The rise of the social media machine has played an important role in exposing areas of alleged inefficiencies and unfairness in our society. In an environment whereby the disclosure of news and information has always been somewhat regulated, certain incidences such as the death of Benjamin Lim, the law suit undertaken by the family of the late Dominique Sarron Lee, the numerous transportation break downs, the Hepatitis C outbreak in SGH and MP Denise Phua’s myopic comments would never have received the air time they did without news traffic online.
While Singapore is obviously a developed and well kept city state, is it as efficient as originally thought? Beneath the veneer of economic success and gleaming buildings, is it as equitable as it can or should be?
The Internet has provided a forum for all kinds of grievances to be publicised. While not all of these complaints can be or has been fully verified, it does bring to light a certain unfairness that does not sit comfortably with Singapore’s constructed benign and happy image.
From the events that have received coverage in the online sphere, incidences of injustice and poverty appear to be too rampant for comfort.
Old age and illness are part and parcel of every society. What makes the difference however is what a country does to support (both emotionally and financially) those who need assistance.  ( The government has recently created the Pioneer package to show its appreciation for the elders amongst us. Yet, this article has highlighted the plight of an elderly couple who have been asked to sell their home so as to fund their medical needs.
This old couple does not live in some swanky condominium. They live in a humble HDB flat. More likely than not, they have lived there for many years. Is asking them to sell their home and move at such an advanced age the only solution for their medical needs? After all, it is not their fault that they need medical attention. They are old. As the government makes provision for the elderly by way of the Pioneer package, might they not also provide some form of medical coverage that does not necessitate the sale of an old couple’s home?
As Singapore develops, many have been calling for more financial assistance to be given to certain segments of society that need help. As a society that respects the elderly, shouldn’t the elderly sick be given top priority?
Bukit Batok is going to the polls soon. Pitted against each other are Dr Chee who despite his writings and ideas is hampered by his past and Mr Murali Pillai who has the might of the PAP on his side. Singapore has had an overwhelming PAP majority for over 50 years. Is it not time to give another party a chance? Especially since the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has always undertaken to defend the underdog of our society. Rather than more of the same (no offence to Mr Pillai), would it not be worth a punt to give Dr Chee a chance?
For those who may be fearful of change, what damage can Dr Chee inflict to Singapore in Parliament? He is but one man. Yet, it would be refreshing for new ideas to be floated in Parliament – this is something that Dr Chee can and will certainly do. Is there harm in new ideas? (
Every society has its pros and cons. Singapore is no different. While the PAP has done a good job in building up Singapore to the modern city state of today, it can still benefit from a different point of view. Clearly, it does not have all the solutions to solving all of society’s problems. It may be that some of its mindsets do not gel with the solutions required for certain problems. Having someone like Dr Chee is Parliament could well be a good balance. As the PAP balances its numbers, Dr Chee can speak up for civil liberties, the poor and the needy without being tainted by the PAP party whip.
As more and more reports of failings in the system arise, would it not be worth giving Dr Chee a chance?

See also  Former President Tony Tan's son-in-law among several establishment figures against law criminalising gay sex