition, the front benches of the sparsely occupied section, presumably accommodating ministers of the government cabinet, were empty and both PM Abdullah Badawi and DPM Najip Tun Razak were also missing in action.Mr Anwar took up most the speech time with the elder Mr Lim intercepting every now and then and they could be easily mistaken as the PM and DPM or PM and opposition leader respectively.A practice not seen in the Singapore Parliament was that every time Mr Anwar completed a few sentences with a high crescendo, PR MPs would tap the table rapidly a few times and during once when a BN MP rose to speak, the BN MPs did the same; this, we later discovered, was a form of clapping, although in Singapore the opposition MPs would not have the critical mass to put on such displays of support.Due to the lopsided attendance, the PR side produced thunderous tapping sounds in contrast to the BN taps that were like "droppings" and one could surmise that this was probably the first time in Malaysia history that government MPs were outnumbered by opposition MPs.Finally, we left the place and prepared ourselves to head back to Singapore; for us in WP, the entire expedition proved to be both fruitful and insightful and we looked forward to return again.Exclusive photos:Meeting Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in personTan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and his family receiving guestsWith DAP stalwarts (seated from left): Tony Pua (corner), Loke Siew Fook, Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng and Teresa KokA van with "Surat Keadilan", the organ of the PKR, stuffed on its windscreenAnother car with PKR and Mr Anwar stickers, presumably of a PKR member or supporterWP members with DAP's Loke Siew Fook (centre), Teo Kok Seong (left) and a DAP HQ staff (second from left)Lim Guan Eng surrounded by press reporters outside the Malaysia Parliament chamberMembers of the WP group exploring the Parliament building More 'first-world' media stunts Several bloggers and netizens raised unhappiness over a Straits Times sentence in one of its many eulogy reports covering the late Mr J B Jeyaretnam, which was later removed and read:"Yet, the old warhorse refused to believe that he was irrelevant to Singaporeans." (ST, 1 October 2008)Also, we have all read Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's public "condolence letter" to both Mr Jeyaretnam's sons, Kenneth and Philip, which I have expressed my views on in my Chinese weblog and so have others everywhere else in cyberspace.There is one more aspect I couldn't help myself seething all over, although I don't know how many will agree with me.A repugnant shot - literally speaking - was found mounted on a photo gallery of the online Straits Times website dedicated to Mr Jeyaretnam's pictures (14th photo) as seen below:The above photograph is presumably taken during the 1997 general election off a rally stage, as it was the only time both Mr Jeyaretnam and Mr Tang Liang Hong stood together as candidates under a Workers' Party team in Cheng San GRC and also because of a partly discernable WP symbol in the background.I hope I wasn't being too imaginative but the impression that portrayed in my head when I first saw this was that both gentlemen were close to engaging in some kissing act.Granted that the other photographs were fine, but normally, editors in their right minds would select photographs no differently from a pair of newly-weds, picking only a full slate of the best from an available bundle.There ought to be an abundant pool of photographs featuring both Mr Jeyaretnam and Mr Tang, deep in the Straits Times archives, since press photographers are always known to snap away like crazy whenever they are present (including those few days at Mr Jeyaretnam's wake).How in the world this photograph could find its way through their "splendid" selection process is amazement to me, if not for ill amusement.To clarify, I have nothing against gays but neither Mr Jeyaretnam was nor Mr Tang is one unless there is something I don't know, which I believe is moot (and which I would think the press would know even less).And I believe even gay couples, for that matter heterosexual couples, would avoid being seen smooching in public.What's up next - a photograph of Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo sticking his hand into Malaysia Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's back pocket? Philip Jeyaretnam's eulogy for his father Delivered at the late Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam's funeral at Saint Andrew's Cathedral on 4 October 2008'JBJ Dies, Shockwaves, Dow Plunges'. So read Wednesday's headlines in the Straits Times. For once, they were spot on.Dad was born on 5 January 1926, in Chenkanai, Jaffna, where his parents were on home leave from Muar, Malaya. His personal name given to him was Benjamin, and today for the first time I'll call him Ben.His mother doted on him, his father was a sterner, more remote figure, but ingrained in the young boy an unyielding honesty. Even a single cent mistakenly given in change had to be returned to the shopkeeper, whether the error was discovered there and then or sometime later.Ben began school at the convent, the only boy among the girls. I have sometimes wondered if this had anything to do with his life-long charm - a debonair air that he carried to the end.Later he studied at Muar English School, and last year when I drove him to visit his old home in Muar we stopped by at the school, where the principal was delighted to see the return of such an old old boy. Ben recounted how once he had to stand on his desk four days in a row - he could not remember what precisely it was for, but I imagine it was not for some petty indiscipline but for a stubborn adherence to a point of view that his teacher did not share.In 1941, the family moved to Johor Bahru, shortly before the Japanese Invasion. As the Japanese Army swarmed down the peninsula, the family left town. One day, with the Japanese in control, two British soldiers turned up at their doorstep. Water and a little food was all they could offer them, much to Ben's regret.During the occupation, Ben worked as a translator for the Transport Department. One day, following a theft, he was called in for questioning by the Kempeitai, who were investigating. While he was not a suspect, the experience felt very different from the ceremony, procedure and safeguards of the pre-war colonial administration. Someone had told his mother he was being interviewed, and that evening he found her wailing and forlorn, looking out for his return some distance from their home.What brought him to the study of law, at University College London, after the War, was his religious conviction, and in particular the implication that he drew from that conviction. The highest duty in life, he believed, is to love God, and in practical terms to serve Him. That meant to serve one's fellow man - help the poor, sick and aged, give a voice to those who are unable to speak for themselves. Giving a voice to the silent brought him into law, and later led him into politics.In London, Ben's life changed in two important ways. As a student at the international hostel, Connaught Hall, he met and became friends with people from all over the Empire, young men and women whose hearts and minds were on independence and the building of new nations. He and his best friend, Philip Woodfield, my godfather, attended political meetings and joined in campaigns together. They also shared a love of literature, that endured in Ben even when reading had become something of a physical strain.The second thing occurred only in his second year, for then a certain girl from Bournemouth entered UCL. But Margaret had to continue in England to complete her solicitors' articles. Her own mother was also in ill-health. She was reluctant to leave her mother and venture to a distant city. She said no. Ben came home disconsolate.He joined the legal service. In 1955 he returned to England with one single aim in mind. One day walking along the Bournemouth cliffs, he and Margaret encountered a graffito - "TRUST IN GOD AND GO". This was the sign she needed, and she left for Singapore in 1956, with a job waiting for her at the same firm in which I am now a partner. A few months later, on 23 February 1957, they were married.Kenneth was born two years later, and after the premature birth of a boy who died within days, I joined my brother in 1964.Ben became Registrar of the Supreme Court and then First District Judge. His thoughts however were turning toward a more active role in society - in 1962 in a speech at a YMCA luncheon, he said 'It is not enough to go to church on Sundays, to sing about 'Onward Christian Soldiers', about fighting the evils of the world, if nothing is done by Christians when they emerge from church.'He left legal service and entered private practice, where he soon made his name as a tenacious and determined criminal defence lawyer. For him there was no such thing as a hopeless case, if he believed the accused's protestations of innocence.I will give an example of this later, but his next step was to enter politics, and thus began his difficult struggle. Everyone knows where they were when they heard that he took Anson, but not many recall the hard battles before, when he lost often narrowly and after facing down savage attacks on his patriotism.These years were made harder still by Margaret's long illness and death from cancer in 1980. Yet his faith in God never wavered, nor did his belief in himself and his mission. Shortly before her death, Margaret told me that her one regret was that she had not said yes sooner.I was with him at the counting centre at Anson. A fresh recruit into the army. I was at the back of the crowd. He called out 'Where is my son?' and I found myself lifted bodily over the heads of his supporters and on to the stage to be with him. He expressed his humility at being the people's choice, and then spoke of it as his saddest moment in that Margaret was not with him. Her memory stayed with him, keeping him going though his darkest moments.That very night he sent a telegram to Kenneth, away in England. Ben was a server in this great cathedral, and the next Sunday though it was not his turn he asked to carry the cross. He was not saying that God had given him victory, rather he was saying that all he did in his life was meant by him to be in service of the Lord.And so he entered Parliament. For that you can read Hansard. But for him it was law and advocacy in a new guise. Speaking for those who might not otherwise be heard. Arguing always for fairness, and due process and equity. Parliament and the courts meant so much to him. And the worst times of his life were when he was deprived of these, through disqualification.Notwithstanding this he was the epitome of grace. Even though others failed to accept the true implications of the Privy Council's restoration of him as an advocate and solicitor, and so he was not pardoned nor reinstated to his seat in Parliament, he bore it all stoically, fully confident that right was on his side.But the Privy Council's decision at least restored him to practice. And I come now to my example. Three persons had confessed to a murder at a coffee shop. Their confessions were ruled to be voluntary. They could be convicted and sentenced to death on the basis of these confessions. But he kept going and sure enough he turned up a lead of another culprit and pressed for fingerprint evidence held by the prosecution to be checked for a match against this person. The prosecution did so, and withdrew the case. It was a huge vindication of the role of defence counsel.His bankruptcy following devastating libel suits deprived him once again of parliamentary and legal life. Thankfully, we were able to help to bring him out of it, and he had a terrific final year back in the saddle, forming a new party and appearing in court again.Forgive me if my account has been coloured by what he once described as 'my unswerving loyalty', and let me conclude with this. Away from his political battles, where he had to fight hard and strong, he was gentle but committed when helping individuals around him. Throughout his life, the way Ben helped people earned him the friendship and love of many. He lived among the people, preferring the bus to a taxi even in his last days. Perhaps he felt embarrassed that so often taxi drivers refused to take a fare from him.He always helped his sons, and his daughters-in-law, and his grandchildren, his parents, siblings, nieces and nephews and countless others. He would read books to his grandchildren, and even-handedly judge competitions at birthday parties. He was a dear uncle too to many other young people.Severe when he did not smile, his face was transformed by that 100 watt grin, as famous as his mutton chop sideburns, that every one of his grandchildren when babies loved to pull. The closer to him you were, the more his smile lit up your life.A great man, a lion, so many have said, but a nice man, a kind man too. In the end, his life carried a simple meaning for all of us: no matter who we are, we can do something, we must do something, to make the world a better place.PHILIP ANTONY JEYARETNAM, a senior lawyer and novellist, is the younger of J. B. Jeyaretnam's two sons. This eulogy is taken from Rachel Chung's Xtralicious with approval from and thanks to the author.NOTE: Philip Jeyaretnam's eulogy for his father is reproduced here with his permission. Further reproduction will require his separate permission. Kenneth Jeyaretnam's eulogy for his father Delivered at the late Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam's funeral at Saint Andrew's Cathedral on 4 October 2008So for the second time the Pharisees summoned the man who had been blind, and said, 'Speak the truth before God. We know that this fellow is a sinner.' 'Whether or not he is a sinner, I do not know', the man replied. 'All I know is this: once I was blind, now I can see.' - John 9 v24-26This quote is in the opening credits of Martin Scorsese's masterpiece, "Raging Bull". "Raging Bull" is about a boxer in the 1950s who could absorb tremendous punishment and still stay on his feet. Whilst not alike in almost every other way I think of my father as a man who received blow after blow and yet remained undefeated and unbowed. Almost every message we have received has paid tribute to his courage, even from those who do not agree with his political views. And whilst I would not wish to open myself to a charge of blasphemy by comparing my father to the Son of God, I do believe that his bravery and tenacity in fighting for the cause of individual freedom and human rights in Singapore did open people's eyes to the fact that they were not powerless to change things and that through the democratic process they possessed the means to control their own destiny. And despite the government's denial that my father has had any impact on their policies or attitudes towards the electorate, every Singaporean knows the legacy of his victories which the presence of opposition MPs in Parliament attests to.Over the past week people have asked me how it felt to have a father who put politics first and his family second. The answer to this question is, I don't know – because MY father put his family first - always. Whilst I would not deny that the path he chose resulted in very real personal costs for me, which I do not wish to dwell on here, my memories of my father are of a man who was devoted to his family and who was much loved by his children and grandchildren. I remember as a child how my father would always come back early to play with me, and later with Philip as well. In particular I recall when I was quite young building a pirate ship in the middle of the floor out of an old mattress and of my father acting as my first mate. As we grew older he used to play badminton and other games in the garden with us and I remember my little brother's insistent demands that Dad come out to play cricket with him, a request that my father was only too happy to comply with. Even last month he always had time to be roped into playing some complicated board game with my son after a long day at the office.My father always took a keen interest in our academic progress and after I went to boarding school in England, he, as well as my mother, never failed to write to me once a week. After phoning him to tell him that I had got First Class Honours in the Finals of my Cambridge Economics degree I remember him writing to tell me that he had been up all night because he was so excited. After I left Singapore and worked abroad he always called me at least once a week. Wherever I was in the world and whatever he was doing - if I had any problems or difficulties he would always find time to help resolve them, even if that meant dropping everything and flying out to see me.After I and Philip married and had children, his deep love for his family extended to his grandchildren. I know how much he loved my son, Jared, and Philip's children, Tristan, Quentin and Miranda. My son was completely devoted to him, to the extent that he would tell me off if he thought I had ever spoken harshly to his grandpa. Despite his by now precarious financial position he would always insist on accompanying Jared to Robinsons each Christmas to choose him a present - a trip I remember taking with him from my own childhood.I would not ask have asked him to choose between his fight for his countrymen and the needs of his family because I know that no such choice was necessary. This man of enormous heart and courage had room for both and more. His greatest wish above all others was to see his sons and their families happy and I will be forever grateful that he was with us long enough to see that dream come true.DAD, I have been the luckiest child. It was a rare privilege being your son. I love you DAD and hope you will never stop being as proud of me as I am of you.KENNETH JEYARETNAM, a hedge fund manager, is the elder of J. B. Jeyaretnam's two sons. This is a personal eulogy based on his personal thoughts on his father and no political significance is intended. A grateful thanks to him for allowing it to be reprised here from his Facebook page. Paying last respects to Mr Jeyaretnam Thoughts of an opposition freshman at an opposition veteran's wakeI was at the wake of Mr J B Jeyaretnam earlier today (2 October 2008). Before I went there, I did not feel much. I was there earlier than expected. There were quite a number of people and many whom I believe are veteran political activists. No PAP people were there tonight though.I saw the many display of flowers and condolences from all walks of life. I was surprised to see Tang Liang Hong's too. It was touching indeed.The flowers and their messages did not blend well with the crowd present. It looked like a gathering among old acquaintances who haven't met for some time. Photographers from the press were releasing their shutters continuously. How many of these shots will actually make it to the print, I wonder?The first trigger of my emotions came as I was queuing up to sign the condolence book. I saw the people in front of me writing a page each at least. When it was my turn, my mind went blank. I could not bring myself to write the emotions that I have not come to terms with and I decided not to write.When I entered the hall with the Workers' Party group, I heard a wail of grief from a young boy clinging on to his mother as we paid our respects. He was about the age I was when my grandfather passed away.Tears started to well up in my eyes. The floodgates of my emotions were released. JBJ was not just a father of somebody, not just a grandfather, not just a friend, not just an uncle, not just family.My first encounter with him was when he was on the streets selling the Hammer. I was still a school kid but was already a supporter. I bought a copy. Not just that, I also overheard comments of other supporters who were buying. Aunties in the market place whispering loudly about how Mr JBJ reached down to the general public despite being a qualified lawyer, selling the Hammer for $1 a copy.When I saw his photo and body, I don't think he looks much different from years back except that now, he is laid in peace and motionless in a wooden box.Normally, I do not think I would dare to look at body the way I did today. The difference tonight when I was looking at him was that the body held the spirit and soul of the most persistent and determined politician ever existed in my country and who pushed to the very end of his beliefs despite the difficulties and trials he went through.His passing on signifies the fall of a major pillar in opposition politics and I really wonder whether if, in the years to come, will there ever be an equal to fill the void that he left behind.My apologies to the people whom were introduced to me tonight. I cannot recall any names. I cannot even recall the topics that were discussed there tonight. My mind was somewhere else. Simply, I was feeling sad.At another wake I attended last time, there was a verse I saw:"Somewhere beyond the night, the day has just begunFor life is but to meet the dawn, and not the setting sun"I pray for dawn to arrive sooner... if it will. The author, Tan Thuan Tong, 31, is a group director in a real estate company. Known to his friends as "TT", he joined the Workers' Party in 2006 and presently serves as a WP Youth Wing Executive Committee Member. Farewell, great JBJ He accomplished more than what he set out to doWritten for The Online Citizen on 30 September 2008, the fateful day of Mr JBJ's demise. Special thanks to the TOC Editorial Team for edits and permission to reprise it.The very first piece of news that greeted my ears as I opened my eyes today was the demise of veteran opposition stalwart Mr Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, or affectionately known as "JBJ".In that instance, shattered imagery of Mr JBJ's unfulfilled political dreams came to my mind before I came to terms with reality.Although I understood that his health had not been good of late, the news of his death came too sudden.The former Member of Parliament for Anson (1981 - 1986) and Non-constituency MP (1997 - 2001), who passed away from heart failure early this morning, had been trying to stave off bankruptcy since 1997 - eventually succeeding ten years later - merely to earn the opportunity, technically, to return to the Singapore Parliament and represent the people once again.1971 was the year Mr JBJ, then a district judge court, entered opposition politics with the formation of the National Party of Singapore shortly before joining and reviving the comatose Workers' Party.He was the WP's secretary-general for an uninterrupted three decades until 2001.After three GE and two by-election attempts, he clinched victory in the ward of Anson in the 1981 by-election, becoming the first opposition Member of Parliament in 15 years - breaking the PAP's monopoly in the process - and in the 1984 GE, retained his seat.However, he was found guilty by the courts over some party accounts matters and was struck off from Parliament in 1986.The offence also barred him from contesting any elections for five years, which expired in 1991 - just after the GE was over in the same year.In the 1997 GE, his team obtained the highest share of votes among defeated opposition candidates when his team contested in Cheng San GRC and JBJ resumed his presence in Parliament once again as an NCMP - until a civil suit by PAP leaders led to a bankruptcy and another disqualification before the 2001 GE.Owing to this, he had to sit out the 2001 and 2006 GEs.At 82, he had reinstated his legal practice after being discharged, established a new electoral vehicle - the Reform Party of which he is founder and inaugural secretary-general - and readied himself with only about three years to go before the next GE due in 2011.There was even anticipation that he would lead a team in the Tanjong Pagar GRC to challenge his "arch-nemesis", Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, in a final face-off, as this could perhaps be the last GE he planned to run in.But fate denied him even this little last opportunity and wish.My first encounter with Mr JBJ was in 1999 when, as a political activist with the Think Centre, we worked together on a few political projects.Subsequently, in the year 2000, we organised a "Save JBJ Rally" in Yio Chu Kang to raise money for his cause and I became one of the speakers.While I had my occasional fair share of private criticism against the various aspects of his political approaches, he is undeniably one of very few men with the pugnacity and tenacity essential for the harsh political environment that is not conducive for opposition politics to progress.Heartfelt condolences to his family and the two sons he leaves behind.The elder, Kenneth Jeyaretnam, is a successful hedge fund manager who has worked in London, Tokyo and Hong Kong.He recently returned to Singapore and through the social utility Facebook, he initiated contact with me to offer to fill in bits of information missing from the "J B Jeyaretnam Supporters" Facebook group that I had set up (the group has since been converted to "In Memory of J B Jeyaretnam").The younger, Phillip Jeyaretnam, is a Senior Counsel, former President of the Law Society Singapore and author of various novels.Both being fine gentlemen, Mr JBJ should have no regrets.He was widowed when his wife, Mdm Margaret Cynthia Walker, passed away in 1980 - not long before he was elected into Parliament.Let us hope that he will meet her again and unite with her.Mr JBJ may have had unfulfilled dreams like anyone else but, in my view, has achieved more than what he had originally set out to accomplish.Mr JBJ's wake is at Funeral Parlour 1, Mount Vernon; the funeral cortege will leave at 1 pm on 4 October 2008 for the 2 pm service at St. Andrew's Cathedral and cremation at 4.30 pm, Mandai Crematorium, Hall 3 Public transport fares up every year Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri to all Muslims and a Happy Childen's Day to all our future national pillars in Singapore and the world.On this festive holiday is also the first day of new public transport fares in Singapore.Higher fares, of course - at least, not counting those previous years.A glance at the Public Transport Council website (www.ptc.gov.sg) uncovers the fact that Singapore's transport fares have been revised upwards every year since 2005.In July 2005, EZ-Link fares increased by 1 to 3 cents and cash fares by 10 cents under a "new fare review framework" - whatever the jargon means.The following year in October, the PTC approved a 1.7% increase for buses and trains owing to the "positive economic outlook", which saw another 1 to 3 cents' hike in EZ-Link fares.In the next revision in October 2007, bus fares for EZ-Link users increased again by 1 to 2 cents, based on the same justification, although the brakes were applied on rail fares (no pun intended).Notably, there has never been any decrease in public transport fares in over 40 years of Singapore's history (and PAP governance), be it whether the economic situation is peak or bleak.Finally, we came to this year's adjustments and the recommended formulas were a melting pot of ups and downs.Cash fares went up since 2005 while transfer rebates were upped as well, but on the whole, the PTC facilitated an increase of 0.7%.One question is, should public transport fares be proscribed from annual reviews, which is as good as emulating the practice of the National Wages Council?Even the NWC appears not to have kept up with PTC's pace, with the former mentioning only a pay increase for "good performers" in 2007 apart from the usual "flexible and sustainable wages" mantra over the last four years.Prior to these round of increases, fares hikes occurred less frequently - only twice, in April 1997 and June 2002 - and one wonders if it is a sheer coincidence that both were within months after a general election. At TOC 'transport', Speakers' Corner I was at The Online Citizen's Speakers' Corner event at Hong Lim Park on a Sunday late afternoon (13 September 2008) for a short while before heading to a family dinner.Entitled "Speaking out on Public Transport: World Class Service or World Class Profits", the theme was "transport", which naturally had much to do with the impending public transport fare hike kicking in in October.Bernard Chen, Secretary of the WP Youth Wing, was one of the five invited speakers, which also included another Workers' Party member James Gomez, and spoke in his capacity as a polytechnic student.In his speech, Bernard made three observations on the current public transport policies and proposed seven ways to improve the transport system.The three observations are:• with regards to fare prices for students, public transport companies adopt requiring tertiary students to pay more compared to students from Primary, Secondary and Junior College levels, which he felt was unfair;• most young Singaporeans still aspire to possess their own cars; and• the rush-hour squeeze in the morning continues to be a problem.Next, he offered seven recommendations:• allow children who have not reached school-going age to travel for free and not base their fares on their height;• full-time students between seven to 25 years old should enjoy special transport fare rates, concession or otherwise;• young working adults should be given discounted fare rates in the first two years of work life;• school opening times should avoid peak hour traffic;• relook at the Road Traffic Act and amend the legal age for a person to obtain a license to operate a motor vehicle;• implement a feasible car-sharing system; and• tax-relief for employers whose employees take public transport to work.Unfortunately, I had to leave after Bernard completed his speech to attend to my appointment and did not get to listen to the other speakers including James, except for from TOC writer Leong Sze Hian, who was first and spoke before Bernard.In my opinion, Bernard expressed himself well and has improved on his public-speaking skills over the years I have known him since the day we met when we were both assigned to assist WP's Aljunied GRC candidate Tan Wui Hua on his groundwork long before the 2006 general election.Closer to the GE after I was confirmed as a candidate in Ang Mo Kio GRC myself and sadly had to leave the Party's Aljunied GRC operations team, given pride to serve an able leader like Wui Hua, Bernard doubled up to provide me the much necessary help needed due to the tight deadlines, for which I am grateful.As for his ideas, without much going into details, I would say that some are worthwhile for consideration but others may not be easy to be feasibly implemented.On that evening's Channel NewsAsia's coverage of the event, I caught a glimpse of myself and Frieda Chan, another fellow Youth Wing Executive Committee Member whom I went to the event with.The next article on this weblog will be my own take on public transport as well and will be posted at the end of this month, which coincides with the first day of new fares.From CNA: Bernard Chen at TOC's Speakers' Corner eventFrom CNA: WP Youth Ex-Co Members Frieda Chan (front, left) and myself (back, left) Cycling around the point Question: What is the difference between the two wheels of the bicycle in the inset picture?I mean, the two logos?Answer: They belong to two organisations of distinct and separate existences in the legal aspect.Surprised? Because they look alike?Indeed, with the logo of the ruling People's Action Party (left) resting within the sculpture of the PAP Community Foundation logo (right), onlookers can tell they have to be affiliated to each other somehow.The PCF is "the social and charitable arm" of the PAP, according to the definition in the former's website.http://www.pcf.org.sg/And, instituted as a charity, it would probably stand a higher prospect of obtaining police approval for an activity like mass cycling - which it did - than the latter, a political party.Or at least, based on what transpired when the Workers' Party tried to apply for such a permit for its 50th anniversary in 2007 and was rejected.A few bloggers, including two women WP bloggers Lee Li Lian and Ng Swee Bee, who are also members of its CEC, voiced dissatisfaction at the application, literally, of double standards, after the PCF held a carnival on 31 August 2008 at West Coast that included a cyclists' fanfare entrance by PAP Secretary-General Lee Hsien Loong and PAP MPs.http://leelilian.blogspot.com/2008/09/double-standards.htmlhttp://ngsb.blogspot.com/2008/09/isnt-this-sign-of-unfairness-and-double.htmlOne was them, non-partisan online news portal "The Online Citizen" in an article by Deputy Editor Andrew Loh, received criticism from another weblog "For Want of a Better Title" for "implying that the PAP did break a law or that the police were lax in the application of the law".http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/09/political-openness-for-pap-only/http://modernburrow.lah.cc/2008/09/05/did-the-pap-break-the-law/The blogger, known by his moniker "Modernburrow", wrote that Mr Loh "should fact check because the PCF is not a political party in the legal sense".Ironically, "Modernburrow" has instead brought to attention an outlandish political practice seen only in unique Singapore, of parties having to register non-political entities to bypass restrictions placed on them.Political parties, be it PAP, WP or any others, are supposed to be exemplary national role models as they seek election to enact, respect and uphold laws.Should they start the trend of registering non-political entities that basically comprises the same people of same political disposition and possibility same political agenda because the situation called for them to bend and cycle around the laws, won't the people they govern be encouraged to do the same?The laws will be made a mockery of, as if they have not made a bigger mockery of common sense and logic when these new organisations are permitted to adopt for a logo that carries their party's symbol.While the PCF and PAP are different organisations, not everyone can differentiate between their logos and may confuse the two, given that the PAP symbol mainly makes up the PCF logo's design.Which is what happened to a writer to a Straits Times forum on 4 September 2008, Mr Tan Ghee Gay.In his letter "Why 'no' and 'yes'", he wrote that "a similar request by the Workers' Party (WP) for a cycling event in East Coast Park was turned down" and asked "why was the PAP event allowed but the WP one not", without once mentioning PCF.The reply in ST Forum today "Why WP didn't get permit for event" by DSP Paul Tay of the Singapore Police Force took generally the same line as "Modernburrow", that it was "organised by the PAP Community Foundation, which is a registered charity and not a political party".Now, if the WP registered another organisation with a hammer plus, say, a cloud or some Adidas-like stripes, how many can tell it is not the WP that is present when they see this logo?Why not just save the hassle and give political parties more space?DSP Tay's letter continued with the event being "a carnival that involved children and families from various kindergartens and educational institutions. The Prime Minister, as guest of honour, and a few other guests, made their entrance by cycling a short distance".From what I know, the WP's event was also meant to be a family carnival rather than some mobile election rally prone to "disorder and unruly behaviour", quoting from DSP Tay's response.In addition, why should cycling be part of a charity event when a sport like cycling has little to do with charitable deeds, unless some corporation donated a million dollars for every round of cycling Mr Lee completed?Next, to date, whether it is the political existence or the cycling event of WP that was the reason for the rejection has not been addressed.The WP already carries out many outreach activities and if the cycling was an issue, the police could have rejected PCF's cycling segment and allowed it to carry on with the rest of the programme.Or if the political existence was the problem, political parties might as well be banned.Coming back to the post by "Modernburrow", the blogger had expressively "checked to see if the PCF was a part of the PAP, legally, and the answers was no".Legally, no organisation is part of another or otherwise, why register another organisation?However, as stated in the PCF website, even the PAP acknowledges PCF to be their charity arm and their trustees are mainly PAP ministers and MPs.But a more noteworthy point has little with do the legal status of these organisations or their logos.During a Parliament sitting on 27 August 2007, WP MPs Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim had queried the government on why WP's permit application for its cycling event was rejected.Among Minister of State of Home Affairs Associate Professor Ho Peng Kee's replies contained the following, "You may be well-behaving, but there may be other people whom you come across when you cycle who may stop you, may want to debate with you and that may attract a crowd, and therefore will result in problems the police want to avoid."I am sure AP Ho would not dispute that Mr Lee, who is also Prime Minister and headed the cyclist contingent, is a more important person than Opposition Leader Mr Low, who is also WP Secretary-General.Won't more people be inclined to stop the PM to debate with him?Won't a PM attract a bigger crowd than an Opposition Leader?If the Opposition Leader attracts a bigger crowd, the PAP needs to start worrying.If AP Ho thinks the Opposition Leader is more important, the PAP needs to start worrying more.Therefore, the authorities should note that West Coast could be unsafe for the PM to cycle in.They should do more to prevent any possible harm that may befall the PM when he is cycling - or the person who stops him midway through and gets run down.Alternatively, the PCF should seriously consider changing its logo to one that does not encompass the PAP's logo, so that its members can enjoy safer cycling trips. WP Youth Wing: YouthQuake 4 THE EVOLVING ROLE OF WOMEN IN SINGAPOREThe Workers' Party Youth Wing takes great pleasure in inviting you to participate in an upcoming public forum as part of the YouthQuake Forum Series. This series is into its fourth installment.The topic for this session focuses on how youth can propose and carry forward a refreshing new approach to women issues in Singapore.YouthQuake offers an excellent opportunity for Singapore youth to exchange ideas and experiences and we are confident that the forum topic will stimulate participants to debate and discuss. We thus encourage you not to miss such an occasion where you can keep pace with the pulse of today's youth in a pleasant and stimulating atmosphere and experience the dynamic nature of youth-centric issues.The details of the YouthQuake forum are as follows:Date: 16th August 2008 (Saturday)Time: 1430 hrs - 1630 hrsVenue: 216-G Syed Alwi Road #02-03 Singapore 207799The speakers for this event are:Dana Lam-TeoDana will be providing an overview on the story of feminism and a history of women's activism and achievements in Singapore since independence in 1965 and how the role of women in Singapore society has evolved over the decades. She will also be touching on what the women's movement is all about and why is it relevant today. Looking ahead, Dana will conclude by speaking on certain issues that she believes will be most relevant to AWARE in the current internet age.She was the tenth president of the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE), from 1999 – 2001, and a member of The Working Committee 2 (TWC2), currently registered as Transient Workers Count Too.A graduate of the former University of Singapore and the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), she is an ex-journalist and is now focusing on writing and the arts. Other than getting away with not displaying parking coupons she has been a good citizen most of her life. She is a mother to two grown-up children.Lee Li LianLi Lian believes that no women in Singapore should be taking on the burden of single motherhood willingly and single-handedly. Her presentation entitled "The predicament of a single-mother in Singapore" shall illustrate how the stigma of being a single mother still exists in Singapore society and why we should accept single-motherhood as a respectable part of our society. She will also propose some recommendations on how the government can provide a better support network for them.She is currently a trainer with a private institution and has been actively involved in both industrial and financial sales for the past 6 years. She graduated from Ngee Ann Polytechnic in 1999 where she majored in Business Studies and went on to pursue a Bachelor's Degree with Curtin University of Technology in Australia majoring in Sales & Marketing.From her years of sales experience, she had gained good communication, interpersonal and persuasive skills. She was both a polling and a counting agent for the Workers' Party during GE 2006. In June that year, she joined as a member and in August 2006, she was subsequently elected as a WP Youth Wing Executive Council Member. The message that she wants to bring across to everyone is: "Until you spread your wings, you'll have no idea how far you can fly".She enjoys singing and making DIY fashion accessories in her past-time. She has been a faithful supporter of Liverpool Football Club since the early 90s.Koh Kai LinKai Lin's presentation entitled, "1.29 to 2.1" is a reflection on boosting the birth rate among young women in Singapore and why financial incentives unveiled in recent years to encourage married Singaporeans to have more babies have failed to significantly cure Singapore's baby blues. She will be offering creative and radical measures aimed at boosting Singapore's flagging birth rate. What exactly works best for young women in the local context will also be discussed.She describes herself as an expressive and self-motivated young Singaporean. A staunch defender of rights and a problem-solver, she enjoys reading, fashion and music in her free time.A graduate from the Singapore Institute of Management with a Bachelor of Business (Marketing), she is currently earning her keep as an account servicing executive at Vintedge Pte Ltd. A person who is deeply enthusiastic about her Christian faith, she is at this moment undergoing training at City Harvest Bible Training Center, School of Theology. Her favourite bible verse is 2 Corinthians 4:8. In her opinion, understanding women is an art.Selene Cheng Ai LinThe working women in Singapore has to grapple daily with the ideals and responsibilities imposed on them by the nation, society, family and the organisations they work for. Selene will be examining the roles of working women in a globalised economy and will offer suggestions on how businesses and the government can go about creating flexible work opportunities for women.She is sub-editor and member of the editorial team at The Online Citizen, an online portal which endeavours to reflect the views and opinions of ordinary Singaporeans. In the day, she works as an editor at an oil and gas consulting firm.She graduated from the National University of Singapore with a Bachelor of Arts in English Literature in 2006. An introverted thinker who likes to read, write, do craftwork, and watch movies, she also shares great interest in civil society and political activism.At heart, she is a person who enjoys curling up with a good book by the HDB window. Her personal blog is at http://randomcharacter.blogspot.com/.In order to assist us in the organisation of this forum, kindly confirm your attendance with the WP Youth Wing at "youthwing@wp.sg" by 14th August 2008 (Thursday).We look forward to see you help create a stir through YouthQuake!What people say about YouthQuake..."A nice session for me to hear from fellow youths on their concerns on transportation, which also helps me to explore my views about what Singapore, can do in this area."- Chan Joy Seng"It's a forum that forces us to think through issues and to be clear of what we stand for; or at least leaves food for thoughts."- Anne Tan"YouthQuake has shown that young Singaporeans are concerned about issues facing our country, are not afraid to speak up and that they are ready to make use of alternative platforms to do so."- Andrew Loh"YouthQuake is not about the magnitude it reads on the Richter scale, but on how far the tremors generated may eventually spread!"- Ong Tiong Ling"YouthQuake has provided me with a lot of insights and thoughts on the various issues presented. I didn't realized how little I know about energy and oil until YouthQuake 3."- Aaron Peng"In YouthQuake, the 3 speakers outline the discussion. Things get interesting when the floor table questions and starts the discussion, showing the variety of opinions out there. YouthQuake wouldn't be the same without the floor."- Ang Y STaken from http://www.wp.sg/youth/?p=43 The vacant seat poser Deepest condolences to the family of the late Dr Ong Chit Chung, Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC.Now that the funeral is over, I may, with due consideration of respect, touch on this issue.A seat among the five in Jurong GRC, namely the Bukit Batok division, which Dr Ong was overseeing, has been vacated as a result.The next question that comes to the minds of some people is if a by-election will be held.In fact, calls have started coming from various quarters - in the internet, among coffee shop dialogues and most prominently from J B Jeyaretnam, secretary-general of the Reform Party in a press statement (summarily relayed in the Straits Times on 22 July 2008).And these aren't the first occurrences in the event of a vacated seat in a GRC.The last time the same happened was on 2 June 1999 when People's Action Party MP for Jalan Besar GRC, Choo Wee Khiang, resigned his MP seat after facing court charges and was later convicted, vacating the division of Whampoa.No by-election was held.The PAP government turned down those calls back then, giving its reasons.If pressed upon, they would probably reiterate the same reasons again this time.Let us examine the laws that stipulate the conditions for having or not having to conduct a by-election, be it whether they are "PAP laws" or "Singapore laws", "fair laws" or "unfair laws".Under the Parliamentary Elections Act (Part 3, Chapter 24, Section 2A) it states:"In respect of any group representation constituency, no writ shall be issued under subsection (1) for an election to fill any vacancy unless all the Members for that constituency have vacated next their seats in Parliament. [10/88]"In the Singapore Constitution (Part 6, Chapter 49, Section 1):"Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force."Certainly, the Act denotes no need to conduct a by-election and while the Constitution seemingly spells otherwise, it leaves an empty plate to the Act.Therefore, establishing a precedent to hold a by-election in the event of one or more, but not all, vacancies within a GRC requires foremost an amendment to the Act and perhaps the Constitution as well.The PAP, which dominates Parliament with the power to amend laws, isn't known to be particularly diligent to enacting electoral changes that will create a more vibrant political atmosphere.However, it ought to be a very categorical assumption that opposition parties and people who believe in a more politically democratic Singapore would agree with the necessity of a by-election despite the law.Those who call for the dissolution of the remaining GRC slate to hold a by-election in Jurong GRC may have got their sums wrong if they are the same who believe a single seat is "easier” for the opposition to clinch a victory.The idea that came to my mind was to carve out Bukit Batok division within Jurong GRC into a single member constituency and holding a by-election for it.Doing so is also in line with most opposition parties' stances, notably the Workers' Party in its 2006 general election manifesto, of abolishing GRCs and keeping to SMCs.This was also expressed in the Reform Party statement and hence, is nothing new.What is a new call that I wish to supplement to the above, which does not require a change to any existing law and will similarly not be heeded but nevertheless, is that at the next general election due in 2011, all GRCs should cut its number of seats by one.Since the PAP has disclosed that its remaining MPs in Jurong GRC are able to cover for the late Dr Ong, it probably indicates that they have more capacity for load.Presently, there are 84 seats and 14 GRCs and this proposal will see a reduction of 14 seats, tallying a total of 70 seats.This is in tandem with my personal belief that there are too many MPs for a small country like Singapore.Finally, I disagree with the writer of the letter to the ST Forum published on 23 July 2008 (JBJ must be careful if he wishes to espouse Singapore's cause) Alvin Tan that Jeyaretnam's call came too early after the demise of Dr Ong and was hence, "somewhat inappropriate”.The wake of the late Dr Ong ended last Friday and I don't need anyone or any entity needs to wait for months or years down the road to articulate his, her or its position on the vacant seat poser. Ministerial salary debate revisited - Part 2 Below are my personal opinions on the ministerial salary debate in Parliament on 9 April 2007 between Workers' Party Member of Parliament Low Thia Khiang and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, reprised in the first part (http://melvintansg.blogspot.com/2008/07/ministerial-salary-debate-revisited.html).For a start, I differ otherwise from the Deputy Speaker, Mr Matthias Yao, and find that Mr Low has sufficiently responded to MM Lee's clarifications.MM Lee had asked if the three countries raised as examples by Mr Low emulated Singapore's economic achievements; Mr Low's reply was obviously yes because these countries are also first world countries according to the definition of the United Nations, albeit having different conditions.MM Lee next asked if they did so with a population as miniature as Singapore, a point Mr Low had earlier addressed and acknowledged that their conditions are different but they were, nonetheless, first world countries.To be fair to MM Lee, Mr Low did not dwell into more specifically on whether he felt the three countries could have succeeded had they boasted a small population akin to Singapore's.However, I recall, during an interview with correspondents of Singapore Press Holdings for the book "The Man and His Ideas" in 1998, MM Lee had also indirectly attributed Singapore's small population to the PAP government's success.Under the chapter "Can the Singapore system be replicated elsewhere?" in page 98 of the book, he expressed that Singapore's small talent pool allowed the PAP to successfully monopolise it resulting in the opposition's inability to draw an equally competent team, thus facilitating Singapore to have a strong government.During the 2006 general election, Lee Hsien Loong also said that the PAP has been able to govern effectively because of a strong mandate given to it and if there were presence of more opposition, he would have to spend time "fixing" them instead of concentrating on national affairs.Well, if there is no large population and talent pool to muster a formidable opposition and "impede" the PAP government's administration, I wonder why Singapore's population size becomes an issue to MM Lee now.To continue, if MM Lee was of the opinion that Mr Low was not "comparing apples with apples", no one should not make comparisons with any countries at all, which the former has been seen to be doing on several occasions; after all, no two countries in the world are exactly the same.MM Lee also failed to counter Mr Low's question on why Singapore had wanted to emulate Switzerland's standard of living years ago if the latter was not a worthy model.Summarising this, I perceive that Mr Low had adequately answered all of MM Lee's clarifications save for one while MM Lee didn't even hit on a single one of Mr Low's questions.I also disagree with MM Lee that the bloc of European countries is what keeps every one of them going because, should most countries in Europe perform drastically, the consequences on the minority of progressing countries will be direr.And if the success of European countries was due to the advantage of bloc, why have Southeast Asian countries not been able to do the same?On several occasions previously, MM Lee said that Southeast Asian countries were too diverse in cultural backgrounds to amalgamate their national apparatuses.I deduce that not all European countries share very close cultural semblances but in any case, why are Middle East countries, located close to Europe and primarily comprise Arab cultures, not able to mold into a bloc?Also, it was a rather odd remark of MM Lee to assert that a better standard of government could lift Finland, Denmark and Switzerland from First World countries to superpowers because whether it is with the PAP or the system it has established, these countries are neither likely to become superpowers nor will Singapore become one.Realistically, a crucial factor a country needs to become a superpower is land size and even that may not be enough for it to become one; the United States of America and China are each about 9.6 million kilometres-square while none of the four countries are anything above 50,000 kilometres-square.As for Ms Irene Ng, I am unsure where she obtained the figures of Finland's unemployment rate of 17% but perhaps she has her sources that I have personally not come across.Taking the year-ended 2006 as the debate was in 2007, Finland's unemployment rate is 8.4%, based on "Index Mundi" (http://www.indexmundi.com/finland/unemployment_rate.html), which draws its data from the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) World Factbook (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/).Further statistics from "Index Mundi" have also not cited Finland as having 17% unemployment rate in any of its past years but again, perhaps Ms Ng has her sources I have not come across.There are often doubts in the mind of some as to how reliable international statistics are but from the same information supply, Singapore's unemployment rate as at 2007 stands at 3.1%, which is the same figure as the one provided by the Singapore's Department of Statistics (http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/keyind.html).Hence, it safe to assume that the CIA World Factbook extracts its figures from the Singapore DOS.As one can discern, 3.1% is not as far-off to 8.4% as compared to 17%.Ms Ng also omitted to mention the other two cases-in-point by Mr Low, which are noteworthy because, referring back to "Index Mundi", Denmark's unemployment rate in 2006 was 5.7%, lower than Finland's.Switzerland's unemployment rate, at 3.8%, is even more negligibly different from Singapore's.Even more noteworthy is that all three countries have narrowed the gap between themselves and Singapore by 2007, at 7%, 3.8% and 3.3% respectively, while Singapore maintained its unemployment rate of 3.1%.Yet, these countries do not pay their cabinet ministers sky-high salaries in order to achieve their levels of employment.In addition, unemployment rates only tell half the story - or less.Going back to the data source by "Index Mundi", for the year-ended 2007, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam have unemployment rates within the range of 2% to 2.5%; they are neither First World countries nor have highly-paid ministers.The kind of wages citizens earn is also important.If every corporate entity paid no more than $500 to its managers and senior executives, it could save a lot of money, hire more people and Singapore could have 100% employment.In Singapore, wages of the middle-class and bottom-rung workers have remained stagnant for the last 10 years, admitted the PAP government itself, while living costs have since escalated... but before I digress too far, that is another a debate, for another day. Ministerial salary debate revisited - Part 1 When the umpteenth debate on ministerial salaries took place in Parliament in April last year, it sparked an exchange between Workers' Party secretary-general and Hougang Member of Parliament Low Thia Khiang and Minister Mentor in the Prime Minister's Office Lee Kuan Yew.Not many people should have read the complete details of the exchange but presumably only the news reports in the local media, myself included.Only when the WP provided a link to a webpage in the online Hansard upon responding to a couple of questions by surgeon and renowned blogger Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan on 11 July 2008 (http://nofearsingapore.blogspot.com/2008/07/questions-for-workers-party.html), of which one was its stance on ministerial salaries, I managed to peruse the full dialogue, word-by-word, for the first time (http://www.parliament.gov.sg/reports/public/hansard/title/20070409/20070409_S0005_T0001.html).Indeed, the online Hansard is a useful tool for those who do not wish to rely merely on the mainstream media for information on Parliamentary proceedings.Following is the extract of the exchange between Mr Low, MM Lee and PAP MP for Tampines GRC Irene Ng on 9 April 2007, which starts after Mr Low has completed delivering his speech.The Deputy Speaker chairing the session was MacPherson MP Mr Matthias Yao.MM Lee: A point of clarification, Sir. The Member has compared Singapore against Switzerland, Denmark and Finland. Can I ask him if he considers Singapore's population to resource ratio equal to Denmark, Switzerland and Finland?Second, have they brought the standard of living of their people up, multi-fold times, from third-world to first-world in one generation? To maintain that quality of government both in the political leadership that sets the tone for the whole civil service and for the whole country, can you get a Swiss-type government, Finnish-type government or a Danish government to bring about the results that Singapore has brought about in their own countries, let alone bringing them and their systems into Singapore? Please explain.Mr Low: Sir, I have to admit that these are the reports that I got from the United Nations. They have put up these reports. I believe that, based on the reports of what they have assessed today, they are not lousier than Singapore, in terms of living standards or the performance of the government. They have different conditions from us, but I gather that when we move forward, we are also emulating the standard of living of Switzerland. Are we not?MM Lee: The Member has not answered my question. Is he saying that we are comparing apples with apples? Is he saying that the system of government in Finland, Denmark and Switzerland can bring them from First World to a superpower? Can they do that? Does he realise that Singapore's GDP is only one-third of its external trade - that our external trade is three and a half times that of our GDP, higher than Hong Kong, by three times. And that if this economy ever falters, it is the end of Singapore and its First World status.Denmark, Switzerland and Finland are part of Europe. They can fail and they are still caught in a European situation. If we fail here, we fall back to a South East Asian situation. Just look around you.Mr Low: Sir, is the Minister Mentor saying that without paying such a high salary, we are bound to fail? Even if we pay top-earner salaries, I do not think the present Government can bring Singapore to superpower status.MM Lee: I am putting a simple question and ask for his clarification. He has compared Singapore as if it were a Denmark, a Switzerland or a Finland. Their system, their governments, never produced the kind of transformation that we have had, and their system and their governments have a broader base, and can afford a mediocre government.The Singapore base is less than 700 square kilometres. When we started, it was less than 600 square kilometres. Could the system in Denmark, Switzerland or Finland produce a transformation as in Singapore?Mr Low: Sir, on what basis does Minister Mentor think that if the system in Denmark and Switzerland is put in Singapore it will not be able to transform Singapore into what we are today? I want to know what is the basis. I have no claim that it will happen. But I would like to know, from the wisdom of Minister Mentor, why he thinks that it will not happen.Deputy Speaker: Mr Low, I do not think that you can see the clarification of Minister Mentor! Mr Lee.MM Lee: I would like the Member to explain why he thinks Singapore is comparable to Denmark, Switzerland and Finland. Look at the size of the country, the location of the country, the resources of each country and the history of its people. Then look at Singapore, its size, its history and the nature of its population.To make the transformation from what we were in 1959 or 1965, whichever the starting point, to what we are requires an extraordinary government with extraordinary government officers to support it, to bring to where it is.If we go back to an ordinary system that exists around us, then we will go down to those levels. It is as simple as that. There is no guarantee that Singapore with less than 700 square kilometres can maintain this position.Deputy Speaker: Ms Irene Ng, do you have a clarification?Ms Ng: Sir, a point of clarification for Mr Low. Mr Low seems to have a very rosy view of the system in Denmark, Finland and Switzerland. I wonder whether he is aware that in Finland, the unemployment rate is 17% compared to our unemployment rate. And at their recent election, the Prime Minister of Finland won the election only by a very narrow margin and is now forced to negotiate a four-party coalition, and might change his policies. Is this the type of Singapore that he wants - with a high unemployment rate?Mr Low: As far as I am aware, based on the report that I have looked at, which was published by the United Nations, these are the comparisons. Are they that bad? They are not Third World countries.PAP MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, Ms Josephine Teo, was then asked to carry out her speech, which contained jibes on Mr Low's points, and the latter continued with his clarifications in Mandarin when she had finished.Mr Low: Mr Deputy Speaker, can I clarify what the Member has talked about? In Mandarin, Sir.Mrs Josephine Teo said that I had mentioned during the General Election that the Ministers' salaries should be pegged to the lowest 20% of the workers. But I did not mention it in my speech just now. Most importantly, it is now that the Ministers' salaries are pegged to the top 48th earners in the private sector. This has always been the concept. So, a very important point is that the Ministers occasionally may forget that there are some people who are in the very low-income group - they are the poor people. It is for this reason that I mentioned during the General Election that Ministers' salary should be linked or pegged to the lowest 20% income group. Maybe you multiply it by 100 times, is that considered high enough and, if it is not enough, then how much more do we need, maybe an astronomical figure?The second point that I would like to clarify is that she said that we must have high salaries so that we can have a clean and honest government. But I would like to tell her, if a person is greedy, no matter how high the salary is, he will not be satisfied. So can high salary ensure a clean and honest government? This is still a controversial question. Thirdly, I want to clarify that she said that the PAP can be ruling for a long period of time because the Ministers have high salaries, all the civil servants are highly paid, so they are all very clean. But I think the reasons for ruling over a long period of time should be more than this. It includes, for example, during the General Election, amend the General Elections rules ---Deputy Speaker: Mr Low, those are not points of clarifications.Mr Low: Thank you, Sir.The next segment shall comprise my personal views on the debate. Right time for the right words *Faint*This was the first reaction after reading a letter by Syu Ying Kwok in the Straits Times Forum section on 8 July 2008, who extolled Singapore's achievements.Syu (not sure if that's a man or lady by the name) also disagreed with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's optimism that Singapore could be "unscrambled in five years", expressing that it could be faster, which in reality served to exemplify the latter's and the PAP government's governing capacity.However, these raptures didn't cause the fainting spell.Of all things, he or she singled out opposition candidate of three general elections, Tan Lead Shake, ostensibly portraying him as a candidate of little credentials and abilities.Now, he or she is apparently aware that tragic events had befallen Lead Shake's family, as the letter had a mention of it.I wonder if he or she could imagine a person in bereavement under the most unfortunate circumstances, separated from his spouse who was suspect and having the local media tailgating him and his family all around for a few days, rummaging through the ST and see that he have been taken to task over a topic that isn't even related to him.This is neither election time, nor is Lead Shake a Member of Parliament, least of all one who failed enough to fit into Syu's grand scheme of arguments.There are more than enough opposition politicians in Singapore history for Syu to take his or her pick on, never mind if it is somebody not "prominent" enough to serve his or her agenda.To be fair, I believe The Online Citizen got it wrong when they asserted that the letter linked the dreadful events surrounding Lead Shake to his credibility as a person; this was not the message I got from reading the contents.On the other hand, TOC is correct to say that the ST editors have to take a fair share of the responsibility - or irresponsibility - for that matter.There's a right time to say or write the right things and the snide remarks in the letter couldn't have come at a worse time. HDB 'suffocates' residents If (1) is a fire hazard, what about(2), (3) and (4)?While HDB flat buyers may feel "suffocated" by rising property prices, the word has practically taken on a literal meaning in this instance.In the Straits Times of 7 July 2008, the HDB reportedly sealed up the air vents of one-room flats in nine blocks in Toa Payoh last month ("Residents unhappy about sealed air vents in corridors").Such vents are commonly seen in many old one- and some two-room flat models.Last year, two of the soon-to-be-demolished blocks in Hougang that were one-room flats also had their air vents blocked up and the same may have happened in other estates.The reason?To prevent fire spreading from an ablaze unit to other units through the corridor.In that case, HDB should also cement up the windows of all three-, four-, five-room and executive units in Singapore that faces corridors, which are bigger, contain more oxygen over the interior and, thus, allow fire to trek out more easily.As if the air vents are not already much constricted, plugging them up totally will, without unaffected doubt, cause residents of these one-room homes to feel warmer and more suffocated.These small dwellings do not have windows for their halls unlike their bigger versions for ventilation purposes, which was why they were built for the latter in the first place.Ironically, for being among the oldest model of residential buildings HDB erected, some even before Singapore's independence, these one-room units had never been fire hazards for the last 50-over years.If the problem was owing to the non-closeable nature of the air vents, the HDB should have added flappable coverings or something else rather than resolve the problem in a cost-effective but uncompassionate way.Residents interviewed said they were not consulted on the move to seal their air vents.One wouldn't think this could come from an oft self-proclaimed "consultative" PAP government. WP Youth Wing: YouthQuake 3 THE ENVIRONMENT - HAS SINGAPORE DONE ENOUGH?How would an environmentally-savvy Singapore look like?Is the Singapore youth prepared for a world where oil prices continue to climb at unprecedented rates?The Workers' Party Youth Wing takes great pleasure in inviting you to participate in an upcoming public forum as part of the YouthQuake Forum Series. If you have something to say about the environment and if you think that youth in Singapore should stand up and speak boldly on issues that affect the environment in Singapore, this upcoming YouthQuake forum is tailored for you!We encourage you not to miss such an occasion where you can keep pace with the pulse of today's youth in a pleasant and stimulating atmosphere and experience the dynamic nature of green issues.The details of the YouthQuake forum are as follows:Date: 13th July 2008 (Sunday)Time: 1500 hrs - 1700 hrsVenue: 216-G Syed Alwi Road #02-03 Singapore 207799The speakers for this event are:Nathaniel KohNathaniel's presentation, entitled "Inspiring the Next Generation", shall illustrate how youths can and have started to play a role in nurturing an environmentally-friendly world. He will also propose some recommendations on how certain policies can help shape new "green" habits.He is currently a third year student in Singapore Management University (SMU) pursuing a Bachelor of Science (Information Systems Management) with a second major in Political Science. In 2003, he graduated from Temasek Polytechnic with a Diploma in Information Technology specialising in Object-Oriented Technologies.In September 2007, Nathaniel was elected as a student leader to the executive committee of the SMU Students' Association, and in January 2008, he began his one-year term of office as its Honorary Finance Secretary. Since 2000, he has been an active member of Toastmasters International, a world-wide organisation dedicated to helping people improve their communication and leadership abilities.In January 2007, he attained the title of "Distinguished Toastmaster", which is the highest recognition awarded in the organisation. He has also served in various leadership capacities namely, Division Governor, Area Governor, Club President, and Club Vice-President for Education.Low Ee MienEe Mien's topic will be "Singapore's Energy Future". Energy is the driving force that powers society. The subject of energy in the Singapore context will be covered, how it relates to rising crude oil prices and escalating petrol and electricity bills. The supply and demand situation will be discussed, including Peak Oil, what it is, how Singapore will be affected by it, and what Singapore can do to secure its energy future.He is an R&D software engineer with Savi Technology, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin. In his spare time, he is also a fund manager for a private investment fund, blogger, peak-oiler, and climate change activist.His blog, which is syndicated by various blogging networks and receives thousands of hits per day, is at http://www.post1.net/lowem/.Wilson AngWilson believes that the only way to create a better planet for human survivability is for every individual to take responsibility of their own action by being more conscious about the choices in their daily consumption habits. He will be speaking on how we can all consume more responsibly.He is the founder and President of the Environment Challenge Organisation (Singapore), also known as ECO Singapore, a non-profit, non-government organization that aims to establish a voluntary environmental movement, thereby creating opportunities for active involvement by Singaporean youths, instilling a sense of commitment and awareness of environmental issues and global hazards.By providing youths a holistic approach towards environmental issues, ECO Singapore's mission is to encourage youths to take initiative and choose to live environmentally sustainable lifestyles.Wilson is a recipient of the NEA Ecofriend award 2007 in the NGO and Grassroots Volunteers category. His life mission is "to create and maintain a sustainable lifestyle and culture".In order to assist us in the organisation of this forum, kindly confirm your attendance with the WP Youth Wing at "youthwing@wp.sg" by 10th July 2008 (Thursday).We look forward to see you help create a stir through YouthQuake!Taken from http://www.wp.sg/youth/?p=41 New blood and news glut After the Workers' Party Organising Members' Conference - a biennial affair - on 29 June 2008, the party now has its post-General Election 2006 batch of recruits represented in its Central Executive Council for the first time.Congratulations to WP comrades Koh Choong Yong, Lee Li Lian and Png Eng Huat - two men and a lady.Choong Yong, 35, and Li Lian, 29, both in the WP Youth Wing's Executive Committee and are bloggers as well, joined after the GE; the latter assisted the WP's East Coast GRC team as a polling and counting agent.Eng Huat, 47, joined the WP before the GE campaign and was a valuable backstage helper; he is also an avid writer of letters to the press, many of which are archived in this very weblog (http://melvintansg.blogspot.com/search/label/Png%20Eng%20Huat).Having worked with them and aside the administrative functions they have been tasked upon as Webmaster, Deputy Treasurer and Deputy Webmaster respectively, they are all proven effective organisers.Most importantly for leadership, all three share common traits of reliability, objectivity and humility.Covering of the event of the WP's OMC by the local English media took place in three news reports, two in TODAY and one in Straits Times.The ST report on 2 July 2008, three days after the OMC, gave me another one of those memorable moments of news glut, overwhelmed by hilarity.Penned by Sue-Ann Chia and Jeremy Au Yong, they wrote that the three new faces "was fewer than the seven introduced in July 2006, who replaced half the CEC".Wonder if they were expecting that out of the WP's CEC of 14, seven should be replaced once every two years, which they acknowledged was "half the CEC".This means that the WP could have a 100% turnover every four years.How exciting.Perhaps they should suggest to the PAP government's cabinet to try that.I believe a number of netizens would anticipate the retirement of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew or the departure of Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng within four years.Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's term hits the fourth year next month, having taken office in August 2004.The two journalists could try sounding the bell that his time is up.By the way, a friend shared a joke that escaped ISA detainee Mas Selamat Kastari probably fled the country using his son's passport and had discovered the "way" before the gaps closed following Mr Ang Heng Soon's encounter.Lastly, with sobriety, my sympathies go out to a friend in the National Solidarity Party, Tan Lead Shake, over the tragic events in his family. One year all it takes to ruin Singapore No need for five years.Just one year could ruin Singapore - if a dominant incumbent ruling party turns rogue in a time of the future.This is a rejoinder to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's comments at a forum in Shangri-La Hotel on 25 June 2008 that it would take five years for Singapore to be ruined if the opposition obtained power through the polls through what he termed as a "freak election result".However, I feel if a new government formed from the opposition could indeed to ruin Singapore in five years, a rogue ruling party could do so in two.And a dominant rogue one with no opposition as a check-and-balance being part of the system could do so in one year - or less.Objectively speaking, the present PAP government is far from being "rogue" under the past and present three prime ministers still in cabinet, despite their imperfection.Nevertheless, there is not telling what will happen beyond three more prime ministers, estimated in about 50 years down the road.In my view, the time it takes for a non-PAP entity to finally form the government is about as distant as the PAP turning "rogue".Chances are that neither scenario would occur in within two or three general elections.Hence, before that happens, the opposition should be allowed by the electorate to build up gradually rather than allow the PAP to maintain its prevailing toehold.Between five years to "ruin" Singapore and one year, there is an undoubted choice.Despite so, Singapore could avoid both outcomes with an electoral mandate of up to 65% versus 35% in Parliament for any two political parties.Parliament is the bastion of power for political parties as it determines via the electorate route as to which forms the government and by how much a majority.With that, the victor extends its tentacles to the other spheres of the nation, such as ministries, the civil service, corporations, unions, the media and the people.A future rogue incumbent familiar with the operation of these facets has a higher likelihood of ruining Singapore faster than an opposition who does not.For one, the former is more prone to the full cooperation of the civil service than the latter and could go the way of the rogue incumbent.I am sure MM Lee knows "how we got here" and "how we can unscramble it" but by the time a rogue incumbent enters the field, he and even I may no longer be in this world.At the least, he acknowledged that with an incompetent government, a succeeding benevolent government could still pick up the pieces, although it would be "difficult".With the potential damage caused by a future rogue incumbent, there may not even be pieces left to pick up.Hopefully, by then, Singapore will not need Malaysia or Thailand to hoist up the entire island. Embracing the 'differences' of the opposition The first reaction that struck me when I read the Straits Times Insight report "4 schools of opposition politics" (Sat, 14 Jun 2008) was, "Schools? What schools?"A Workers' Party friend joked that the featured four - Chiam See Tong (Singapore People's Party), Low Thia Khiang (WP), Chee Soon Juan (Singapore Democratic Party) and J B Jeyaretnam (upcoming Reform Party) - belonged to different schools, i.e. Canterbury University (New Zealand), Nanyang University (Singapore), University of Georgia (USA) and University College London (UK) respectively.What then also struck me was the fact that current WP Secretary-general Low is the only one amongst the names who had never graduated from an overseas university.Coming back to the point.All four men once headed or are presently heading the two opposition parties of WP (Jeyaretnam, Low) and SDP (Chiam, Chee) but the preceding elders broke away to form their own (RP and SPP).At the start of the article, the writer suggested that the transition of leadership of both were nothing more than "smooth" as each successor "took a leaf" from the other's predecessor.This may neither be entirely accurate, nor entirely inaccurate.A conclusion that can be drawn is that most new opposition entrants would take stock of, among others, parliamentary presence a criteria for selecting the political party to join.In this instance, Low joined the WP in 1981 when it was the only party with a seat Parliament, the same year Jeyaretnam won it, and Chee the SDP in 1992, a year after it became the main opposition party with three seats.The approach of the party may take a back seat, being susceptible to changes by either the present leadership through moving with the times or a new leadership.Had Low had joined the SDP under Chiam's helm and Chee the WP under Jeyaretnam's, the outcome today would have not been the same for sure although no one can perfectly predict how the exact cards will be displayed.However, it is presumptuous to conclude that this hypothetical scenario would naturally churn out a "smooth" succession process.For one, Chiam and Jeyaretnam are nearing or past eighty yet by staying on at the rudder of their respective vehicles, would result in deputising roles for the other two.Indeed, both Low and Chee were assistant secretary-generals to the two former secretary-generals, stopping short of the final advancement albeit without non-awkwardness thereafter.Based on occurrences in the Parliament gallery, even Chiam and Low do not cut complete, concerted synergy as much as they don't skirmish except against People's Action Party MPs.When Chiam, as the chairman of the Singapore Democratic Alliance umbrella in 2001 invited all opposition parties to join it, it was no surprise that the Chee-led SDP declined but the WP with Low also did not accept the proposal.Ten years earlier, opposition unity was hardly part of Chiam's agenda when he was the SDP chief and it showed when he sent a team comprising Chee into the Marine Parade GRC by-election held primarily for Jeyaretnam, cumulating a mild dispute with Low in favour of the latter.Ditto for the other case.The Open Singapore Centre, a non-governmental organisation founded and spearheaded by both Jeyaretnam and Chee, lasted a few months and faded away, largely triggered by directional and structural divergences.When J B Jeyaretnam was discharged from bankruptcy recently, he preferred to form his own party rather than join the SDP.But the biggest difference said to be between the two was that Jeyaretnam appears steadfast in the belief of getting elected into Parliament whereas Chee has dismissed it as a route to progress the national status.Before continuing, the above are not criticisms of any person or entity but observations and attempts have been made to depict the events as fairly as possible.All being expressed, such "differences" do give the people more choices.The "differences" are not only at a superficial level but by also looking at the variance between the four party's manifestos (with the exception of the RP which will likely be mapped on the WP's earlier manifestos).For those who argue that the "disunity" in the opposition camp (rather than the "quality" its candidates) is what keeps them away from supporting the latter, another alternative perception that can correct this is that this is the beauty of "diversity" and all the more gives them an incentive to participate in opposition parties.After all, this manifestation of "four schools" exemplifies more choices instead of the "only one choice" mantra provided by the "PAP kindergarten" that treats its citizens like children, such as the lame justifications against ministerial responsibility over Mas Selamat's escape or "trash index" idea of a PAP town council. Voters can embrace 'differences' of the opposition The first reaction that struck me when I read the Straits Times Insight report "4 schools of opposition politics" (Sat, 14 Jun 2008) was, "Schools? What schools?"A Workers' Party friend joked that the featured four - Chiam See Tong (Singapore People's Party), Low Thia Khiang (Workers' Party), Chee Soon Juan (Singapore Democratic Party) and J B Jeyaretnam (upcoming Reform Party) - belonged to different schools, i.e. Canterbury University (New Zealand), Nanyang University (Singapore), University of Georgia (USA) and University College London (UK).Also struck me was the fact that WP Secretary-general Low is the only one among the names who never graduated from an overseas university.MORE COMING SOON... The other way around Malaysian judge's "boot camp" allegation may hurt Malaysia's opposition more than its governmentTop: PM Mahathir Mohamad and DPM Anwar Ibrahim hoisting the UMNO flag during those daysBottom left: Opposition leader Anwar speaking at a joint PKR-DAP rallyBottom right: "Ordinary citizen" Mahathir and the government are now at loggerheadsEver since the Malaysian general election results this year saw the near-emergence of a two-party system, the political scene across the causeway has been heating up.First, it was the pressure on Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi to resign over the slash in majority of the Barisan Nasional (BN).There was speculation that at least one of his detractors within the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) would contest for the post of party president, currently held by him, at the party's upcoming general assembly.Then, came the resignation of former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who led Malaysia between 1981 and 2003, from the UMNO over PM Abdullah's refusal to step down.Next, there were calls to release the five Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) members detained under the Internal Security Act in December 2007 - chorused even by the leader BN component Malaysian Indian Congress president Samy Vellu, who lost his seat in the election.Announcements by de facto leader of the opposition and the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), Anwar Ibrahim, that enough BN MPs will defect to allow the opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat to form the government, also raised eyebrows.The new state government in Penang, now controlled by the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and led by new Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, said that discrepancies had been spotted in the coffers.Another controversy now erupts just as the Malaysian judiciary is set to loosen itself from a once-dominant government's influence.Justice Ian Chin, Malaysia's longest-serving high court judge, made the claim during a trial to hear a dispute over election results in Sarawak that Dr Mahathir sent judges who did not deliver verdicts in favour of the government to a "boot camp" when he was PM and the former himself was an inductee for five days.This allegation appeared to shock other members of the judiciary who expressed they had never encountered this "boot camp".While Justice Chin justified issuing this statement based on that Dr Mahathir's ruling BN was still in power, this latest startling disclosure may hardly have an impact on the latter.For one, Dr Mahathir is now an independent government and ruling coalition critic.Hence, if there were conspiracy theorists viewing that the saga was designed to discredit the government, it could be the other way around and have more negative implications on those outside it, or worse, on the Malaysia opposition.This is because time phase of which this purportedly occurred when Dr Mahathir was PM - in 1997 - also heralded opposition leader Anwar's tenure as a deputy prime minister.Already, Dr Mahathir is embroiled in another judiciary-related storm that he, along with five other high-profile individuals, interfered and fixed the appointments of judges after a video clip featuring prominent lawyer V. K. Lingam found its way into the public eye.Meanwhile, Anwar has responded to interviews that he had never recalled chancing upon this "boot camp".DAP national chairman and MP Karpal Singh has lodged a police report against Dr Mahathir over the matter but ironically, if he did not realise, the possible bearing on the symbolic head of the opposition Pakatan Rakyat umbrella, of which his DAP, the PKR and another - PAS - are component parties of.He also called for the issue to be debated in Malaysia's parliament but those he seeks to grill could strategically disassociate themselves from any involvement.The bottom line is, the whole incident could turn out have little to do with PM Abdullah or his government. WP Youth Wing: YouthQuake II The Workers' Party Youth Wing takes great pleasure in inviting you to participate in an upcoming public forum as part of the YouthQuake Forum series.This forum series is into its second installment. The topic for this session focuses on how youth can propose and carry forward a refreshing new approach to transportation issues in Singapore.YouthQuake offers an excellent opportunity for Singapore youth to exchange ideas and experiences and we are confident that the forum topic will stimulate participants to debate and discuss.We thus encourage you not to miss such an occasion where you can keep pace with the pulse of today's youth in a pleasant and stimulating atmosphere and experience the dynamic nature of youth-centric issues.The details of the YouthQuake forum are as follows:Date: 7th June 2008 (Saturday)Time: 1400 hrs - 1600 hrs (please be seated by 1345 hrs)Venue: 216-G Syed Alwi Road #02-03 Singapore 207799The speakers for this event will be:Jamilah binte Md Lutfi LimJamilah, 20, will be speaking on the need for a National Public Transportation Concession Card for Singapore students up till the end of their tertiary studies.She is a graduate from Republic Polytechnic and an expressive and politically inclined youth. Her interest in politics started back in 2001, when she was exposed to the darker side of humanity, oddly captivated by the fall of the twin towers. This prompted her to immerse herself with the (then) current affairs.As she grew older, she got addicted to Philosophy as a discipline. In her free time, she likes to participate in online gaming.Living in Malaysia and traveling to Singapore daily, she is able to provide a unique perspective on Singapore politics and society vis-à-vis Malaysia’s political and social fabric.Kelvin QueeHis topic will be "Taking a closer look at Singapore's public transportation network".Kelvin is currently a final year student pursuing accountancy in Nanyang Technological University (NTU).While not balancing the books, he ventures into the Arts and Technology. He is a keen organiser and has organised a series of multi-disciplinary conferences (InteresThink.com) and a social entrepreneurship program (SYINCubate).Currently, he is running a start-up specializing in measuring opinion and influence on the Internet. More information about Kelvin can be found on his personal portal @ http://kquee.com/blog/.Alvinder SinghAlvinder, 22, will be sharing his thoughts on the viability of youth embracing a one-car policy and integrating public transportation into the daily living of a young Singaporean.He describes himself as someone who is really dynamic, often seen scaling walls, running marathons and discovering new lands. His peers have known him as an inquisitive and adventurous individual.During his national service days, he was in the ground logistics squadron and is currently an intern with Sembawang Marine Offshore Engineering. He conducts elaborate scientific experiments during his breaks and occasionally swims across the Singapore Strait.Alvinder will soon be embarking on a community project in India for 10 months. He holds to the belief that each individual is responsible for his or her community and no contribution is too small to make.In order to assist us in the organisation of this forum, kindly confirm your attendance with the WP Youth Wing at "youthwing@wp.sg" by 5th June 2008 (Thursday).Taken from http://www.wp.sg/youth/?p=35 Don't dismiss seat-belt subsidy idea for the needy Letter by Png Eng Huat to The Straits Times ForumI REFER to the reports, "Seat belts compulsory for new minibuses" last Sunday and "Ministry clarifies on school bus fare subsidy" on Monday.The Transport Ministry should not be so quick to discount the idea of giving specific assistance to needy families to cope with any increase in bus fares following the new seat-belt rule for minibuses. The ministry has implied that existing help schemes like Growth Dividends, GST credits and Workfare Income Supplement are substantial enough to help low-income families cope with such unexpected cost pressures.However, the world has changed much since these help schemes were introduced. Surely, the Government did not formulate these benefits on the basis that oil prices would hit US$127 (S$174) a barrel, inflation would reach a 26-year high of 6.7 per cent, and food prices would spike at such an unprecedented rate.The severity of the current economic crisis has even prompted the National Wages Council to recommend a one-off "inflation" bonus to help workers deal with rising costs.A $250 annual GST credit can probably offset only a fraction of what it was originally slated to do because the inflation on the ground is a lot higher than the official rate.In addition, oil at US$150 a barrel may not be a far-fetched prediction anymore.How far can a needy family stretch or juggle these benefits to meet unexpected cost pressures?I am sure the Transport Ministry, with its vast resources, can come up with a win-win arrangement to ensure school bus operators do not pass on the cost of retrofitting seat belts to needy families.Png Eng HuatAbout the author: Png Eng Huat is avid writer of letters on policy issues to local newspaper columns. Presently helping out in grassroots and welfare work of Hougang constituency, he received his education in USA and graduated with a degree before coming back to Singapore.ST, Jan 31, 2008Helping the needy not just about financial aidI REFER to the letter by Mr Png Eng Huat, "Don't make needy seek aid from multiple sources" (ST, Jan 29).Helping the needy is not just about giving them a sum of money to solve all their problems. This is because their needs typically extend beyond just financial assistance.Solving a needy person's problems requires him and his family to exercise personal and family responsibility.It requires the involvement of the many strands of our social safety net, which include community groups such as voluntary welfare organisations and grassroots organisations.The active care and concern shown by the community as well as professional interventions by social workers complement government assistance, and help the needy to overcome their difficulties. This "Many Helping Hands" approach has served us well all these years.Public assistance (PA) recipients receive three types of assistance. In addition to the monthly PA allowance, they hold a PA Card which makes them eligible for free medical treatment and heavily subsidised rental housing. They also receive utilities and services and conservancy charges rebates.Together, this should be sufficient to maintain a basic standard of living for most PA recipients.On top of this, PA recipients also receive extensive community support, such as befriending programmes, daily activities at senior activity centres, food rations, free meals, hongbao, and cash allowances.My ministry carries out regular reviews of the PA scheme, and will ensure that the provisions of the scheme remain appropriate in today's context.A needy person only needs to approach his Community Development Council, grassroots leaders or family service centres for help. He can also call ComCare Call on 1800-222 0000.Just as a patient need only let his doctor know what his symptoms are, it is not necessary for a needy person to ask for any specific scheme. The agency he approaches will help him to apply for the relevant assistance.Our social safety net is robust. The Government has the necessary assistance schemes in place, and the community actively supplements these with various programmes.For those who are truly unable to cope on their own, there are always the welfare homes that will provide shelter and food. No one needs to go hungry in Singapore. Kevin ShumDirector (ComCare and Social Support Division)Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports More and more enigmatic Anything related to the methodologies of the People's Action Party (PAP) governance is showing increasing signs of enigma.As if government policies are not complicated enough, the PAP-managed Aljunied Town Council introduces the idea of a "trash index" to deter litterbugs through higher service and conservancy (S & C) charges for dirtiest precincts.How in the world is such a policy going to be implemented?Count the number of tissue crumples and charge constituents $5 per piece?Sweep up the trash to determine how much floor space it takes up and bill $10 per square foot?Or consolidate it by void decks and weigh the damage by $20 per kilogram?Thank you for the creativity but I believe Singaporeans would not wish to pay the government higher salaries to think of new ways to make more money from them.And when more money is made, the government shows them the budget surpluses to justify its pay increases for its "ingenious" ideas and return to the drawing board for more "concoctions".It becomes a vicious cycle.Perhaps, in order to save on conservancy charges, residents of Aljunied GRC may have to "triple up", as if they do not have their own jobs already.They need to double up as police to catch litterbugs and then triple up as cleaners to avoid being taxed with higher costs.Personally, I am glad coordinating chairman of PAP town councils Dr Teo Ho Pin did not share the jest zest of Aljunied Town Council chairman Mdm Cynthia Phua.The Straits Times (Mon, 5 May 2008) dubbed this idea "the first of its kind in Singapore".First of its kind in the world, more likely.Trash the idea, please. That 'foreign object' Why a PAP MP couldn't fathom a Workers' Party statementThe Workers' Party of Singapore (WP) issued a press release on May Day 2008, signed off by organising secretary Yaw Shin Leong, calling for, in short, the interests of Singapore workers be paid attention to.The next day, People's Action Party (PAP) Member of Parliament for Yio Chu Kang SMC Seng Han Thong, who is also National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) assistant secretary-general, challenged the WP-managed Hougang Town Council (HGTC) not to hire foreigners.With due respect, the bigger challenge was to reckon how any statement could be misinterpreted to great lengths by a labour movement leader.Nothing in the statement suggested that the Singapore government should ban foreign workers or that WP did not welcome them.The WP, as far as I know, has never showed signs of xenophobia, Mr Seng.Given that the word "socialism" is enshrined in the WP's constitution, doesn't that make it a left-wing party rather than a right-wing one like Australia's One Nation Party?Since this is a challenge to stretch our imaginations, could I throw back a personal challenge to the PAP government and the NTUC to have employment only for foreigners and none for Singaporeans?Or perhaps, how about steering Singapore to become another Israel and subsequently demarcate Sentosa as the world's second Gaza Strip or West Bank?Indeed, the HGTC does not have foreign workers - but that is not the point.The point is, your foreign policy, PAP, your foreign policy.The WP is not the government and cannot administer the number of foreign workers entering the country.Everyone is aware that every country on this globe has non-citizens living in it, even closed-door ones like Cuba and North Korea.At the same time, governments implement certain criteria to limit these numbers.Singapore appears to have very lag hurdles and this is what I believe the WP is in object to.To put it in deeper perspective, even if the HGTC were to employ foreigners, it was the PAP government that let them into Singapore.Apparently, this was not understood the first time; hence the WP responded to Mr Seng with a second statement, again by Mr Yaw, reiterating its stand again.This was misunderstood once again and taken to be "a shift its position on the issue on foreigners" and the HGTC "should offer all of its work to Singaporeans and not allow its contractors to employ foreigners", according to the PAP MP.Ahem... weren't you the one who said that the HGTC should not hire foreigners and were shown it was the case, Mr Seng?Now, he extends his challenge to the contractors engaged by the HGTC.What about the idea of HGTC decreeing that Hougang constituents cannot hire foreign maids?Intriguing enough to score two misses but remarkable when the same repeated point is missed twice.Firstly, the HGTC management must be flattered to know that there are people who think they have superhuman abilities to control who their contractors can and should employ.Mr Seng did have a spot on - that foreigners are breaking the rice bowls of Singaporean workers.However, Singaporeans' rice bowls do not have to be protected by zero foreigners, Mr Seng.All that needs are lesser foreigners - and that is the point.Having 10% foreign workers and having 30% foreign workers are two different scenarios, Mr Seng.Hopefully, the WP does not need to issue a third statement.Otherwise, the continuation of rebuttals by the ruling PAP may sound more and more foreign to more and more Singaporeans. Singapore press, international rankings The verdict is out for the Singapore press again.Based on the latest "Global Press Freedom Rankings", a publication released by Freedom House, for its cover of the year 2007, the Singapore press remains stuck at the mid-hundred range among nearly 200 countries ranked annually.One can surmise that this will probably be the status quo for a long time until there is a change of government.Freedom House is a non-profit organisation that promotes democracy, political and economic freedom around the world.Founded in 1941 by Anna Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of 32nd United States president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, it is concerned with mounting threats to peace and democracy and opposes tyrannical rule, dictatorships and totalitarian regimes in the world.It also runs another publication - its flagship publication - "Freedom in the World".According to Freedom House, the Singapore press has been "awarded" 153th place, an improvement of one space up from 154th last year and as a first-world country, shares the same slot with third-world ones like Iraq and Gabon.Here is how the Singapore press fared under its microscope for previous years:FREEDOM HOUSE[www.freedomhouse.org]Global Press Freedom Rankings: Singapore2007Ranking: 154 out of 195Category: Free / Partly Free / Not FreeSame Rankings: Afghanistan, Djibouti, Gabon2006Ranking: 148 out of 194Category: Free / Partly Free / Not FreeSame Rankings: NIL2005Ranking: 139 out of 194Category: Free / Partly Free / Not FreeSame Rankings: Angola, Bhutan, Gabon, Haiti2004Ranking: 135 out of 193Category: Free / Partly Free / Not FreeSame Rankings: Armenia, Central African Republic, Maldives, Mauritania2003Ranking: 61 - 70 out of 100Category: Free / Partly Free / Not FreeSame Rankings: 27 countries2002Ranking: 61 - 75 out of 100Category: Free / Partly Free / Not FreeSame Rankings: 32 countriesNotably, apart from the little recent rise, the Singapore press' ranking has dipped over the past five years.Its status has also consistently fallen into the category of "Not Free" among three categories that include "Free" and "Partly Free".If the topmost and foot categories were simultaneous with the identifications of "first-world" and "third-world" respectively, it is safe to conclude that Singapore has "third-world press freedoms".With a "first-world government" in Singapore, or so-claimed by the PAP, it is remarkable that press freedoms here cannot achieve the "second-world" tag of "Partly Free", which would be more deserving of a ruling party that prides itself in having elections yet turn up a single-dominant-party result.Not only so, it is 21st among 40 countries with press freedoms categorised "Not Free" - right at the centre.Another international organisation that conducts such similar rankings exercise is the Reporters without Borders (RWB).Registered in France as a non-profit entity, it highlights mistreatment and torture of journalists and media assistants persecuted while in the course of carrying out their job and has consultancy status with the United Nations.Let's take a look at the RWB's past years' rankings of the Singapore press:REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS[www.rsf.org]Worldwide Press Freedom Index: Singapore2007: 141 out of 1692006: 146 out of 1682005: 140 out of 1672004: 147 out of 1672003: 144 out of 1662002: Not availableAccording to this one, Singapore's press freedom rankings have been fluctuating but is also positioned rather modestly.Taking a closer look, it is placed at the bottom 20% tier every year among countries ranked.First-world countries usually possess first-world press freedoms.Even many third-world countries have it.Singapore certainly enjoys this rare, dubious honour of being "first-world" while having "third-world press freedoms".Time to shape up?