Thursday, April 24, 2025
29.6 C
Singapore
Home Blog Page 5129

PM’s Identity Crisis

By PN BALJI

This article was first published on 29 Aug 2014

It has been 10 years since Lee Hsien Loong became prime minister of Singapore, yet his style and achievements are hard to put a finger on, as Singapore grapples with a maturing economy, a population mix that throws up questions about national identity and inequality and a citizenry that has suddenly been let loose by a vibrant and raucous online world.

There was no mistake about what founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and his successor, Goh Chok Tong, stood for very early in their leadership years. Pushed to the wall by racial and ethnic riots, separation from the Federation of Malaya, and the withdrawal of British troops, the best and worst of LKY came out. He was bent on building an economic miracle, even if it meant he had to put his opponents behind bars.

After 31 years of LKY’s reign, which saw Singapore punching above its weight as a regional economic powerhouse but receiving international ridicule for its human rights record, Goh identified a sweet spot to position his prime ministership as one that would make the country a caring one. Although there were instances that made him take a hard line, generally his reign was a gentler and kinder one.

But Singapore’s third prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, is still struggling to make a mark for himself. In short, he is suffering from an identity crisis. Three factors have made his job a very tough one.

A huge hurdle is his cabinet, the weakest when compared with those of his predecessors. LKY was blessed to have path-breakers such his deputy, Goh Keng Swee, who should actually be remembered as the real architect of Singapore. His credentials were impressive and his contributions were groundbreaking, with many of the country’s present institutions still bearing the trademark of that loyal lieutenant.

Goh started the army, transformed a wasteland in Jurong into one giant industrial estate, set up the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Economic Development Board and played an influential role in the formation of the Singapore Zoo and Singapore Symphony Orchestra.

The brains behind the second prime minister’s cabinet was none other than Lee Hsien Loong, the deputy who masterminded Singapore’s escape from the recession of 1985. A former civil servant who had dealings with him said: “Once I sent Lee Hsien Loong a position paper; within 30 minutes, I got a response with questions and comments that revealed his grasp of details and his acute  understanding of world affairs.”

Now that Lee is prime minister, that kind of cabinet talent is missing.

Second, he and his team have been dealt the cruellest card in the form of a political game-changer called the Internet. For a leadership brought up on a command-and-control culture, the influence of the online world was something with which it was unable to deal. The result was a humiliating election result that took the ruling party’s share of popular vote to a historic low of 60.1 per cent three years ago – a per cent that would be the envy of ruling parties in most other countries, but which signalled an erosion of public support in Singapore’s traditionally monolithic political culture.

LKY and Goh had it much easier with just one voice – that of His Majesty, LKY — drowning out every other voice in town.

Third, and this is a little speculative, Lee Hsien Loong must have found it very difficult to move out of  the shadow of his father, the first and founding prime minister, and act decisively when he needed to. Act tough, and the accusation that he is his father’s boy would prevail.

Early into his leadership eight years ago and during the heat of a general election, the prime minister snapped: I will have to spend my time fixing the opposition if they win too many seats.

That had his father’s brutal temperament and strong language written all over it. The prime minister understood the folly of his statement and apologised immediately.

In fact, it is his lack of decisiveness – especially against his ruling team — that has highlighted a major part of  his leadership years. His 10-year reign has seen him moving from one crisis to another, with the prime minister being put on the backfoot and displaying a palpable reluctance to call a spade a spade.

Among the notable developments on his watch: the escape of terrorist Mas Selamat  from a maximum security prison, the first labour strike in 26  years, the first riot in 40 years, sex and corruption scandals involving  two top civil servants and finally the major strategic error of bringing too many foreigners into the country when the infrastructure was not there to handle the crush.

Even today, it is a mystery why such a forward-looking  government that displays its scenario-planning skills on its sleeves with great pride never saw this storm coming. Lee Hsien Loong and his government are still paying the price for that misstep. The housing and transport  building programmes, which kicked in soon after the disastrous 2011 general election results, will take a while to show results.

But for those who closely examine Lee’s recent policy shifts, it may well be that his lasting legacy will be more forgiving than contemporary judgements of him, because he has taken steps to steer Singapore toward a series of policies that represent a break from the city-state’s past. For these, he may well be remembered for having succeeded, precisely because he departed from the legacies of his father and his father’s successor, Goh.

Lee’s biggest achievement  has  been in helping to launch a peaceful and beneficial relationship with Singapore’s closest neighbour, Malaysia. The personal warmth established with Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has taken the sting out of 50 years of acrimonious relations with Singapore’s closest neighbour. The railway land deal, which eluded both his predecessors, was signed and delivered under Lee Hsien Loong’s leadership.

He has also pushed hard to level the playing field for the slow learners by establishing special schools for them and taking a personal interest in showcasing industrial training colleges that cater for those who fall through the examination cracks.

Signs are also emerging that the prime minister will plant his personal flag on a couple of welfare policies. Universal insurance coverage and a generous health package for the pioneer generation are kicking in, with the prime minister taking a personal interest to make sure that schemes are not hijacked by critics waiting to scuttle his plans.

He is at the half-way mark of his prime ministership and the chances are that his move to shift Singapore away from a nothing-is-for-free country to one that is prepared to take some bold steps towards semi-welfarism will succeed. Until then, the identity crisis will continue to haunt a prime minister who came to power after a charmed entry into politics 30 years ago.

 

This article first appeared on The Edge Review.

Local Indie Film To See World Premiere In Los Angeles

PRESS RELEASE

 

Faeryville, Dystopian Teen Film By Singaporean Director To Make a Red Carpet World Premiere In  Los Angeles, USA

26 August 2014

 

Faeryville, a dystopian teen movie from INRI Studio, a local independent film studio, has been picked up for international sales by Eleven Arts, an American film production and distribution company based in Los Angles. The feature film will see its maiden screening at a Red Carpet World Premiere in LA, California, on January 15, 2015, in a yet-to-be-announced theatre, with support from Singapore-based publishing company Sterne & Lears Global Pte Ltd, the publisher of F*** Magazine.

Faeryville_F2SM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Written and directed by award-winning independent filmmaker Tzang Merwyn Tong, Faeryville is a coming-of-age film about a group of teenage misfits who are often bullied, and how they struggle to find themselves in an increasingly surreal ambiguous and apathetic world. Set in a fictitious college, Faeryville is about identity and friendship, and explores how victims of bullying are pushed to extremes.

Following the Los Angeles world premiere, Faeryville will kick start its world sales in Europe, at the Rotterdam Film Festival’s CineMart and the Berlin International Film Festival’s European Film Market, with Eleven Arts representing Faeryville as the international sales agent. Faeryville is already enjoying international attention, with offers for territorial rights being made even before the film is launched. INRI Studio is also in negotiations with US partners for possible theatrical release in the US.

The international film premiere of Faeryville, as well as the acquisition by international sales agent Eleven Arts, marks a milestone for filmmaker Tzang Merwyn Tong and his independent Singapore-based studio, INRI Studio. Tzang has made 3 award-winning featurettes: e’Tzaintes (2003), A Wicked Tale (2005), and V1K1: A Techno Fairytale (2010), with e’Tzaintes and A Wicked Tale getting a bit of an cult following in Berlin and Montreal when it was released in 2005 with underground screenings in clubs and indie art spaces. A Wicked Tale, which is a psychoerotic re-imagination of Red Riding Hood, premiered to critical acclaim at the Rotterdam International Film Festival; and was the Closing Night Film at the Montreal FanTasia Film Festival. Tzang is also the youngest Singaporean director to release a film commercially on DVD.

Eight years in the making, Faeryville was very much an underdog battle from pre-production to post-production. From budget constraints and a highly controversial story to a massive thunderstorm that killed the most expensive day of shooting, there were innumerable obstacles in the making of Faeryville. However, true to the underdog, rebel spirit of the film and INRI Studio, director Tzang Merwyn Tong kept going and remained faithful to his vision for Faeryville.

Faeryville is Tzang’s first full length feature film.

For now, Faeryville is primed and ready for its international debut, followed by world sales in the European film market, with an international sales representative on board. This marks an achievement not just for the filmmaker, but also for Singaporean independent cinema, proving that local independent films can punch above their weight class in the global arena, even without the might of a major international studio behind them.

Quotes

“Faeryville is a zeitgeist film that deals with themes very reflective of the world today. It deserves a place in the world market, and I thought we should take a chance with this film here in LA.” — Ko Mori, CEO of Eleven Arts

“One Singapore filmmaker is standing out from the rest of the pack.” — Twitch Film (Twitchfilm.com)

“I’ve known Tzang since 2005 … He’s always been very different with his ideas of what film should be. Faeryville is off-the-wall, engaging and unconventional. We’re happy to support this vision of his.” — Royston Loh, CEO of Sterne & Lears Global Pte Ltd and Editor of F*** Magazine

“It has always been my vision to offer a different kind of imagination for Singapore film. Faeryville is a film set in an alternative universe. It’s a story of teenagers in a fictitious college, tired of trying to fit in, choosing to prank their oppressors instead, to rebel and fight back – and later, realising how lost they are in their pursuit for meaning and identity. It is a coming-of-age story, a story of friendship, and finding yourself in this increasingly surreal post 9/11 world, where nothing seems to be right or wrong anymore.” — Tzang Merwyn Tong, Director of Faeryville

“I am delighted to hear about the news. Los Angeles is the City of Angels, a place where many of my heroes in music and film saw their dreams come to life. It’s an appropriate breaking ground for a film like Faeryville.” — Tzang Merwyn Tong, Director of Faeryville

 

Additional Notes

About Eleven Arts, Inc.

Eleven Arts is a film distribution company based in Los Angeles which has brought many acclaimed Japanese and Asian films – both live-action and animated features – to North American audiences.

Eleven Arts’ major film titles include Japan Academy Awards winner Memories of Tomorrow, starring Ken Watanabe and the samurai film Love and Honor, directed by Yoji Yamada, who received an Oscar nomination for The Twilight Samurai (2004). Eleven Arts is also the distributor for popular animation titles such as the Evangelion franchise, Fullmetal Alchemist: The Sacred Star of Milos, and Puella Magi Madoka Magica: The Movie. Eleven Arts also recently distributed the award-winning Uzumasa Limelight, directed by Ken Ochiai.

Breaking News: SINGAPOREANS FIRST has been successfully registered as a society by the Registry of Societies

PRESS RELEASE

Dear fellow Singaporeans, friends and supporters,
I am pleased to announce that SINGAPOREANS FIRST has been successfully registered as a society by the Registry of Societies. Following the registration, we submitted our proposed party symbol for approval. We expect the process to take a few weeks. Until it is approved, we cannot make use of the party logo.
We can now conduct activities of an approved political party. We need members to help us. If you share our beliefs and values (as stated in our Manifesto here), please join us by filling up this SINGAPOREANS FIRST MEMBERSHIP FORM
In the months ahead, we will be planning a series of activities leading up to the next General Election. We welcome ideas from all Singaporeans. You can approach any of the members of the protem committee listed below :
Chairman : Dr Ang Yong Guan,
Vice chairman : Tan Peng Ann,
Secretary-General : Tan Jee Say,
Assistant-Secretary General : Loke Pak Hoe,
Treasurer : Dr David Foo Ming Jin,
Assistant Treasurer : Fatimah Akhtar,
Members : Michael Chia, Fahmi Rais, Winston Lim, David Tan.
We look forward to your support.
Tan Jee Say

PM: It is time to change, we have to get used to it

At a recent question and answer session, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spoke of recent and impending changes that relate to the changing state of affairs in not only Singapore but also the region. Much of his focus was on economic and social changes along with the need for more cooperation between neighboring states.

At the gala dinner for the Indian Institutes of Management, the Prime Minister had a chance to voice his opinion on many of the recent developments in regional politics and how Singapore, along with regional partners like Indonesia and India, fit in.

On the political and social climate in his own nation, he spoke of the need for Singaporeans to adjust to the effects of economic restructuring and changes that have come as the result of the information age, saying, “It’s a time of change and we have to get used to it.”

He also spoke of the need for Singapore to make an effort to integrate the immigrant communities into the broader social fabric of the nation. He stated that for this effort to be successful there must be an effort from both sides. While foreign residents that are living in the nation must make an effort to fit in and participate, he also believes that native Singaporeans must take steps to welcome them into society.

On the topic of the effects that social media has had on politics and society the Prime Minister spoke of how it has changed the way that information is shared but that it has not significantly changed the reality of politics. However, in regard to how the internet has affected society, he did speak of how people sometimes have a tendency to get overly agitated by things that may be posted in the social media and he questioned whether it was necessary to have such a strong reaction to these incidents.

In further discussion, the Prime Minister said that he looked forward to working with the newly elected Indian PM Narendra Modi and soon to be President of Indonesia Joko Widodo. In reference to these regional neighbors, he spoke of hopes that there could be further cooperation on issues like trade, infrastructure and education.

The Curious Case Of Zouk’s Reprieve

By Ivan Lim

Zouk is safe. At least for now.

The answer that Zouk, Singapore’s pre-eminent dance club, its thousands of loyal, regular clubbers, 200 anxious staff, irate residents of neighbouring condominiums and green-eyed competitors craved for is finally out: The 23-year-old club has been offered a conditional three-year extension on its tenancy at Jiak Kim Street.

The extension granted by the authorities reflects the recognition that the club is an important tourism brand as it is an entertainment venue.

A joint statement released by the Singapore Land Authority, the Singapore Tourism Board and the Urban Redevelopment Authority acknowledged “Zouk’s contribution to the strengthening of Singapore’s reputation in the international entertainment scene”, which was the reason the three government agencies granted Zouk the extension it required, albeit with conditions.

More than that, the fact that the agencies even considered granting Zouk the extension could perhaps attest to the club’s position as the crown jewel of the nightlife scene in Singapore.  Zouk, which was placed seventh last year in respected international publication DJ Mag’s Top 100 Clubs poll, brings the world’s foremost DJs to our shores.

And Zouk is beyond that. It is a super club, a brand that is known to set trends and a club venue that’s host to the inspired and creative.

The club has brought glamour and prestige to an industry which is considered fairly small and which sometimes carries negative connotations because of its association with alcohol and with it, its somewhat unsavoury effects.

When it made its advent 23 years ago, Zouk was occupying a disused warehouse in an area devoid of activity. The area surrounding Zouk has since become a residential precinct, a development that has rendered its presence at its current site, in the words of the authorities, “incompatible with the residential nature of the area”.

It has had repeated extensions on its lease since June 2012, and the authorities have made it clear that this one will be its last.

So here’s the new deal: Zouk will have to secure a new venue by June next year – that’s 10 months from now. If they can do that, the lease will go on till Dec 31, 2017. If Zouk is unable, or chooses not to secure a venue by June 30, 2015, the lease on its Jiak Kim Street premise will expire on Dec 31 next year.

Which for all intents and purposes, was what founder and boss Lincoln Cheng had been asking for since June.

His decision in June to launch a petition to save Zouk may be perceived as a study  in brinksmanship. His purpose, however, was far simpler and way less sinister: Cheng, who calls Zouk “my baby”, was driven by his desire to seek recourse for the future of Zouk’s 200 employees and, of course, to keep the party going.

Cheng, who once described himself as a “Forrest Gump of music”, was just lucky to be at the right place at the right time. The 67-year-old was at Woodstock in 1969, an event which no doubt opened his mind to the possibilities of music.

In 1987, he was in Ibiza during what was the arrival of House music in Europe. He took that distinctive sound to Asia with the launch of Zouk in 1991.

Since then, Zouk has been in the forefront of dance music in Singapore. Now the club, which opened its doors for the first time six months before London’s Ministry of Sound, sees more than half a million visitors each year. ZoukOut, an annual year-end music and dance festival organised by the club at an outdoor venue, sees more than 40,000 visitors over two nights, many of whom are tourists who fly in specifically for the event.

For Cheng, becoming a club owner was secondary to bringing in new musical experiences, a spirit that has prevailed throughout the club’s 23-year history. Cheng, an architect by training, has proven over the years to be a purveyor of culture and quality. The original works of Andy Warhol, Keith Haring, Takashi Murakami and others from his personal collection are proudly displayed at Velvet Dance and Lounge, two of Zouk’s halls.

Clubs come and go in the dynamic and varied nightlife scene in Singapore, and whereas many club operators would scheme at making profits, Cheng’s building of the Zouk brand has stood the test of time. The long queues of beautiful clubbers, quite possibly the best-looking nightlife crowd in Singapore, have adorned the club’s exterior for generations, a testament to the club’s consistency and popularity over the years.

But there is still work to do. Zouk will have to leave Jiak Kim Street eventually. Can Zouk’s success be translated to a new venue? There is no doubt in this writer’s mind that with the philosophy of the man and the crew behind him, Cheng would be able to replicate the Zouk experience at any venue.

As it stands, Cheng favours a move to the Singapore Flyer, which will benefit from the footfall should Zouk take its place there. The Singapore Flyer went into receivership in May last year and Cheng has to wait for the announcement of a successful bid from investors before he can start negotiations with its new owners. It is understood that he is considering other options in the meantime.

Cheng has 10 good months to find a suitable place to relocate Zouk.  With the confidence of having at least a two-and-a-half year lease thereafter, he will almost certainly pursue that end with relentless  vigour.

The Zouk experience, a rite of passage for many a young Singaporean and a must-see venue for every visitor, looks set to make it to the quarter-century mark – and beyond.

 

* The writer, a former print journalist, is an author with Typewriter Books.

Why CPF is Failing

By Eric Tan

When the PAP inherited the CPF system from the British, they did not change the basic flaw in the system, which was to allow members to withdraw all the funds when they reached the then retirement age of 55. Later in the 1980s when they tried to move the withdrawal age to 60 in tandem with the retirement age, there was strong resistance from the ground. Consequently, they lost the second parliamentary seat to opposition in 1984.

I suspect that in order to achieve the same purpose, the mandarins then created the minimum sum and special account structure. They designed the minimum amount to increase over time such that when the baby boomers retire, it would balloon to a substantial amount. Today I believe those mandarins would have been very pleased with themselves as for more than 50 percent of CPF members who reached 55 almost all their funds in the ordinary account are transferred to the special account to meet the minimum amount requirement. However, they did not anticipate the public outcry arising from it.

The CPF as a retirement scheme has two problems, firstly the withdrawal age of 55 is outdated as people live longer and need to work longer before they can withdraw their CPF. Furthermore, withdrawal at 55 is uncoordinated with the current retirement age of 62 today. Secondly, the lump sum withdrawal is not in line with the principles of pension, which is an annuity.  The CPF members should convert the lump sum into an annuity. It looks like the government understands all these concepts. They put in place the minimum sum and CPF Life annuity.

Why this crisis of confidence?

Firstly, they did not effectively persuade people that these reforms are good for them. People felt they had been manipulated and had no choice in the matter. Ironically, in the age of the Internet it is difficult to dispel conspiracy theories.

Secondly, the CPF life annuity, which is now compulsory for those who turn 65, is not attractive. For the full minimum sum of $155,000, the retiree receives an annuity of about $1,200 for life. However, the people perceived that they have to be over 80 years old before they get back all their money. Most people do not believe they can live so long and they do not believe in the evidence reflected in the statistics. I am not an expert on annuity or actuarial science but shouldn’t the public know the amount of profits the outsourced insurance company makes from this scheme?

Lastly, the most important reason of all, most Singaporeans do not have sufficient funds in their CPF to retire. CPF is used to pay for housing, medisave, medishield insurance premiums and for paying parent’s medical expenses and children’s education.

Furthermore, the government uses CPF as a tool in recession to reduce wages.  These measures depleted the peoples’ CPF.  Why did the PAP government allow this to happen? Were they kicking the can down the road?

In the 1990s, I saw how the use of CPF for housing and medical expense led to inflated prices for these sectors. I supported the opposition movement and then joined the WP because I felt that we must debate these issues in Parliament for public scrutiny.  On one occasion in the 1990s, if I can recollect, a Minister mentioned that we have progressed so well such that clerks are now opting for A class hospital wards and soon there may not be a need for C class wards. They were depleting their medisave accounts for first class medical treatments.

For a while, the HDB stopped building two room flats under the illusion that we have prospered and there is no longer any demand for such flats. Unfortunately, for me it took another generation for the public to see the follies of these policies. For the longest time from 1990s until 2011, the people only voted two opposition MPs, signalling to the PAP all is well. It is only now the people experienced the negative impact of these policies. Today costly health care services, CPF and unaffordable HDB flats are hot button issues.

By not allowing the people to withdraw all their CPF when they reached 55 years old, it appears that they have broken their promises and subsequently lost the people’s trust.

The PAP also has to contend with the Asian cultural factor. Pensions are a Western concept, Asians expect their children to look after them. In the best case, we give our children a good education and happy childhood and we hope, out of love, they will look after us. In the most cynical case, we promise them an inheritance to induce them to look after us when we are old.

As my retired friend told me, you have to keep the honey so that the bees will keep coming back. I think the British introduced CPF to complement this system. Annuities do not leave an inheritance. However when they are far from sufficient to live on, you have a social time bomb.

Therefore, the government has to get off from their comfort zone and start persuading the people that they need to convert their CPF into an annuity to be drawn down after they retire at 62. One way is to make the CPF Life annuity very compelling and offering better rate of returns for CPF funds.

CPF  rate of return

In the past, CPF rate of returns have always been low but Singaporeans accepted them as we see it as supporting our nation building. I remembered in the early 1980s, Ong Teng Cheong had to defend the low 4 per cent per annum CPF rate when the bank deposits were close to 10 per cent. However, there were no protests as people can see that their lives were getting better and they believed the CPF funded the construction of the PIE, Changi Airport and JTC all of which contributed to our well-being. Ministers and top civil servants were not paid million dollar salaries then.

Today despite what the officials say, many believe that CPF is funding GIC and Temasek. Both sovereign funds are run like private equity funds with multi- million dollar salaries and bonuses paid to the fund managers working for them. The public response is understandable, why should they provide cheap CPF funds for these people to earn high salaries .They will demand more transparency and accountability for these funds.  Now comes the difficult question: how much risk should a pensioner take to get better returns?

CPF members have an option to invest part of their CPF balance in their ordinary account in CPF approved equities and unit trusts. However, the performance for those who opted to do so has been bad. As a result, the take up rate is low. The problem is that the average CPF member is not a well-informed investor. Also in the case of unit trusts, if the performance is poor, the unit trust fund managers are not accountable to the individual CPF investor.

The solution is that we should restructure the CPF funds into a pension fund with fund managers who are accountable directly to the CPF members or the public. These fund managers would enjoy economies of scale to reduce their costs. The large fund size would give them the advantage to gain access to the best deal flow and private equity funds. The Ministry of Finance through the CPF board can set guidelines on the range of risk appetite for different categories of investors. For example, those who have amounts in excess of $100,000 in their CPF can invest in equities otherwise they should be restricted to investment grade bond funds. These guidelines should be debated in Parliament.  CPF can then offer various mutual funds, including those from GIC and Temasek, to accommodate the CPF investor risk profile.

Proposed Action Plan for Government

The government must restore the original pension objectives of the CPF by gradually reducing the amounts from CPF, which can be used for housing and healthcare costs. The financial impact of a housing loan on your CPF balances when you retire is punitive as the total interest paid for a 25-year loan is equal or greater than the amount borrowed. For example if you borrow $200, 000, then when you repay it after 25 years, the total amount deducted from the CPF would be more than $400,000.  Reducing the amount that can be used for housing will have a negative impact on the property prices but the PAP government has to manage it since the problem originated in their watch.

The government must convince the people that deferring the CPF withdrawal and converting lump sums into annuities are good for them. They can do so by making the annuities more attractive and improving the returns as proposed above.

 

Eric Tan is a retired banker and former treasurer of the Workers Party

PM Fails As A Financial Planner

The  PM tried to play financial planner during his rally speech on Sunday and failed.  His advice for a fictitious Mr Tan just fell flat after it was examined by an associate professor of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in an article in The Straits Times.

Hui Weng Tat’s main contention is that the $2,000 a month the PM felt Mr Tan will need in his retirement  years will put him among the lowest 10 per cent  of resident households.

“The prospect of such retired households being forced down to the lowest decile on retirement certainly does not paint a very optimistic  view of adequate retirement living in Singapore,’’  the professor said.

And the PM did not even factor in inflation in his calculations.

His so-called big concession on CPF – allowing members to take out about 20 per cent of their savings at 65 – means nothing really.

Prof Hui questioned the move. “To my mind, that is merely a cosmetic change that seems to pander to popular demands. Allowing this may not be in the best interest of most CPF contributors  as any lump sum withdrawal means correspondingly lower amounts of retirement income for the individual.”

Tinkering with the CPF, as the PM did on Sunday, is not the way forward. A way has to be found to return the CPF to its original purpose of providing sufficient retirement savings.

Then we all can have peace of mind – a phrase the PM has used often enough to clutch at the straws of a survival strategy.

A PM in search of a legacy

By Simon Vincent

Anticipations were high for this year’s National Day Rally speech. One could not help but wonder how Lee Hsien Loong would mark the event, days after his 10th year anniversary as prime minister.

As it turned out, the momentous occasion was matched by a momentous concession by Lee. Retired citizens would finally be able to withdraw a lump sum of their CPF savings, though not more than 20 per cent.

The CPF scheme has been a lingering bone of contention for many retirees who feel that they should be entitled to withdraw, as they see fit, the money they have worked hard to save over the years. While they may not be able to withdraw theirentire  savings, the modification to the CPF scheme allows a level of autonomy long denied to them.

This concession ties in well with the Pioneer Package, espoused by Lee during the speech. By using the “red card” issued in the package, older Singaporeans will now also be able to enjoy significant rebates in medical costs.

The Pioneer Package, as Lee indicated, was created to recognise the contributions of the older generation of Singaporeans who worked hard and sacrificed for Singapore. Yusof Ishak, the first president of Singapore, was among the people whom Lee had praised.

If Lee had chosen to identify his political legacy by recognising the Pioneer Generation, it might turn out to be a move to shore up his government’s popularity. After all, it would be hard to find any segment of society that disapproves of supporting the people who helped build Singapore.

Nevertheless, the lack of any engagement with socio-political issues, with disagreements and negotiations over civil liberties still brewing, was a glaring omission. The uproar over the recent banning of books by the NLB and the opposition of certain religious groups to Pink Dot were strangely absent from Lee’s speech.

As politically-neutered as his pioneer-oriented speech was, it might, ironically, have owed a debt to the nascent dialogue about civil liberties. In what was seen to be a step back for the state of our right to freedom of expression, the Prime Minister had pursued a defamation case against Roy Ngerng, prompting strong disapproval from the public. The issue that revolved around the defamation case was, of course, the CPF scheme.

Ngerng’s allegations about the misuse of CPF money by the Prime Minister might indeed have been baseless, yet we cannot deny that if not for Ngerng openly speaking up, the public discontentment over the CPF scheme would not have gained such traction.

It is hard to fathom that the Prime Minister’s explanation about the mechanics of the CPF had nothing to do with assuaging the fears and doubts raised by Ngerng.

“Together, let us be the pioneers of our generation,” said Lee at the end of his speech. “Together let us create a brighter future for all Singaporeans.”

Lee’s championing of the Pioneer Generation by giving them a renewed belief in Singapore may turn out to be a milestone in that hypothetical future and in his legacy. That achievement though would probably be weighed down by Lee’s poor handling of a society in transition. The News Licensing Scheme, the gazetting of Maruah and The Online Citizen as political organisations, and the defamation suit indicate a regressive strain of governance. Perhaps then it should be no surprise that there was no discussion of civil liberties in the National Day Rally speech.

The footsteps in the sands of Lee’s political tenure seem to indicate confused steps forward and backward.

Presents from PM Lee

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong introduced four popular — possibly vote-getting measures — in his National Day Rally speech last night. The first was to enable owners of four-room flats to enjoy the lease buy-back scheme, extending beyond current availability only to three-room flats. This will enable half the public flats in Singapore to find additional source of income each month from the HDB until their residents die.  Owners of larger flats had been asking their MPs for this for quite a while.

He also agreed to let retirees, upon reaching the age of 65, to take out up to 20 per cent of their CPF savings if they meet certain minimum sum requirements. He went to some length to explain the amount set ($155,000, to be raised to $161,000 next year). After his clear explanation, his comment that not many MPs were probably familiar with the maths involved drew some embarrassed twitter from the audience.

The third measure was the “silver support scheme” for the lower income retiree generation — the amount of which will be announced at the next Budget (In February 2015).

It is the fourth measure — the setting up of the Municipal Services Office to coordinate the various government agencies dealing with the public, including the police, the Land Authority, the Housing Board, National Parks, Animals and Veterinary Authority, Public Utilities — that will have the most immediate improvement to the quality of life for the average Singaporean. As soon as it is set up, under the Ministry of National Development, any member of the public with a complaint about public service need only call the MSO, instead of being given the usual runaround (cited by Lee himself, to much laughter from the audience).

Lee also cited many examples of young men and women who, despite not having degrees, were able to reach positions of management at Keppel Shipyard. The underlying message to young people and parents was clear: even without a degree, you can go much further if you work hard and seek training. Although the advice was obvious, it was clear from some of the MPs at the reception later that it was a hard message to get across.

The rest of his speech was peppered with personal accounts of pioneer generation folk, including Singapore’s first President, a Malay, Yusof Ishak, who would be honoured with a mosque, an institute and a social science chair after his name.

The major real estate development that follows every NDR speech will be the one at Jurong Lake over the next few years, including expanding the new Science Centre.

ESM Goh: The government must pass the demanding parental test

On the eve of the Prime Minister’s National Day Rally, Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong gave a speech where he mentioned a perceived “loosening” of the ties between the Singaporean government and its people. The speech was delivered at a dinner event at Marine Parade.

Goh highlighted the importance of a solid relationship between the people and their government and how this relationship is fundamental in the success of a nation. He cited many of the effects that the deterioration of this relationship has had, but he seemed to be less than clear on how this state of affairs came to be.

In the speech, he drew parallels between the relationships of parents and children to that of citizens and government. Goh pointed out that we love our parents no matter what their flaws may be, but in regard to government citizens tend to be quick to criticize even for the slightest mistakes.

Goh proceeded to state that this apparent unhealthy relationship has become what he calls “the New Normal” and that this condition has caused the nation to lose its direction, saying, “We still discuss and debate, consult and engage. But each group is now more assertive than before in pushing its point of view and vested interests. Each side does not want to give an inch without taking a quarter. The common space for Singaporeans is getting smaller instead of bigger”

He then went on to call for a greater understanding and he spoke for the need for Singaporeans to pull together not only as a people, but also as a people with their government. Coming back to his parent and child theme, he said, “The government must pass the demanding parental test, which is to help the next generation succeed to the best of their capabilities. But the next generation, too, must pass the family test in building on what they have inherited. They must demand as much of themselves as they do of the government.”

Some of the concerns voiced by the former prime minister might be debatable, but it is true that a healthy relationship between citizens and their government is important. However, this is an issue that has causes problems in many nations throughout the history of civilized society and solutions to this problem are often hard to find.