As usual, the PAP is trying to paint doomsday scenarios if opposition gets voted.
Here's a line by line analysis of MM Lee's wise words.
SINGAPORE: Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has urged the voters of Aljunied GRC to exercise their vote carefully in the 7 May General Election.
This is because a wrong choice would mean they lose a strong team of office holders and ground parliamentarians. Mr Lee was speaking to the media after a visit to Tampines Central on Friday night.
"Strong team" to who? The people? or PAP?
What has George Yeo's team done?
Let me remind Aljunied voters that in 2008, Aljunied GRC was voted one of the dirtiest towns in Singapore. And George Yeo's strong team of office holders considered raising conservancy fees as a quick fix. Thankfully they made a u-turn in the face of a barrage of online criticisms.
You see, with more opposition in parliment, we will make the PAP think twice before passing unpopular policies.
Mr Lee's visit there was to support Mr Heng Swee Keat, PAP's new candidate in the Tampines GRC slate.
Mr Heng was once Minister Mentor Lee's principal private secretary during his career in the civil service. His last post before leaving for politics was as the managing director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).
Mr Lee said: "He is the man who saw Singapore through the financial crisis and we recovered faster than other countries, but he's a potential Minister for Finance or Minister for Trade and Industry and we've got to have people like that in reserve."
MM Lee, is he also the man who oversaw our economy when we were the first Asia country to dip into recession when the crisis started?
So Mr Lee's advice to all voters and in particular those in Aljunied GRC is to look at the track record of the candidates and the programmes they have for the constituency.
We have looked into the track record. Unfortunately for your new PAP, it isn't particularly impressive considering that you have the most expensive ministers on the whole planet."During election time, all claims are made recklessly, but they are simplistic. Election rallies' slogans sell," he warned.
The Minister Mentor urged Aljunied GRC's voters to compare the property prices of their GRC with those in the neighbouring Hougang division, an opposition stronghold.
He said they would realise the prices are not the same. "You have the wrong government, you have your property prices go right down," he said.
Minister Mentor Lee went on to say: "If you are in Aljunied, ask yourself: do you want one MP, one non-constituency MP, one celebrity, two unknowns, to look after you? Or, have two ministers, one Speaker of Parliament, one very good ground worker (Ong Ye Kung) and Cynthia Phua to look after the place?
Isn't an elected government suppose to take care of ALL citizens, whether or not they are supporters?
Will Obama wash his hands off Texas because they are Republican?
So it shouldn't matter if the new team is made up of incumbent ministers or unknowns. We want to judge people on track record (yes I said it) and commitment to Singaporeans."What will happen to your property values and your own comfort, the drains and mosquitoes and so on in the five years? You have this celebrity, he has been away 30 years, he comes back, how does he connect with us?
We've given PAP nearly 50 years. Let's give this "celebrity" 5 years in office and then we will decide again. If he screws up, the voters will replace him in 2016. Let's not judge too early."It may well happen. If they win, in which case, the people of Aljunied live with the results. The only way people learn is when they have to pay a price."
And how do you know that? What if the lives of Aljunied Singaporeans actually get better? What will you say?Mr Lee was also unfazed by the large crowds at the opposition rallies, as he feels that does not translate into the final results on Polling Day.
Mr Lee also provided data to counter opposition's claims that foreigners in Singapore were taking away jobs from Singaporeans.
He said total employment in Singapore rose by 786,000 between 2006 and last year. That's a cumulative increase of 34 percent.
Last year alone, 115,900 jobs were added, with half going to Singaporeans.
Even if that were true, why are we creating 57,950 jobs for foreigners? Leave that to their own governments back home. I don't know of any country except UAE where the government creates as many jobs for foreigners. (Still, UAE citizens sit on top of the economic ladder so I hear. Not sure if it's the same here)
Preliminary estimates also show that total employment grew by 23,700 in the first three months of this year.
Mr Lee pointed out that the Singapore government has no reason to look after the interest of foreigners.
More foreigners means more spending on consumption no matter what. That will add to GDP de facto. Higher GDP growth means more bonuses for ministers. So there isn't any reason to look after the interest of foreigners?
He added that the PAP government has created more jobs than Singaporeans can fill.
That's because we have too many labour intensive jobs and exploitative MNCs on our shores. Move up the value chain, services chain-- Singaporeans are talented and hardworking and if given the chance, we can grow the economy by ourselves! Let our local run businesses thrive! Downplay the significance of MNCs.
I'm seeing ordinary foreigners taking away our PMET jobs when there are locals who can perform these jobs.
He said no country has done that except Singapore.
Mr Lee also released data stating that the overall unemployment rate was 2.2 percent last year.
The resident jobless rate was 3.1 percent, the second lowest over the period of 2000 and 2010.
Resident includes Singaporeans and PRs. PRs will have to be employed otherwise they will be out of this country. Stop skewing the statistics. Give us the jobless rate for Singaporeans only and we can judge.
Mr Lee added that foreigners are brought into Singapore to attract investments, in turn creating even more jobs for locals.
Some examples include how the equipment supplying company, Applied Materials, employs over 500 staff, and 85 percent of them are Singaporeans.
To be honest, I wouldn't expect any less. For every Applied Materials, there would be two Johnson & Johnsons or Citibanks.
And based on a construction manpower study done last year, which surveyed 1,000 contracting firms, two-thirds of professional, managerial, executive and technical positions are held by Singaporeans.
- CNA/ir
Saturday 30 April 2011
So what are the real issues at stake?
Ignore the party rhetoric, slogans and catch phrases. What is really at stake for the future of Singapore?
1) 6.5 million people.
I don't know about you but I already feel the strain of having 4.5 million people in this tiny country. Since the last GE, the PAP allowed about 1 million foreigners of all sorts into our land without consulting Singaporeans. They also failed to adequately expand the public infrastructure to accommodate them. Our facilities- public transport, malls, clinics, parks, hospitals, schools etc- are strained.
Trust me, we will get to 6.5 million if our political landscape remains status quo.
2) Cost of living.
Unlike many developed nations, the PAP doesn't subsidise basic necessities like food and utilities. Instead, these items are slapped with a 7% tax, which burdens the less fortunate alot more than the rich.
I'm sure we can make room for such subsidies by scrutinising our defence budget and minister salaries more closely.
In the last five years, the PAP heavily pushed medical tourism. Millionaires from all over the world flock to our island and use up valuable healthcare facilities. Yet the number of hospital beds hardly increased. So now we have foreigners + medical tourist + Singaporeans competing for medical infrastructure. Who should come first?
Why would a hospital allocate more "C" class wards for Singaporeans when surgeons can charge a member of the Brunei royal family $24,000,000 in fees?
The end result is that healthcare fees just go up and up. And I'm not sure if Johor Bahru is a viable option.
The notion of public housing is twisted beyond recognition. Public housing is no longer affordable when you need 25-30 years to pay off a loan. This leaves many Singaporeans with little retirement monies.
Ask yourself, how comfortably can you retire if things stay the same?
3) Education
The PAP has created a system that is focused solely on grades. Mission schools that used to place equal emphasis on academic and character development have also given into this system. Half of a typical primary 1 class is now foreigners. Our children have no choice but to compete with them from a young age. Our kids no longer learn but just study.
Our local students are finding it harder and harder to get into the courses of choice. Our unis set aside too many places for foreign students.
My dear Singaporeans, I see darker clouds over the horizon if nothing changes...
1) 6.5 million people.
I don't know about you but I already feel the strain of having 4.5 million people in this tiny country. Since the last GE, the PAP allowed about 1 million foreigners of all sorts into our land without consulting Singaporeans. They also failed to adequately expand the public infrastructure to accommodate them. Our facilities- public transport, malls, clinics, parks, hospitals, schools etc- are strained.
Trust me, we will get to 6.5 million if our political landscape remains status quo.
2) Cost of living.
Unlike many developed nations, the PAP doesn't subsidise basic necessities like food and utilities. Instead, these items are slapped with a 7% tax, which burdens the less fortunate alot more than the rich.
I'm sure we can make room for such subsidies by scrutinising our defence budget and minister salaries more closely.
In the last five years, the PAP heavily pushed medical tourism. Millionaires from all over the world flock to our island and use up valuable healthcare facilities. Yet the number of hospital beds hardly increased. So now we have foreigners + medical tourist + Singaporeans competing for medical infrastructure. Who should come first?
Why would a hospital allocate more "C" class wards for Singaporeans when surgeons can charge a member of the Brunei royal family $24,000,000 in fees?
The end result is that healthcare fees just go up and up. And I'm not sure if Johor Bahru is a viable option.
The notion of public housing is twisted beyond recognition. Public housing is no longer affordable when you need 25-30 years to pay off a loan. This leaves many Singaporeans with little retirement monies.
Ask yourself, how comfortably can you retire if things stay the same?
3) Education
The PAP has created a system that is focused solely on grades. Mission schools that used to place equal emphasis on academic and character development have also given into this system. Half of a typical primary 1 class is now foreigners. Our children have no choice but to compete with them from a young age. Our kids no longer learn but just study.
Our local students are finding it harder and harder to get into the courses of choice. Our unis set aside too many places for foreign students.
My dear Singaporeans, I see darker clouds over the horizon if nothing changes...
Friday 29 April 2011
Workers' Party rally 2- Your vote is secret!
I was at the Workers' Party rally at Serangoon Stadium. Here are a couple of shots from my ordinary iPhone camera.
Like the first rally, I reckon there were about 50k people in attendance. Pretty amazing.
The key point that was driven home tonight is that your vote is secret.
1) You place your votes on poll day. Note that the serial number is just to make sure one does not vote twice.
2) Votes are taken to counting centres. Votes are counted by civil servants from different departments in full view of candidates from each contesting party.
3) Ballot boxes sealed and party members will sign on the seal. They are then taken to the vaults in Supreme Court and locked up for six months.
4) After six months, the sealed boxes and signatures are inspected by all parties and sent to the incinerators. Members of all political parties will be present to witness this.
There is no way your vote can be traced.
So you see, vote without fear!
Like the first rally, I reckon there were about 50k people in attendance. Pretty amazing.
The key point that was driven home tonight is that your vote is secret.
1) You place your votes on poll day. Note that the serial number is just to make sure one does not vote twice.
2) Votes are taken to counting centres. Votes are counted by civil servants from different departments in full view of candidates from each contesting party.
3) Ballot boxes sealed and party members will sign on the seal. They are then taken to the vaults in Supreme Court and locked up for six months.
4) After six months, the sealed boxes and signatures are inspected by all parties and sent to the incinerators. Members of all political parties will be present to witness this.
There is no way your vote can be traced.
So you see, vote without fear!
An appeal to younger generation
Show your parents/grandparents the opposition side of the story. Play social media, youtube etc for them.
Local media content only tells the PAP story.
Remember while you can't yet vote, your parents/grandparents can and their votes will help shape your future.
You guys make a difference!
Local media content only tells the PAP story.
Remember while you can't yet vote, your parents/grandparents can and their votes will help shape your future.
You guys make a difference!
Who's actually dealing with tangible issues?
I must applaud the Straits Times for giving alot more coverage to the opposition this time round.
Suppose you need to when a combined crowd of about of 100,000 Singaporeans packed into opposition rally sites yesterday.
But I must also caution readers that no matter how objective our excellent, young journalists want to be, their hands would be tied by the powers that be. (Ex PAP Dr. Tony Tan is the Chairman of SPH)
That's why I woke up only to read a somewhat distorted view of the elections.
If you read front pages of today's ST, it would seem that only PAP is tackling the tangible issues while the opposition is merely trumping their own agenda.
This couldnt be further away from the truth. And I'll tell you why.
Firstly, I'm not sure what kind of moral compass PAP is using when the tangible issues of today's Singapore like cost of living, immigration, medical, housing, education etc were caused by..... them.
We can safely say so because the PAP has had half a century of uninterrupted rule.
It's like saying to someone I'm going to poision you and then claim that I'm are the only one with the antidote.
Secondly, the SDP did give credit to the old PAP, something which ST has totally failed to report. There's no doubt that we had men of courage and servitude like Goh Keng Swee, Lim Chin Siong and of course Lee Kuan Yew. For the latter, yes not everyone agrees with his hard-handed tactics but one can't begrudge him of his contributions to early Singapore. So I'm strangely happy that Tanjong Pagar GRC is a walkover so his legacy will be intact.
In actual fact, one can argue that pre Independence Singapore was already some sort of crown jewel in the region. The British built our policies and infrastructure and left Singapore in a very good state.
Should Gordon Brown come out and claim credit?
I think the point here is that Singaporeans have repaid the old PAP many times over with our hard work and sacrifices over the last 50 years. In any case, the role of the elected government is to serve the people, not the other way round.
So alot of the misgivings are with the current crop of PAP ministers..or the new PAP.
All of them are millionaires, some born with silver spoon. You seriously expect a bunch of sheltered millionaires to know that feeling of squeezing into stuffy MRT trains? Or feel any sort of pinch from 7% GST? Or understand the frustration of balloting for HDB and schools? Or fathom the agony of a 5 hour wait to see a doctor?
The PAP must realise that in the age of social media, they can no longer control information. A google search will reveal that Khaw Boon Wan did suggest sending the elderly to Johor and even to Batam.
A google search will prove that unpopular policies like COE and ERP were introduced during SM Goh's time as PM.
In fact, it is the opposition who are campaigning on tangible policies. Unlike the PAP, opposition parties today have a well balanced breed of scholars and doctors but also ordinary Singaporeans like small business owners and marketing executives. We all know that a political party solely consisting of government scholars may not produce the best ideas.
Imagine a football team with 11 Ronaldos or 11 Shiltons. There must be diversity to represent different interests.
Still, at the SDP rally (I will be the other parties rallies over the next week), there were some good ideas, needing fine tuning, that are worth considering.
1) Dr. Ang suggested bringing down class room size from 40 to 20. This will certainly benefit each child and also create more teaching jobs
2) Focus more on services sector- less labour intensive (hence fewer foreigners needed) and less land intensive
3) Donating half their MP allowance if voted in to set up a bursary for the less fortunate. I wonder if any PAP minister will do the same.
On the topic of housing, I suggest the opposition should talk less about high prices as general wisdom will dictate that high asset prices are good. And the PAP will drum this into voters everytime.
Try arguing that if PAP track record was so good and if they really have improved the lives of Singaporeans, then why is the ratio of those staying in public vs private housing (condos) nearly the same as 20 years ago.
I'm not aware of another developed country that has public housing for the masses. (Public housing in Hong Kong is rental housing for the poor, many Malaysians own private apartments)
Suppose you need to when a combined crowd of about of 100,000 Singaporeans packed into opposition rally sites yesterday.
But I must also caution readers that no matter how objective our excellent, young journalists want to be, their hands would be tied by the powers that be. (Ex PAP Dr. Tony Tan is the Chairman of SPH)
That's why I woke up only to read a somewhat distorted view of the elections.
If you read front pages of today's ST, it would seem that only PAP is tackling the tangible issues while the opposition is merely trumping their own agenda.
This couldnt be further away from the truth. And I'll tell you why.
Firstly, I'm not sure what kind of moral compass PAP is using when the tangible issues of today's Singapore like cost of living, immigration, medical, housing, education etc were caused by..... them.
We can safely say so because the PAP has had half a century of uninterrupted rule.
It's like saying to someone I'm going to poision you and then claim that I'm are the only one with the antidote.
Secondly, the SDP did give credit to the old PAP, something which ST has totally failed to report. There's no doubt that we had men of courage and servitude like Goh Keng Swee, Lim Chin Siong and of course Lee Kuan Yew. For the latter, yes not everyone agrees with his hard-handed tactics but one can't begrudge him of his contributions to early Singapore. So I'm strangely happy that Tanjong Pagar GRC is a walkover so his legacy will be intact.
In actual fact, one can argue that pre Independence Singapore was already some sort of crown jewel in the region. The British built our policies and infrastructure and left Singapore in a very good state.
Should Gordon Brown come out and claim credit?
I think the point here is that Singaporeans have repaid the old PAP many times over with our hard work and sacrifices over the last 50 years. In any case, the role of the elected government is to serve the people, not the other way round.
So alot of the misgivings are with the current crop of PAP ministers..or the new PAP.
All of them are millionaires, some born with silver spoon. You seriously expect a bunch of sheltered millionaires to know that feeling of squeezing into stuffy MRT trains? Or feel any sort of pinch from 7% GST? Or understand the frustration of balloting for HDB and schools? Or fathom the agony of a 5 hour wait to see a doctor?
The PAP must realise that in the age of social media, they can no longer control information. A google search will reveal that Khaw Boon Wan did suggest sending the elderly to Johor and even to Batam.
A google search will prove that unpopular policies like COE and ERP were introduced during SM Goh's time as PM.
In fact, it is the opposition who are campaigning on tangible policies. Unlike the PAP, opposition parties today have a well balanced breed of scholars and doctors but also ordinary Singaporeans like small business owners and marketing executives. We all know that a political party solely consisting of government scholars may not produce the best ideas.
Imagine a football team with 11 Ronaldos or 11 Shiltons. There must be diversity to represent different interests.
Still, at the SDP rally (I will be the other parties rallies over the next week), there were some good ideas, needing fine tuning, that are worth considering.
1) Dr. Ang suggested bringing down class room size from 40 to 20. This will certainly benefit each child and also create more teaching jobs
2) Focus more on services sector- less labour intensive (hence fewer foreigners needed) and less land intensive
3) Donating half their MP allowance if voted in to set up a bursary for the less fortunate. I wonder if any PAP minister will do the same.
On the topic of housing, I suggest the opposition should talk less about high prices as general wisdom will dictate that high asset prices are good. And the PAP will drum this into voters everytime.
Try arguing that if PAP track record was so good and if they really have improved the lives of Singaporeans, then why is the ratio of those staying in public vs private housing (condos) nearly the same as 20 years ago.
I'm not aware of another developed country that has public housing for the masses. (Public housing in Hong Kong is rental housing for the poor, many Malaysians own private apartments)
SDP rally 1---- HOT!!!
I was at the SDP rally at Commonwealth this evening.
The atmosphere was electric and I guess there must have been a few thousand people in attendance.
This SDP team looks really strong.
Some highlights:
James Gomez rocked the crowd with his "Send Khaw Boon Wan to JB" battlecry. This is an obvious jibe at Khaw for suggesting that Singaporeans could send their elderly to cheaper nursing homes in JB.
Some in the crowd suggested Bintan or Batam, drawing spontaneous laughter.
Dr. Vincent got the biggest cheer.
I thought he was extremely intelligent in how he downplayed the "gay video" incident and even wished Vivian the best. He touched on immigration, HDB and YOG with the usual eloquence.
Tan Jee Say positioned himself as the team's economist and he certainly has the credo for it. He also explained how PAP misconstrued his suggestion of focusing on the services sector saying that land intensive manufacturing industries may not be the best use of scarce land resources in Sinagpore.
Dr. Ang Yong Guan had the last slot. As a psychiatrist, he called himself the "software" of the team.
He spoke very passionately about a variety of issues and was able to excite the crowd with salient and witty remarks.
Overall, you could feel the heat and excitement on the ground. There seems to be alot more passion this time round, candidates and supporters alike.
I think the PAP has a big fight on its hands.
The atmosphere was electric and I guess there must have been a few thousand people in attendance.
This SDP team looks really strong.
Some highlights:
James Gomez rocked the crowd with his "Send Khaw Boon Wan to JB" battlecry. This is an obvious jibe at Khaw for suggesting that Singaporeans could send their elderly to cheaper nursing homes in JB.
Some in the crowd suggested Bintan or Batam, drawing spontaneous laughter.
Dr. Vincent got the biggest cheer.
I thought he was extremely intelligent in how he downplayed the "gay video" incident and even wished Vivian the best. He touched on immigration, HDB and YOG with the usual eloquence.
Tan Jee Say positioned himself as the team's economist and he certainly has the credo for it. He also explained how PAP misconstrued his suggestion of focusing on the services sector saying that land intensive manufacturing industries may not be the best use of scarce land resources in Sinagpore.
Dr. Ang Yong Guan had the last slot. As a psychiatrist, he called himself the "software" of the team.
He spoke very passionately about a variety of issues and was able to excite the crowd with salient and witty remarks.
Overall, you could feel the heat and excitement on the ground. There seems to be alot more passion this time round, candidates and supporters alike.
I think the PAP has a big fight on its hands.
Thursday 28 April 2011
$10 an hour
That's what PAP is apparently paying friends/relatives of grassroot leaders to attend ralllies, clap, wave flags and what not.
Just a wild guess but the money would be taxpayers' no?
So expect to see lots of white coloured drones at Sengkang tonight.
Just a wild guess but the money would be taxpayers' no?
So expect to see lots of white coloured drones at Sengkang tonight.
PAP track record: Bukit Panjang SMC Teo Ho Pin
As coordinating chairman of town councils, he allowed town councils to gamble and lose millions of residents' money in minibonds.
These councils amass hundreds of millions in resident conservancy fees while many struggle to cough out $66 every single month.
Then there's the NorthWest CDC civil servants getting 8 months bonus saga.
He also failed to stand up for residents in the Fajar wet market incident.
How he got 77.2% of the votes last time round is a mystery....
These councils amass hundreds of millions in resident conservancy fees while many struggle to cough out $66 every single month.
Then there's the NorthWest CDC civil servants getting 8 months bonus saga.
He also failed to stand up for residents in the Fajar wet market incident.
How he got 77.2% of the votes last time round is a mystery....
SM Goh names economic growth and jobs as top voter issue
Or so it seems. That's another ivory tower view from PAP.
Top voter issues in my opinion are standard/cost of living and immigration.
Yes economic growth is important but we all know that with this should come real wage growth or wages adjusted for inflation.
MAS reported that wages grew 5.6% for all of 2010.
Our inflation rate for most of Q1 this year is about 5%.
Again, due to the lack of transparency, we don't know the actual wage growth for Singaporeans, excluding PRs and foreigners.
And as you know, alot of these foreign PMET "talents" are actually paid quite well because there are qualifying salary thresholds for different employment passes and these thresholds have gone up.
So actual wage growth could very well be skewed higher.
Another unique characteristic of the Singapore growth story is that when GDP is strong and more jobs are created, more foreigners are hired into our shores because of our open immigration policy.
My company actually got an EP approved for a generic job position in about one hour!
So the actual net effect of economy led jobs growth on local Singaporeans could be minimal.
Therefore, wage growth should not be the only yardstick that measures standard of living. With prices of food, utilities,education, medical care etc relentlessly going up, many voters are left wondering when this "Swiss standard of living" mooted by SM Goh 20 years ago will arrive.
Top voter issues in my opinion are standard/cost of living and immigration.
Yes economic growth is important but we all know that with this should come real wage growth or wages adjusted for inflation.
MAS reported that wages grew 5.6% for all of 2010.
Our inflation rate for most of Q1 this year is about 5%.
Again, due to the lack of transparency, we don't know the actual wage growth for Singaporeans, excluding PRs and foreigners.
And as you know, alot of these foreign PMET "talents" are actually paid quite well because there are qualifying salary thresholds for different employment passes and these thresholds have gone up.
So actual wage growth could very well be skewed higher.
Another unique characteristic of the Singapore growth story is that when GDP is strong and more jobs are created, more foreigners are hired into our shores because of our open immigration policy.
My company actually got an EP approved for a generic job position in about one hour!
So the actual net effect of economy led jobs growth on local Singaporeans could be minimal.
Therefore, wage growth should not be the only yardstick that measures standard of living. With prices of food, utilities,education, medical care etc relentlessly going up, many voters are left wondering when this "Swiss standard of living" mooted by SM Goh 20 years ago will arrive.
Wednesday 27 April 2011
PAP track record: Aljunied GRC George Yeo
In a word, WikiLeaks
His inept response to the leaks may cause rifts with neighbours and could one day compromise our nation's security.
Perhaps that's why they need 200,000 reservists to be a standby.
Our Foreign Affairs Minister also let that Romanian diplomat escape.
His inept response to the leaks may cause rifts with neighbours and could one day compromise our nation's security.
Perhaps that's why they need 200,000 reservists to be a standby.
Our Foreign Affairs Minister also let that Romanian diplomat escape.
PAP track record: Moulmein-Kallang GRC Yaacob Ibrahim
My fellow Singaporeans, and Malay brethrens, he recently said we should teach Malay as a foreign language instead of mother tongue.
As Environment and Water Resources Minister, he oversaw the flooding of Singapore's premier shopping belt and claimed these things happen once in 50 years.
However, we all know that it flooded a few more times after that. Some sightings in Jan 2011.
And yes, I suppose the water pacts with Johor are under his purview? We all know how those negotiations went. I guess that leaves us with err... new water.
As Environment and Water Resources Minister, he oversaw the flooding of Singapore's premier shopping belt and claimed these things happen once in 50 years.
However, we all know that it flooded a few more times after that. Some sightings in Jan 2011.
And yes, I suppose the water pacts with Johor are under his purview? We all know how those negotiations went. I guess that leaves us with err... new water.
PAP track record: Tampines GRC Baey Yam Keng
He has spoken about pressing issues such as creating a food museum, length of women's skirts and Edison Chen's scandal.
I dont blame him when there are so many frivolous issues like cost of living, immigration and the sandwiched middle class.
Oh did I forget to mention that he was the ex army chief?
From Temasek Review http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/08/16/baey-yam-keng-sexually-harassed-by-women-wearing-low-cut-dress/
I dont blame him when there are so many frivolous issues like cost of living, immigration and the sandwiched middle class.
Oh did I forget to mention that he was the ex army chief?
From Temasek Review http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/08/16/baey-yam-keng-sexually-harassed-by-women-wearing-low-cut-dress/
PAP track record: Choa Chu Kang GRC Gan Kim Yong
He's our Manpower Minister. One of the key issues is immigration.
There you go....
There you go....
PAP track record: Aljunied GRC Cynthia Phua
Isn't very popular, is she?
This is from another popular blog.
http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/05/boy-arrested-for-slamming-chair-at-mp.html
This is from another popular blog.
http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/05/boy-arrested-for-slamming-chair-at-mp.html
GE is for native Singaporeans only please
Why should foreigner opinions count in a national election?
This is utter gutter journalism and a desparate attempt to rally support for PAP.
From Straits Times Online:
Shanghai-born entrepreneur Zhang Runzi rallied 56 employees from her vacuum cleaner retail business to support PAP candidate Mr Sam Tan. They chanted “Sam Tan bi sheng” (Sam Tan must win) and “PAP bi sheng” a few times. Ms Zhang, 42, a mother of three, has been a Singapore citizen for 16 years. She chartered a bus and gave her staff half the day off to support the PAP, which she thinks has made Singapore a happy and prosperous society.
This is utter gutter journalism and a desparate attempt to rally support for PAP.
From Straits Times Online:
Shanghai-born entrepreneur Zhang Runzi rallied 56 employees from her vacuum cleaner retail business to support PAP candidate Mr Sam Tan. They chanted “Sam Tan bi sheng” (Sam Tan must win) and “PAP bi sheng” a few times. Ms Zhang, 42, a mother of three, has been a Singapore citizen for 16 years. She chartered a bus and gave her staff half the day off to support the PAP, which she thinks has made Singapore a happy and prosperous society.
Is minimum wage good or bad?
I think there is no clear cut answer here. Even economists can't agree.
Since there isn't a definitive right or wrong, the next best way to evaluate its merits is to see how universal the concept of minimum wage is.
Here goes:
197 countries have some sort of minimum wage.
Singapore is joined by distinguished nations like North Korea, Somalia, Tonga and Yemen under those without one.
PAP's Jospehine Teo's attempt at explaining her party's stand is at best lackadaisical.
It's true that minimum wages might put some firms out of business as labour costs are raised.
But the ruling party can offset this by a reduction of rentals, most of which goes to the coffers of government linked companies. Same goes for utlities.
At the very least, minimum wages will weed out unethical companies that have exploited labour for years.
Since there isn't a definitive right or wrong, the next best way to evaluate its merits is to see how universal the concept of minimum wage is.
Here goes:
197 countries have some sort of minimum wage.
Singapore is joined by distinguished nations like North Korea, Somalia, Tonga and Yemen under those without one.
PAP's Jospehine Teo's attempt at explaining her party's stand is at best lackadaisical.
It's true that minimum wages might put some firms out of business as labour costs are raised.
But the ruling party can offset this by a reduction of rentals, most of which goes to the coffers of government linked companies. Same goes for utlities.
At the very least, minimum wages will weed out unethical companies that have exploited labour for years.
Tuesday 26 April 2011
PAP track record: Holland-Bukit Timah GRC Dr. Vivian
Remember this infamous exchange.
One would think that a millionaire PAP minister like Dr. Vivian should show more compassion for the less fortunate?
One would think that a millionaire PAP minister like Dr. Vivian should show more compassion for the less fortunate?
Dr Lily Neo: Sir, I want to check with the Minister again when he said on the strict criteria on the entitlement for PA recipients. May I ask him what is his definition of "subsistence living"? Am I correct to say that, out of $260 per month for PA recipients, $100 goes to rental, power supply and S&C and leaving them with only $5 a day to live on? Am I correct to say that any basic meal in any hawker centre is already $2.50 to $3.00 per meal? Therefore, is it too much to ask for just three meals a day as an entitlement for the PA recipients?Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?
MM Lee said he doesn't care if native Singaporeans fall behind
Quote from his interview with NatGeo:
Over time, the MM says, Singaporeans have become "less hard-driving and hard-striving." This is why it is a good thing, the MM says, that the nation has welcomed so many Chinese immigrants (25 percent of the population is now foreign-born). He is aware that many Singaporeans are unhappy with the influx of immigrants, especially those educated newcomers prepared to fight for higher paying jobs. But taking a typically Darwinian stance, the MM describes the country's new subjects as "hungry," with parents who "pushed the children very hard." If native Singaporeans are falling behind because "the spurs are not stuck into the hide," that is their problem.
Well MM, if the current crop of ministers are voted out because "the spurs are not stuck into the hide", that is their problem.
Over time, the MM says, Singaporeans have become "less hard-driving and hard-striving." This is why it is a good thing, the MM says, that the nation has welcomed so many Chinese immigrants (25 percent of the population is now foreign-born). He is aware that many Singaporeans are unhappy with the influx of immigrants, especially those educated newcomers prepared to fight for higher paying jobs. But taking a typically Darwinian stance, the MM describes the country's new subjects as "hungry," with parents who "pushed the children very hard." If native Singaporeans are falling behind because "the spurs are not stuck into the hide," that is their problem.
Well MM, if the current crop of ministers are voted out because "the spurs are not stuck into the hide", that is their problem.
Three reasons why PAP still holds the upper hand
1) Full control of media. Our local media is almost run like PAP's TV channel. Many people still believe whatever is written in Straits Times, especially those without access to the internet.
2) PAP can engage freely in personal smear tactics against opposition candidates. While mud slinging is part of the political process and happens in democratic processes like US and Australia, the key difference in Singapore is the inability of the opposition to sling back.
Any attempts at "smearing" PAP members will be swiftly dealt with by the police and judiciary.
See case of Tang Liang Hong/JB, accused of being anti-Christian etc
See case of Chee Soon Juan and what happened to him when he tried to take on Goh Chok Tong
3) New citizens. We don't know their exact numbers but they may very well keep PAP in power. A colleague of mine is a Malaysian turned Singaporean and her support for PAP is probably more steadfast than some young PAP members.
So far, the PAP has shown little interest in engaging the real issues at hand.
There is no indication that any of the policies that have caused much voter discontent is even being reviewed.
Instead, they adopt the tactic of distraction by launching personal attacks on key opposition candidates, the latest being Dr Vincent Wijeysingha.
How well the opposition tackles this could decide the outcome of the election.
2) PAP can engage freely in personal smear tactics against opposition candidates. While mud slinging is part of the political process and happens in democratic processes like US and Australia, the key difference in Singapore is the inability of the opposition to sling back.
Any attempts at "smearing" PAP members will be swiftly dealt with by the police and judiciary.
See case of Tang Liang Hong/JB, accused of being anti-Christian etc
See case of Chee Soon Juan and what happened to him when he tried to take on Goh Chok Tong
3) New citizens. We don't know their exact numbers but they may very well keep PAP in power. A colleague of mine is a Malaysian turned Singaporean and her support for PAP is probably more steadfast than some young PAP members.
So far, the PAP has shown little interest in engaging the real issues at hand.
There is no indication that any of the policies that have caused much voter discontent is even being reviewed.
Instead, they adopt the tactic of distraction by launching personal attacks on key opposition candidates, the latest being Dr Vincent Wijeysingha.
How well the opposition tackles this could decide the outcome of the election.
Monday 25 April 2011
MM reminds Singaporeans they are not living in Disney World.
My humble comments on MM's pre nomination lecture.
He's urged them to look at the fundamentals
- Dear MM, it's precisely the fundamentals that aren't so good. I've written about this in a post on your track record of late.
He reminded Singaporeans not to risk their assets, property values, and job opportunities.
- I've dealth with property values in one of my earlier posts.
- I can see no proof of how PAP has enhanced job opportunities unless they give us a breakdown of the total number or % of jobs created that went to Singaporeans.
Mr Lee explained that the PAP got Singapore to where it is by careful and painstaking selection of their successors, men and women of integrity and quality.
They fill the top positions in Parliament, the administration, the Police and the Singapore Armed Forces.
- I think the problem why enterpreneurship, creativity and productivity is lacking in Singapore is because we may have too many men in uniform in leadership positions. Food for thought.
Highlighting Singapore's achievements, Mr Lee reminded voters that no country in the world has housed 85% of its population in public housing of high quality with the remaining 15% able to afford to buy condominiums and landed properties.
-The problem is that the proportion of those in public vs private housing hasn't changed much since then. If the people of a society has progressed, then shouldn't we see a bigger proportion of citizens living in private housing over time?
- Singaporeans don't really own their houses, not in the pure sense. The banks actually own the houses. And seeing that most loan tenures are 30 years, one can argue that most Singaporeans dont own their houses until three long decades later. Even so, the PAP has devised an ingenious scheme to "allow" the elderly to sell their houses back to HDB at low prices.
The Central Provident Fund was also expanded and this has enabled people to buy homes, co-pay for medical and dental expenses, and still have an adequate balance for retirement.
- The British gave us the CPF. The PAP turned CPF upside down. The reason why many have little in retirement funds is because the CPF was "expanded" primarly to allow people to buy expensive housing leases from local banks. These banks literally made a killing here.
So Mr Lee's message to voters - do not rock the foundation and remember where Singapore came from, and how difficult it was that the country has got to where it is.
- The country is going nowhere, at least not forward. That's why you sir, despite decades of steadfast refusal, finally allowed casinos to inhabit our island. I guess your team of ministers have simply ran out of ideas. Isn't it time for citizens to "rock the foundation" now?
The Minister Mentor reminded Singaporeans they are not living in Disney World.
- I'm not sure if i should laugh or cry at this remark?
He's urged them to look at the fundamentals
- Dear MM, it's precisely the fundamentals that aren't so good. I've written about this in a post on your track record of late.
He reminded Singaporeans not to risk their assets, property values, and job opportunities.
- I've dealth with property values in one of my earlier posts.
- I can see no proof of how PAP has enhanced job opportunities unless they give us a breakdown of the total number or % of jobs created that went to Singaporeans.
Mr Lee explained that the PAP got Singapore to where it is by careful and painstaking selection of their successors, men and women of integrity and quality.
They fill the top positions in Parliament, the administration, the Police and the Singapore Armed Forces.
- I think the problem why enterpreneurship, creativity and productivity is lacking in Singapore is because we may have too many men in uniform in leadership positions. Food for thought.
Highlighting Singapore's achievements, Mr Lee reminded voters that no country in the world has housed 85% of its population in public housing of high quality with the remaining 15% able to afford to buy condominiums and landed properties.
-The problem is that the proportion of those in public vs private housing hasn't changed much since then. If the people of a society has progressed, then shouldn't we see a bigger proportion of citizens living in private housing over time?
- Singaporeans don't really own their houses, not in the pure sense. The banks actually own the houses. And seeing that most loan tenures are 30 years, one can argue that most Singaporeans dont own their houses until three long decades later. Even so, the PAP has devised an ingenious scheme to "allow" the elderly to sell their houses back to HDB at low prices.
The Central Provident Fund was also expanded and this has enabled people to buy homes, co-pay for medical and dental expenses, and still have an adequate balance for retirement.
- The British gave us the CPF. The PAP turned CPF upside down. The reason why many have little in retirement funds is because the CPF was "expanded" primarly to allow people to buy expensive housing leases from local banks. These banks literally made a killing here.
So Mr Lee's message to voters - do not rock the foundation and remember where Singapore came from, and how difficult it was that the country has got to where it is.
- The country is going nowhere, at least not forward. That's why you sir, despite decades of steadfast refusal, finally allowed casinos to inhabit our island. I guess your team of ministers have simply ran out of ideas. Isn't it time for citizens to "rock the foundation" now?
The Minister Mentor reminded Singaporeans they are not living in Disney World.
- I'm not sure if i should laugh or cry at this remark?
Vote on PAP's track record please
Since the PAP's message is clear, vote based on track record, I'm summarising their track record in terms of Economy, Cost of living, Eudcation, Safety and Accountability since the last GE.
Economy:
1) We were to first Asian economy to plunge into recession during the Lehman-led downturn.
2) Our productivity hasn't grown
3) GIC and Temasek conspired to lose billions in our hard earned reserves
Cost of living:
1) We've had record inflation in the past couple of years- housing, food, transport, utilities and practically everything else under the sun
2) Yet wages only grow on average of 2-3% annually
3) GSTincreased 40% from 5 to 7%
Education:
1) More and more locals being rejected for the preferred course of study at our universities
2) By their own admission, the billingual education policy has failed
3) Singaporeans are balloting against PRs and foreigners for places at primary schools
Safety:
1) Mas Selamat
2) They allowed our trains to be victim of graffiti
3) They let a cold blooded Romanian murderer escape
Accountability:
1) From National Safety Council to Singapore Land Authority to NKF, millions were misappropriated
2) YOG budget ran 3-4 times over and there was no explanation
3) Our young soliders die during training but the system remains the same
Economy:
1) We were to first Asian economy to plunge into recession during the Lehman-led downturn.
2) Our productivity hasn't grown
3) GIC and Temasek conspired to lose billions in our hard earned reserves
Cost of living:
1) We've had record inflation in the past couple of years- housing, food, transport, utilities and practically everything else under the sun
2) Yet wages only grow on average of 2-3% annually
3) GSTincreased 40% from 5 to 7%
Education:
1) More and more locals being rejected for the preferred course of study at our universities
2) By their own admission, the billingual education policy has failed
3) Singaporeans are balloting against PRs and foreigners for places at primary schools
Safety:
1) Mas Selamat
2) They allowed our trains to be victim of graffiti
3) They let a cold blooded Romanian murderer escape
Accountability:
1) From National Safety Council to Singapore Land Authority to NKF, millions were misappropriated
2) YOG budget ran 3-4 times over and there was no explanation
3) Our young soliders die during training but the system remains the same
GE: S'poreans should be aware of possible freak result, says Ng Eng Hen
In the 2002 World Cup, England faced Brazil in the quarters. Brazil won a free kick almost at the half way line. Up stepped Ronaldinho to deliver the ball into the England box. The ball instead sailed over David Seaman and Brazil took the lead for a second time, went on the win the match and eventually, their fifth World Cup title.
It took a freak goal for that to happen.
A combination of a massive earthquake and freak weather brought the world's third largest economy to its knees. Japan faces many years of rebuilding and fears of radiation still lingers on.
One thing is certain, freak results do count.
In fact, the freak result would be if the opposition didn't win a handful of seats.
Even if they do, MM Lee had forewarned that the army could come in and stop it? Let's hope our courageous men in uniform can think for the future of this country.
It took a freak goal for that to happen.
A combination of a massive earthquake and freak weather brought the world's third largest economy to its knees. Japan faces many years of rebuilding and fears of radiation still lingers on.
One thing is certain, freak results do count.
In fact, the freak result would be if the opposition didn't win a handful of seats.
Even if they do, MM Lee had forewarned that the army could come in and stop it? Let's hope our courageous men in uniform can think for the future of this country.
SINGAPORE : Education Minister Ng Eng Hen has warned of a possible freak result if Singaporeans vote the opposition into power in the coming polls.
He said that the opposition must look to form an alternate government, and not just offer alternative voices in Parliament.
Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng took issue with the opposition sharing candidates.
They were speaking at the launch of Heights Park in Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency (GRC) on Saturday.
After meeting with residents at the opening of Heights Park, Education Minister Ng told reporters that voters need to ask themselves who will best serve their needs.
He said Singaporeans should only vote for the opposition if they believe the opposition can run the country better than the People's Action Party (PAP).
Dr Ng said: "Every election, it is never about just alternative voices in Parliament, because your vote is very powerful and for every General Election, you are deciding on who runs the country. If it is just for alternative voices, the NCMP scheme allows for that, you can raise anything you want in Parliament.
"But as the opposition parties have clarified, that is not their intent. In fact, they want to - Workers' Party have said they want to block constitutional amendments, they want enough seats in the house not just to provide alternative voices, but really their goal is to form an alternative government - to become the government."
One of the points in the Singapore People's Party manifesto is that the government must be held accountable for any security lapses. To this, Mr Wong said he had already dealt with this issue in Parliament.
He said: "I spent one hour detailing what the Committee of Inquiry found, and spent the next two hours answering questions from all the MPs - those who were interested in asking questions.
"Mr Chiam (See Tong) stood up and asked me a question, and he asked whether the police considered using tracker dogs to track down Mas Selamat. That is his only question for me in Parliament, where I spent two hours answering questions. So I made a full public account of it. So if he now says that is not enough, why didn't he stand up then and ask more questions."
Asked to respond on Mr Chiam's comment that sharing of candidates shows opposition unity, Mr Wong disagreed.
He said: "So it means that all the opposition parties have the same philosophy, same principle, same values? By his comments, from what you just read to me, that must be the meaning of it. Well, if that is the case, why so many different parties, why not have one?"
- CNA/ms
He said that the opposition must look to form an alternate government, and not just offer alternative voices in Parliament.
Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng took issue with the opposition sharing candidates.
They were speaking at the launch of Heights Park in Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency (GRC) on Saturday.
After meeting with residents at the opening of Heights Park, Education Minister Ng told reporters that voters need to ask themselves who will best serve their needs.
He said Singaporeans should only vote for the opposition if they believe the opposition can run the country better than the People's Action Party (PAP).
Dr Ng said: "Every election, it is never about just alternative voices in Parliament, because your vote is very powerful and for every General Election, you are deciding on who runs the country. If it is just for alternative voices, the NCMP scheme allows for that, you can raise anything you want in Parliament.
"But as the opposition parties have clarified, that is not their intent. In fact, they want to - Workers' Party have said they want to block constitutional amendments, they want enough seats in the house not just to provide alternative voices, but really their goal is to form an alternative government - to become the government."
One of the points in the Singapore People's Party manifesto is that the government must be held accountable for any security lapses. To this, Mr Wong said he had already dealt with this issue in Parliament.
He said: "I spent one hour detailing what the Committee of Inquiry found, and spent the next two hours answering questions from all the MPs - those who were interested in asking questions.
"Mr Chiam (See Tong) stood up and asked me a question, and he asked whether the police considered using tracker dogs to track down Mas Selamat. That is his only question for me in Parliament, where I spent two hours answering questions. So I made a full public account of it. So if he now says that is not enough, why didn't he stand up then and ask more questions."
Asked to respond on Mr Chiam's comment that sharing of candidates shows opposition unity, Mr Wong disagreed.
He said: "So it means that all the opposition parties have the same philosophy, same principle, same values? By his comments, from what you just read to me, that must be the meaning of it. Well, if that is the case, why so many different parties, why not have one?"
- CNA/ms
Saturday 23 April 2011
GE: Lim Hng Kiang rebuts SDP's proposal to shrink manufacturing sector
Another haughty rhetoric from a minister.
Manufacturing no doubt is an important part of the economy. Back in the 70s, first-mover advantage + hardworking work force + geographical location made Singapore's manufacturing sector the pillar of the economy.
Today, the driving force of manufacturing is simply cost.
Japanese companies, of which Toyota pioneered advance manufacturing standards like six sigma, have also realised that they need to compete on cost. Hence the numerous vehicle recalls over the last few years due to manufacturing defaults.
Singapore can no longer compete on cost with the likes of China, Malaysia, Vietnam and even Thailand taking away alot of our manufacturing output.
Seagate closed its Singapore plant in 2010 and shed 2000 jobs.
Motorola shut a plant producing hand sets and 700 jobs were lost.
ST Microelectronics moved some operations to Shenzhen, Chna.
But one can say that hey, many MNCs still have their HQs in Singapore.
And why not? These corporate mammoths get tax free HQ status, enjoy low corporate taxes and get a free hand at hiring and firing anyone they want- it's an employer's dream!
To fund this corporate largesse, our government introduced the regressive GST system, which taxes the poor more than the rich.
In any case, the major components in our manufacturing are electronics output and biomedicals. The two are extremely volatile and leave our economy haplessly exposed during economic down cycles.
So with five decades of interrupted rule, one would think that our government would have moved our economy with the times, not just to achieve growth but to withstand the inevitable downturns.
Given the circumstances in the region, ramping up the services industry might be the way to go. Hong Kong's economy is over 80% services and one can argue that they may be better placed to weather changes to the region's economic order than Singapore.
Manufacturing no doubt is an important part of the economy. Back in the 70s, first-mover advantage + hardworking work force + geographical location made Singapore's manufacturing sector the pillar of the economy.
Today, the driving force of manufacturing is simply cost.
Japanese companies, of which Toyota pioneered advance manufacturing standards like six sigma, have also realised that they need to compete on cost. Hence the numerous vehicle recalls over the last few years due to manufacturing defaults.
Singapore can no longer compete on cost with the likes of China, Malaysia, Vietnam and even Thailand taking away alot of our manufacturing output.
Seagate closed its Singapore plant in 2010 and shed 2000 jobs.
Motorola shut a plant producing hand sets and 700 jobs were lost.
ST Microelectronics moved some operations to Shenzhen, Chna.
But one can say that hey, many MNCs still have their HQs in Singapore.
And why not? These corporate mammoths get tax free HQ status, enjoy low corporate taxes and get a free hand at hiring and firing anyone they want- it's an employer's dream!
To fund this corporate largesse, our government introduced the regressive GST system, which taxes the poor more than the rich.
In any case, the major components in our manufacturing are electronics output and biomedicals. The two are extremely volatile and leave our economy haplessly exposed during economic down cycles.
So with five decades of interrupted rule, one would think that our government would have moved our economy with the times, not just to achieve growth but to withstand the inevitable downturns.
Given the circumstances in the region, ramping up the services industry might be the way to go. Hong Kong's economy is over 80% services and one can argue that they may be better placed to weather changes to the region's economic order than Singapore.
SINGAPORE: Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang rebutted the economic policies proposed by the Singapore Democratic Party's (SDP) Tan Jee Say, one of which is to shrink the manufacturing sector.
Mr Lim said the manufacturing sector is important because it creates many synergies and linkages for other industries to grow such as financing and wholesale.
Mr Lim was speaking to reporters on the sidelines at the official opening of Clementi Public Library on Saturday.
The manufacturing sector contributes about a quarter to Singapore's economy.
But a proposal by the SDP candidate aims to phase out that sector, in favour of ramping up the services industry which he believes is more sustainable.
Mr Tan, who is a former MTI official and former Principal Private Secretary to Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, was unveiled by the SDP as one of its candidates on Friday.
He believes this proposal will reduce the dependence on cheap foreign labour and reduce the economic volatility faced during downturns.
However, that has been slammed by the government as unrealistic, as it will not drive the same level of growth as the manufacturing sector.
Mr Lim challenged: "How confident are you that the services sector will take up the slack? Yes, there are some prospects for us to grow the sector as we are doing whether its financial services, port, regional services, education, healthcare, creative services.
"But we don't think that collectively or individually, all these services will take up the slack if we give up manufacturing."
Mr Lim added that it is important to have a diversified economy and not be too overly reliant on a single sector.
Mr Lim is urging voters to study the opposition's proposal carefully because a wrong choice could have detrimental consequences for the economy.
He also took issue with Mr Tan's criticism that the casino and gaming sector was "the wrong kind of services" to go into.
Mr Lim said the sector contributed only a small part of GDP.
Still, he added that the ministry understood the potential social consequences and is monitoring the situation closely.
Mr Lim said: "If SDP wins and gets the support of Singaporeans, then investors will say 'hey, this is the strategy and Singaporeans are supporting such a strategy, now what does that mean to our future investments?' This is something very serious.
"If it's a private individual, if he puts up his ideas as a friend, as an individual, we'll debate it over coffee. But now he is a political candidate standing for elections, Singaporeans have to study his ideas carefully, compare it with what we are doing, make a decision which is better for our future, because it's not just our future; it's not just a GRC that's being affected, it's also sending a very strong signal to potential investors and existing investors."
For the General Election, it will be another party that Mr Lim will likely have to worry about in the battle for West Coast GRC.
The Reform Party is expected to contest there, but his team is confident its track record will give them the edge.
"There is a profound difference between walking the ground, and working with the ground or for the ground, and we are in the latter category for sure, and we have been working systematically and we intend to continue to do that all through," said S Iswaran, Singapore Senior Minister of State for Trade & Industry and Education.
West Coast GRC has had a walkover in the previous two elections.
It will also see two newcomers into the PAP team: former CEO of Energy Market Authority Lawrence Wong, and Standard Chartered's Head of Premier Banking Foo Mee Har. They will join incumbents Arthur Fong, S Iswaran and Lim Hng Kiang.
- CNA/fa/ls
Mr Lim said the manufacturing sector is important because it creates many synergies and linkages for other industries to grow such as financing and wholesale.
Mr Lim was speaking to reporters on the sidelines at the official opening of Clementi Public Library on Saturday.
The manufacturing sector contributes about a quarter to Singapore's economy.
But a proposal by the SDP candidate aims to phase out that sector, in favour of ramping up the services industry which he believes is more sustainable.
Mr Tan, who is a former MTI official and former Principal Private Secretary to Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, was unveiled by the SDP as one of its candidates on Friday.
He believes this proposal will reduce the dependence on cheap foreign labour and reduce the economic volatility faced during downturns.
However, that has been slammed by the government as unrealistic, as it will not drive the same level of growth as the manufacturing sector.
Mr Lim challenged: "How confident are you that the services sector will take up the slack? Yes, there are some prospects for us to grow the sector as we are doing whether its financial services, port, regional services, education, healthcare, creative services.
"But we don't think that collectively or individually, all these services will take up the slack if we give up manufacturing."
Mr Lim added that it is important to have a diversified economy and not be too overly reliant on a single sector.
Mr Lim is urging voters to study the opposition's proposal carefully because a wrong choice could have detrimental consequences for the economy.
He also took issue with Mr Tan's criticism that the casino and gaming sector was "the wrong kind of services" to go into.
Mr Lim said the sector contributed only a small part of GDP.
Still, he added that the ministry understood the potential social consequences and is monitoring the situation closely.
Mr Lim said: "If SDP wins and gets the support of Singaporeans, then investors will say 'hey, this is the strategy and Singaporeans are supporting such a strategy, now what does that mean to our future investments?' This is something very serious.
"If it's a private individual, if he puts up his ideas as a friend, as an individual, we'll debate it over coffee. But now he is a political candidate standing for elections, Singaporeans have to study his ideas carefully, compare it with what we are doing, make a decision which is better for our future, because it's not just our future; it's not just a GRC that's being affected, it's also sending a very strong signal to potential investors and existing investors."
For the General Election, it will be another party that Mr Lim will likely have to worry about in the battle for West Coast GRC.
The Reform Party is expected to contest there, but his team is confident its track record will give them the edge.
"There is a profound difference between walking the ground, and working with the ground or for the ground, and we are in the latter category for sure, and we have been working systematically and we intend to continue to do that all through," said S Iswaran, Singapore Senior Minister of State for Trade & Industry and Education.
West Coast GRC has had a walkover in the previous two elections.
It will also see two newcomers into the PAP team: former CEO of Energy Market Authority Lawrence Wong, and Standard Chartered's Head of Premier Banking Foo Mee Har. They will join incumbents Arthur Fong, S Iswaran and Lim Hng Kiang.
- CNA/fa/ls
Beware the lesser mortals
In Jan 2009, when the Singapore economy was in all sorts of trouble, one of PM's many permanent secretaries Tan Yong Soon decided to take his family to a top notch cooking class in France, spending 50k in the process. Not that there's anything wrong with that except that he saw fit to brag about it in our local media.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/403473/1/.html
After being "thoroughly and utterly" rebuked in Parliment, like Han Solo to Luke Skywalker, Pasir Ris-Punggol MP Charles Chong rushed to Tan's defence:
PS: Why does PM need so many perm secs anyway?
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/403473/1/.html
After being "thoroughly and utterly" rebuked in Parliment, like Han Solo to Luke Skywalker, Pasir Ris-Punggol MP Charles Chong rushed to Tan's defence:
Agreeing that the rebuke in Parliament was “harsh”, MP Charles Chong noted that Mr Tan didn’t “brag” about how expensive the trip was in the article.Well Mr. Chong, its time we envious lesser mortals layeth some smackdown on you greater mortals.
.
“Maybe it made lesser mortals envious and they thought maybe he was a little bit boastful,” he said. “Would people have taken offence if his wife (a senior investment counsellor at a bank) had paid for everything?”
PS: Why does PM need so many perm secs anyway?
Good Saturday Morning!
Took me a while to realise this since I'm new to blogging.
I've enabled comments so please feel free to... comment. :)
I've enabled comments so please feel free to... comment. :)
Friday 22 April 2011
GE: Minister issues challenge to opposition
I'm sick and tired of these Ministers trash talking the opposition.
If you are so confident of your track record, then grow some b**s and agree to a debate.
Let voters see what both sides can or cannot offer.
So I'm calling PAP Ministers to be bold enough to say that they want to debate the opposition.
If you are so confident of your track record, then grow some b**s and agree to a debate.
Let voters see what both sides can or cannot offer.
So I'm calling PAP Ministers to be bold enough to say that they want to debate the opposition.
SINGAPORE: Education Minister Ng Eng Hen has called on the opposition parties to be bold enough to say that they want to form a government.
He issued the challenge on the sidelines of a market visit to Toa Payoh Vista on Friday.
Accompanying him were Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng, Ms Josephine Teo, Mr Zainudin Nordin and Mr Hri Kumar.
The group will likely be contesting the Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency (GRC) in the May 7 General Election.
The GRC may see its first contest in 14 years, with the Singapore People's Party (SPP) staking its interest there.
While Mr Wong said that he welcomes a contest, Dr Ng had this challenge for all opposition parties.
"If they can convince voters that they can build a better government, be a better government, take care of Singapore better than the voters and the PAP government, voters will vote for them. Otherwise, voters will say 'I will trust the people that have delivered'," said Dr Ng.
As for opposition parties recruiting highly-educated candidates, Dr Ng said it all boils down to the parties' track record.
"The real question and the simple calculation that voters all over Singapore will make (is) a very simple one," he said. "You've seen our residents, they just want to ask:
One: can you improve my life? Two: will I trust you to be the government? And that's what voters will vote for, whatever party you come from."
"I'm asking a simple question as a voter......No matter how bright you are, whether you are in PAP or any other party, your brightness and your intelligence doesn't impact me, you know, if it doesn't improve my life," said Dr Ng.
The SPP recently said it is 'loaning' three of its members to the Reform Party (RP).
But DPM Wong said that this may lead to a confusion of party ideologies, "particularly if you assemble a team with different party members. Then, how do you know that they share the same philosophies?"
Separately, Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) secretary-general Desmond Lim has responded to Dr Ng's challenge for the opposition to form the next government.
He said: "Our long-term aim is to form a government, be it on our own or coalition with any other political party. I think we should have that in mind, but at this juncture, we believe in doing things step by step. Therefore what we need to do now is to capture a few seats in the Parliament and do our best and convince the voters that we can actually do the job. And in the long term, when the confidence level has been built up, I believe we will have more numbers of calibre candidates to join us, and to take up further challenge."
-CNA/ac/ir
He issued the challenge on the sidelines of a market visit to Toa Payoh Vista on Friday.
Accompanying him were Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng, Ms Josephine Teo, Mr Zainudin Nordin and Mr Hri Kumar.
The group will likely be contesting the Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency (GRC) in the May 7 General Election.
The GRC may see its first contest in 14 years, with the Singapore People's Party (SPP) staking its interest there.
While Mr Wong said that he welcomes a contest, Dr Ng had this challenge for all opposition parties.
"If they can convince voters that they can build a better government, be a better government, take care of Singapore better than the voters and the PAP government, voters will vote for them. Otherwise, voters will say 'I will trust the people that have delivered'," said Dr Ng.
As for opposition parties recruiting highly-educated candidates, Dr Ng said it all boils down to the parties' track record.
"The real question and the simple calculation that voters all over Singapore will make (is) a very simple one," he said. "You've seen our residents, they just want to ask:
One: can you improve my life? Two: will I trust you to be the government? And that's what voters will vote for, whatever party you come from."
"I'm asking a simple question as a voter......No matter how bright you are, whether you are in PAP or any other party, your brightness and your intelligence doesn't impact me, you know, if it doesn't improve my life," said Dr Ng.
The SPP recently said it is 'loaning' three of its members to the Reform Party (RP).
But DPM Wong said that this may lead to a confusion of party ideologies, "particularly if you assemble a team with different party members. Then, how do you know that they share the same philosophies?"
Separately, Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) secretary-general Desmond Lim has responded to Dr Ng's challenge for the opposition to form the next government.
He said: "Our long-term aim is to form a government, be it on our own or coalition with any other political party. I think we should have that in mind, but at this juncture, we believe in doing things step by step. Therefore what we need to do now is to capture a few seats in the Parliament and do our best and convince the voters that we can actually do the job. And in the long term, when the confidence level has been built up, I believe we will have more numbers of calibre candidates to join us, and to take up further challenge."
-CNA/ac/ir
COE- Certificate of Expensive
I think the Honda Accord is a very nice car.
3 years ago, we bought ourselves a Honda Stream at 77k because the 90k Accord was a little out of our budget.
Step forward to 2011 and the same Accord is now a whopping 140k!
We could get a BMW 535 for that price in Hong Kong and still have change for a 5-star dinner!
Something has certainly gone wrong somewhere....
3 years ago, we bought ourselves a Honda Stream at 77k because the 90k Accord was a little out of our budget.
Step forward to 2011 and the same Accord is now a whopping 140k!
We could get a BMW 535 for that price in Hong Kong and still have change for a 5-star dinner!
Something has certainly gone wrong somewhere....
I Wish You Were Here- Avril Lavigne
I'm a huge Avril Lavigne fan. Glad she's coming to Singapore again- May 9th!
This is a new, beautiful song from her Goodbye Lullaby album. She wrote it herself-- now that's talent!
I will vote PAP if
1) GST is abolished or least removed for necessities.
2) Immigration halted totally for a year. During which a migration point system be instituted, much like the ones in Australia and Hong Kong.
3) NS cut down to six months and reservist cycle to 5 years. Conscript army to be replaced by a professional army within 5 years.
4) COE system scrapped since jams are still everywhere. In its place, foreigners and PRs can only purchase a car if they have stayed in Singapore for minimum 5 years.
5) Public transport nationalised. Unlist listed transport operators. Public Transport Council to be helmed by non PAP or ruling party member. Free transport for elderly and children.
6) Reduce % of places reserved for foreigners at our local universities to just 10%. Free education up until tertiary level. Tertiary fees for Singaporeans to receive further subsidies and foreigners to pick up the slack.
7) Force HDB to reveal exact cost of each public flat. Public housing prices pegged at cost. Foreigners and PRs are not allowed to sell any Singapore properties within 10 years.
To be continued...
2) Immigration halted totally for a year. During which a migration point system be instituted, much like the ones in Australia and Hong Kong.
3) NS cut down to six months and reservist cycle to 5 years. Conscript army to be replaced by a professional army within 5 years.
4) COE system scrapped since jams are still everywhere. In its place, foreigners and PRs can only purchase a car if they have stayed in Singapore for minimum 5 years.
5) Public transport nationalised. Unlist listed transport operators. Public Transport Council to be helmed by non PAP or ruling party member. Free transport for elderly and children.
6) Reduce % of places reserved for foreigners at our local universities to just 10%. Free education up until tertiary level. Tertiary fees for Singaporeans to receive further subsidies and foreigners to pick up the slack.
7) Force HDB to reveal exact cost of each public flat. Public housing prices pegged at cost. Foreigners and PRs are not allowed to sell any Singapore properties within 10 years.
To be continued...
This is American Idol..
Random thoughts on this year's American Idol so far:
1) The judges have no substance. Everybody is beautiful to Steven, Jennifer calls everyone baby and Randy tries too hard to be like Simon.
2) Am I the only one who thinks Pia isn't all that great? Yes she had a voice but she was boring.
3) Other than Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood, the other Idol winners went on to have very underwhelming careers. Taylor Hicks anyone?
4) Has the Idol save ever been mistreated like that before? Saving the annoying Casey Abrams was so uncool.
5) Does Adam Lambert have a twin brother in James Durbin?
6) What's with David Cook's cheap rehash of the 80s Simple Minds classic?!! Awful!
7) No matter what people say, Simon is a top judge. His comments are usually bang on the buck.
1) The judges have no substance. Everybody is beautiful to Steven, Jennifer calls everyone baby and Randy tries too hard to be like Simon.
2) Am I the only one who thinks Pia isn't all that great? Yes she had a voice but she was boring.
3) Other than Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood, the other Idol winners went on to have very underwhelming careers. Taylor Hicks anyone?
4) Has the Idol save ever been mistreated like that before? Saving the annoying Casey Abrams was so uncool.
5) Does Adam Lambert have a twin brother in James Durbin?
6) What's with David Cook's cheap rehash of the 80s Simple Minds classic?!! Awful!
7) No matter what people say, Simon is a top judge. His comments are usually bang on the buck.
Thursday 21 April 2011
MM's believe it or not?!
I beg your pardon! Did they say those things?
A collecion of unbelievably outrageous comments from MM and his band of millionaire ministers.
Brings back haunting memories of a certain fascist dictator from WWII.
Originally posted by Wendy in 2009.
Someone's take on PAP's manifesto
http://the-diplomat.com/asean-beat/2011/04/21/pap-manifesto-falls-short/
Singapore’s People’s Action Party (PAP) issued a manifesto containing its election agenda on April 17 but it seems many voters—at least in cyberspace—aren’t impressed with it.
Singapore’s People’s Action Party (PAP) issued a manifesto containing its election agenda on April 17 but it seems many voters—at least in cyberspace—aren’t impressed with it.
Released less than three weeks before the upcoming general elections on May 7, the manifesto mentions the PAP’s vision of a ‘vibrant and inclusive society with opportunities for a better life for each and every citizen’ in Singapore.
To achieve this vision, the PAP vowed to do the following: 1) Create opportunities for higher incomes for all; 2) Improve the lives of lower-income Singaporeans; 3) Bring out the best in every child; 4) Develop a vibrant city and an endearing home; 5) Help seniors stay active, healthy and engaged; and 6) Involve all Singaporeans in shaping the future.
Who would argue with this beautiful vision guaranteeing the right of young and old citizens to share in the progress of Singapore?
Singaporeans who’ve criticized the manifesto have complained that it doesn’t include new solutions or ideas. They’ve said that the proposed programs have been tried before but didn’t make any difference at all in improving the quality of life in Singapore. They reminded PAP leaders that while government ministers are receiving some of the highest salaries in the world, income inequality in Singapore has increased. They cited as well the rising cost of schooling, health care and housing as among the bad legacies of the PAP.
PAP is the current ruling party in Singapore, and has been in power for more than five decades already.
Furthermore, critics noted that the publication of the party’s manifesto was late, since the opposition Workers’ Party (WP) had already discussed and distributed its election agenda a week earlier. Some election observers who compared the programs of the PAP and WP picked the opposition agenda as more appealing and substantive. In fact, the PAP document consists of only 25 pages while the WP manifesto is composed of 63 pages with detailed recommendations in 15 different policy areas.
Some voters also slammed the PAP manifesto for being too vague. Nigel Tan, the chief editor of The Satay Club, an online political portal, is disappointed that the manifesto contains only a ‘series of vague promises with neither details of specific policies nor information on how the various stated aims were going to be implemented.’
Through the manifesto, the PAP hoped to convince more voters, in particular first-time voters, to choose its brand of leadership. But in fact, that it was forced to release a manifesto in reaction to the opposition platform may be indicative of its desperation to reverse its declining popularity and reach out to alienated segments of the population.
So did the manifesto improve the PAP’s electoral chances? If online reactions are the gauge, then it seems the party still has some serious work to do in the next few days if it wants to secure another landslide victory in the coming polls.
To achieve this vision, the PAP vowed to do the following: 1) Create opportunities for higher incomes for all; 2) Improve the lives of lower-income Singaporeans; 3) Bring out the best in every child; 4) Develop a vibrant city and an endearing home; 5) Help seniors stay active, healthy and engaged; and 6) Involve all Singaporeans in shaping the future.
Who would argue with this beautiful vision guaranteeing the right of young and old citizens to share in the progress of Singapore?
Singaporeans who’ve criticized the manifesto have complained that it doesn’t include new solutions or ideas. They’ve said that the proposed programs have been tried before but didn’t make any difference at all in improving the quality of life in Singapore. They reminded PAP leaders that while government ministers are receiving some of the highest salaries in the world, income inequality in Singapore has increased. They cited as well the rising cost of schooling, health care and housing as among the bad legacies of the PAP.
PAP is the current ruling party in Singapore, and has been in power for more than five decades already.
Furthermore, critics noted that the publication of the party’s manifesto was late, since the opposition Workers’ Party (WP) had already discussed and distributed its election agenda a week earlier. Some election observers who compared the programs of the PAP and WP picked the opposition agenda as more appealing and substantive. In fact, the PAP document consists of only 25 pages while the WP manifesto is composed of 63 pages with detailed recommendations in 15 different policy areas.
Some voters also slammed the PAP manifesto for being too vague. Nigel Tan, the chief editor of The Satay Club, an online political portal, is disappointed that the manifesto contains only a ‘series of vague promises with neither details of specific policies nor information on how the various stated aims were going to be implemented.’
Through the manifesto, the PAP hoped to convince more voters, in particular first-time voters, to choose its brand of leadership. But in fact, that it was forced to release a manifesto in reaction to the opposition platform may be indicative of its desperation to reverse its declining popularity and reach out to alienated segments of the population.
So did the manifesto improve the PAP’s electoral chances? If online reactions are the gauge, then it seems the party still has some serious work to do in the next few days if it wants to secure another landslide victory in the coming polls.
GDP growth but who wins?
I stopped by a local fish shop on my way back today.
Since there were no other customers, the shop owner started chatting to me.
He was grousing about how it was difficult to make ends meet these days.
I understood what he meant when he told me that his monthly rental was about $4k for a shop space of 200 sq feet or so!
And his location is a rather low traffic area under a HDB block.
For those familiar with the aquarium scene, he probably has to sell 4-5 arowanas each month just to break even. A tough ask.
Earlier, I was at Tanjong Pagar MRT for lunch. I saw at least 5-6 retail outlets permanently shuttered.
Last week, there was a report in the local media about how retailers at train stations and underground exchanges were facing difficulties.
If you've been to Central at Clarke Quay recently, the sheer amount of empty shop spaces is quite shocking.
There are probably alot more retailers, Orchard Road or heartlands, that are in the same situation.
One would think that with scenes like these, the country is in recession. But Singapore's GDP grew at an astonishing rate last year, the fastest in the world!
So why hasn't GDP growth trickled down to more parts of society?
The people benefitting from GDP growth are the landlords, who in all likelihood are the GLCs and related companies. They adroitly use the "growing" economy as an excuse to up rentals.
Tenants also have to contend with relentless hikes in utilities.
When margins are hit, retailers turn to cheaper foreign labour or reduce quality/quantity (eg. food).
So who wins in the end?
Since there were no other customers, the shop owner started chatting to me.
He was grousing about how it was difficult to make ends meet these days.
I understood what he meant when he told me that his monthly rental was about $4k for a shop space of 200 sq feet or so!
And his location is a rather low traffic area under a HDB block.
For those familiar with the aquarium scene, he probably has to sell 4-5 arowanas each month just to break even. A tough ask.
Earlier, I was at Tanjong Pagar MRT for lunch. I saw at least 5-6 retail outlets permanently shuttered.
Last week, there was a report in the local media about how retailers at train stations and underground exchanges were facing difficulties.
If you've been to Central at Clarke Quay recently, the sheer amount of empty shop spaces is quite shocking.
There are probably alot more retailers, Orchard Road or heartlands, that are in the same situation.
One would think that with scenes like these, the country is in recession. But Singapore's GDP grew at an astonishing rate last year, the fastest in the world!
So why hasn't GDP growth trickled down to more parts of society?
The people benefitting from GDP growth are the landlords, who in all likelihood are the GLCs and related companies. They adroitly use the "growing" economy as an excuse to up rentals.
Tenants also have to contend with relentless hikes in utilities.
When margins are hit, retailers turn to cheaper foreign labour or reduce quality/quantity (eg. food).
So who wins in the end?
Foreign workers help to create more good jobs for Singaporeans: PM
I'm not sure what to make of this piece.
The headline by our beloved media seems to suggest that the Indian national employed to do a generic marketing job at XYZ company is in fact magically creating another job at ABC company for a Singaporean of similar qualification?
My day job requires me to interact with scores of MNCs and I often find myself talking to marketing executives, product managers, research managers etc who are non Singaporeans. Are you telling us, dear PM, that there aren't enough qualified Singaporeans to do such generic business functions?
If so, doesn't it imply that our education system, which your party has overseen for more than 40 years, has failed?
Yes Singapore's net pool of workers is small but you've often heard that it's the quality that counts.
Isn't that what productivity is all about? Producing more output with less input?
Investing and applying new technology, R&D, capital investment?
The Singapore economy's growth in the past decade can be largely attributed to growth in input (immigration).
It will be interesting to see how our productivity has grown/declined since the 80s. Anyone has the stats?
Also, to justify the incessant use of foreigners, can MOM please publish a breakdown of Singaporeans only vs the rest for number of employed, unemployment rate- by industry and sector, over the last decade?
The headline by our beloved media seems to suggest that the Indian national employed to do a generic marketing job at XYZ company is in fact magically creating another job at ABC company for a Singaporean of similar qualification?
My day job requires me to interact with scores of MNCs and I often find myself talking to marketing executives, product managers, research managers etc who are non Singaporeans. Are you telling us, dear PM, that there aren't enough qualified Singaporeans to do such generic business functions?
If so, doesn't it imply that our education system, which your party has overseen for more than 40 years, has failed?
Yes Singapore's net pool of workers is small but you've often heard that it's the quality that counts.
Isn't that what productivity is all about? Producing more output with less input?
Investing and applying new technology, R&D, capital investment?
The Singapore economy's growth in the past decade can be largely attributed to growth in input (immigration).
It will be interesting to see how our productivity has grown/declined since the 80s. Anyone has the stats?
Also, to justify the incessant use of foreigners, can MOM please publish a breakdown of Singaporeans only vs the rest for number of employed, unemployment rate- by industry and sector, over the last decade?
SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that by allowing the controlled entry of foreign workers, Singapore has attracted one of the largest investments in the country and created more jobs for Singaporeans.
Mr Lee said this during a speech at the opening of chipmakers Intel and Micron's joint venture manufacturing plant IM Flash Singapore Nand Flash Wafer Fab on Thursday.
The 300 millimetre NAND facility is a first in Singapore and is one of the largest investments at US$3 billion.
The plant manufactures NAND flash memory chips using the 25 nanometre process technology that are used in smartphones and tablets.
Mr Lee said it is expected to bring significant spinoffs to supporting industries.
Currently, IM Flash Singapore employs 1,200 workers of which six in 10 are Singaporeans and permanent residents (PRs), while four in 10 are foreigners
"Without the foreign workers, we would not have attracted this US$3 billion investment, and Intel and Micron would have built its wafer fab elsewhere," PM Lee said.
"But by allowing in a controlled number of foreign workers, far from disadvantaging Singaporean workers, we have created more good jobs for Singaporeans," he continued.
"For every one foreign worker, we have created 1.5 local jobs in this project," PM Lee said.
So far, Singaporeans and PRs take up about two-thirds of the managerial and professional positions, while two-thirds of technician and manufacturing jobs are done by the foreigners.
The opening of the facility comes as demand for consumer electronics is increasing amid better economic conditions globally.
The construction of the facility was put on hold in 2008 as consumer sentiment collapsed in the wake of the financial crisis.
It now aims to be at full production levels later in 2011.
Save Baglee, vice president and director of NAND manufacturing and operations at Intel said, "The IM Flash joint venture has been able to create tremendous momentum and industry leading manufacturing capabilities. We look forward to adding IM Flash Singapore to our global manufacturing network."
- CNA/fa
Mr Lee said this during a speech at the opening of chipmakers Intel and Micron's joint venture manufacturing plant IM Flash Singapore Nand Flash Wafer Fab on Thursday.
The 300 millimetre NAND facility is a first in Singapore and is one of the largest investments at US$3 billion.
The plant manufactures NAND flash memory chips using the 25 nanometre process technology that are used in smartphones and tablets.
Mr Lee said it is expected to bring significant spinoffs to supporting industries.
Currently, IM Flash Singapore employs 1,200 workers of which six in 10 are Singaporeans and permanent residents (PRs), while four in 10 are foreigners
"Without the foreign workers, we would not have attracted this US$3 billion investment, and Intel and Micron would have built its wafer fab elsewhere," PM Lee said.
"But by allowing in a controlled number of foreign workers, far from disadvantaging Singaporean workers, we have created more good jobs for Singaporeans," he continued.
"For every one foreign worker, we have created 1.5 local jobs in this project," PM Lee said.
So far, Singaporeans and PRs take up about two-thirds of the managerial and professional positions, while two-thirds of technician and manufacturing jobs are done by the foreigners.
The opening of the facility comes as demand for consumer electronics is increasing amid better economic conditions globally.
The construction of the facility was put on hold in 2008 as consumer sentiment collapsed in the wake of the financial crisis.
It now aims to be at full production levels later in 2011.
Save Baglee, vice president and director of NAND manufacturing and operations at Intel said, "The IM Flash joint venture has been able to create tremendous momentum and industry leading manufacturing capabilities. We look forward to adding IM Flash Singapore to our global manufacturing network."
- CNA/fa
Are lower property prices really bad?
Elections are in 2 weeks. We see our local media frantically posting stories of how opposition ideas are "dangerous".
On the front page of today's main newspaper, the headline labels WP's housing policies as "dangerous".
Here are the hidden truths about rising property values in Singapore:
1) Your house is a paper asset. That means rising property values will not translate to cold hard cash if you don't sell the house.
2) Let's say that like most Singaporeans, you have one roof over your head. Selling your existing house at a prevailing rates would also mean that you need to buy another at prevailing rates. Zero net gain.
3) Yes you could choose to downgrade and make a sum from the sale but isn't that running contrary to the government's perennial promise of first world Swiss standard of living? Upgrade or downgrade?
4) The people who win are the rich. They probably have more than one house so they can cash in on high prices. Another reason why our Gini coefficient, which measures income gap, is one of the highest in Asia.
5) Property prices are high because of the reactive policies of HDB. The immigration floodgates opened soon after the 2006 elections which led to a startling increase in population. As statistics will attest, the number of flats built lagged way behind the jump in resident numbers.
Where do you expect a million foreigners to stay?
So the Minister's reasoning that lower property values are bad for Singaporeans is highly mootable.
In fact, the main worry for most Singaporeans is the affordability of buying their very first home. And they worry for their childern too.
And please Mr. Minister, affordability is subjective. The longer the loan tenure, the lower the monthly repayments, hence affordable? NO.
Longer loans just means you end up paying alot alot more in interest!
So taking everything in consideration, pegging public housing prices at cost may be a good thing for the majority of citizens afterall.
On the front page of today's main newspaper, the headline labels WP's housing policies as "dangerous".
Here are the hidden truths about rising property values in Singapore:
1) Your house is a paper asset. That means rising property values will not translate to cold hard cash if you don't sell the house.
2) Let's say that like most Singaporeans, you have one roof over your head. Selling your existing house at a prevailing rates would also mean that you need to buy another at prevailing rates. Zero net gain.
3) Yes you could choose to downgrade and make a sum from the sale but isn't that running contrary to the government's perennial promise of first world Swiss standard of living? Upgrade or downgrade?
4) The people who win are the rich. They probably have more than one house so they can cash in on high prices. Another reason why our Gini coefficient, which measures income gap, is one of the highest in Asia.
5) Property prices are high because of the reactive policies of HDB. The immigration floodgates opened soon after the 2006 elections which led to a startling increase in population. As statistics will attest, the number of flats built lagged way behind the jump in resident numbers.
Where do you expect a million foreigners to stay?
So the Minister's reasoning that lower property values are bad for Singaporeans is highly mootable.
In fact, the main worry for most Singaporeans is the affordability of buying their very first home. And they worry for their childern too.
And please Mr. Minister, affordability is subjective. The longer the loan tenure, the lower the monthly repayments, hence affordable? NO.
Longer loans just means you end up paying alot alot more in interest!
So taking everything in consideration, pegging public housing prices at cost may be a good thing for the majority of citizens afterall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)