By Robert Yeo
The sentence, Speak Truth to Power, is a Quaker advice and it summed up what Catherine Lim did in a dinner talk she gave at Tanglin Club last month. Indeed, she has been doing that for 17 years, speaking truth to power fearlessly.
Addressing a sell-out audience and referring to her 2011 book (A Watershed Election), she reminded her readers that she criticised the high ministerial salaries, the authoritarian ways of the PAP and the adverse influence of Lee Kuan Yew on the GE campaign. She wrote that nothing would change.
After the election results, the government reduced the ministerial salaries and Lee stepped down from the cabinet. Catherine Lim could not believe what happened. She repeated what she had written: “‘The Lee Kuan Yew era is over.'”
When first asked to speak, she was reluctant as she had just published her book and there was her blog. What made her change her mind was an article published on April 6 in The Straits Times entitled The Singapore Way: The Way To Go? by American journalist Tom Plate.
Plate’s article was an excerpt from the Afterword of his just-published second edition of Conversations with Lee Kuan Yew.
Plate wrote: “By fax I once asked him to offer some self-criticism. He referred me to Catherine Lim.’
This fine writer, perhaps his most persistently perceptive critic… was Plate’s description of her, and he went on to quote her:
“‘Mr Lee’s legacy is so mixed that at one end of the spectrum of response, there will be adulation, and at the other, undisguised opprobrium and distaste.”
Catherine Lim never doubted the force of her commentaries on Lee but for the first time, he acknowledged her as a critic to be reckoned with. He had in the past dismissed her as ‘ a novelist… with the capacity for grotesque caricature’. Well, the novelist now felt vindicated.
But she did not gloat. The government had ignored her, The Straits Times had ignored, after publishing her initial articles. Now, the great man, late in life, a year after leaving politics, a widower, had finally said in print that Catherine Lim was someone who had contributed to his self-criticism.
The significance of Lee’s admission that Lim was a critic to be counted has escaped most watchers of Singapore’s politics.
Her position as critic
In her talk, she referred to the Prime Minister’s recent National Day rally speech in which he said his government would take care of housing, education and health and create a more inclusive society, but sceptics said that they had heard it before.
She stated that the electorate had become so disillusioned and alienated they were beyond the reach of concilation. The government was facing a “crisis of trust.”
What could it do? She suggested two choices. The first is to go back to the old knuckleduster days of Lee Kuan Yew. The second is to open up Singapore society in a way that has not been seen before. In other words, replace the old, stern top-down approach with a people-friendly, bottom-up one, something that a minister had called the light footprint.
But she did not think the second option would work. First, it would mean overhauling a mindset.
She used the phrase ” a collective DNA” that made the party constitutionally incapable of change. Second, PAP leaders have always believed that Singapore was too small and vulnerable and it would always need the strong, paternal hand of the party. Third, it would mean the dismantling of the feared machinery of the ISA and the defamation suit.
She she could not see the present PM doing it
What next for the PAP?
First, she said, prepare for the next general election likely in 2016. Second, concentrate on the economy as a long-term strategy. Get the economics right and the rest will take care of itself, as the Prime Minister had said: ” Good policies make good politics.”
But third, the government would still use what she termed “old instruments” to curb critics who overstepped, like the outspoken blogger or the satirical cartoonist. In this sort of behaviour, the government had skilfully created the mixed strategy of blowing hot, blowing cold.
It forced the White Paper on population on the people and then invited them to engage in the great Singapore Conversation. It looked Machiavellian.
She stressed that the scenario just painted was speculative, as is the feeling that the PAP, despite displaying a harmonious whole, may be internally torn and may split up
Finally, she offered this advice to young people who asked her for ways of dealing with the government: “Think through, stand up, speak up and try not to be afraid. But alas, alas, these days I myself am feeling, well, not exactly afraid, but nervous, uneasy. I think I am suffering from what is sometimes called the Quo Vadis syndrome, that is, the anxiety of whither are we going.”
Post-speech answers
After the speech she was peppered with questions. Were you ever afraid? No, she replied unequivocally, ” I speak as a concerned citizen within my democratic rights. I have not taken instructions from anyone, I have no connections with a foreign power, no one can pin anything on me.”
What about your “relationship’, someone asked, with Goh Chok Tong whom you first criticised in 1994. She wrote an article called The Great Affective Divide in September that year and followed it with One Government, Two Styles three months later.
In the second article, she said Goh was under the influence of Lee Kuan Yew.
Goh took exception to that claim and challenged her to enter politics. Her answer: ” I wrote as a responsible person interested in the direction of Singapore’s politics. I don’t have to join a political party to be able to comment on it.
To return finally to her criticism of Lee Kuan Yew, no one can tell exactly the extent her remarks contributed to his self-appraisal. Recents reports of the first Prime Minister evince mixed responses. He has this year published two new books, The Wit and Wisdom of Lee Kuan Yew and One Man’s View of the World, tomes aimed to assure his legacy.
At the same time, press reports point to a physically frail, old person and on the Net one can see an image of him in a wheelchair feeding coi in Jurong.
It prompts the comment not often publicly mentioned that Lee is not what he used to be. This feeling is augmented by his poignant remark that when it was his time to go, and this from a person of secular belief, he hoped to meet Mrs Lee in the hereafter.
Catherine Lim has been speaking truth to power since 1994, when she published her article on Goh. Many are surprised that she has done so with impunity.
But because she speaks as an honest broker beholden only to her conscience and because she is an accomplished writer who knows how far she can go, perhaps no one should be surprised that she has got away with what she did—and is still doing.
Robert Yeo, poet and playwright, is a part-time lecturer at SMU.
Catherine Lim and LKY
Should You Buy the Biggest Flat You Can Get?
Yeah, I know we covered this topic before. But it was before all the big changes we’ve seen, so that old guide’s now as useful as a car manual from the time of The Flintstones. And since some of you have started asking this question again, I thought we’d better do a quick, fresh take:
Key Changes in the Wonderful World of HDB
I know the the editorial team’s frowning at this headline. I refuse to change it.
At the rate our media’s celebrating HDB, we’re months away from opening a “Wonderful World of HDB” theme park. You’ll see: “Sudden Subsidy” roller coasters, shooting out the mouths of politicians’ statues, and cafeterias selling Executive Condiments (EC) burgers.
(I call dibs on the ideas and names).
Now some of the celebrated HDB changes, which should impact your decision to get the biggest flat, are:
- Stepped Up Special Housing Grant
- De-linking of BTO Flats from Resale Flat Prices
- The Joint Singles Scheme
1. Stepped Up Special Housing Grant
The Special Housing Grant (SHG) is a $20,000 grant for HDB flats. This was previously given to lower income families ($2,250 a month and below), to buy 3-room and 2-room flats.
During the National Day Rally speech however, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced a step-up to the grant. It will now cover 4-room flats as well, and now the Middle Class will qualify. There was a mention of qualifying at a household income of $4,000 or under a month; I’ll update you with the exact figure once I’m sure.
A stepped up SHG might make a 4-room a far more sensible decision than a 3-room. You’ll have the potential for rental income (whether you use it or not), and more room for your family. All without surrendering the $20,000 grant.
2. De-linking of BTO Flats from Resale Flat Prices
Some people out there are still obsessing over capital gains (i.e. they think their flat is an asset, not a home). Which is great justification for certain healthcare ideas. Like subsidised hearing aids.
Your flat is not going to be considered an asset first and home second. I don’t know how much clearer the government can make that message. Hence, new flat prices are now de-linked from resale flat prices.
This is all good news for home buyers; it makes BTO flats more affordable. For them, it’s a sign that they may be able to pick the biggest one. For the investor types, buying the biggest flat no longer translates to the same kind of capital appreciation that it used to.
Let’s do this because we can share our lives. Because we can grow old together. Because a 4-room has way higher returns.3. The Joint Singles Scheme
Two single Singapore citizens can now make a joint application for a flat; this is under the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS). The subsidies they both get can be combined. And if they later get married, they get another $15,000 for their flat.
So if you and your partner are mostly sure about settling down, it might not be a bad idea to grab a bigger flat. There’ll be more room for your family, and you know another $15,000 subsidy will be waiting.
Other Related Factors
Some of you will have to use a private bank loan, instead of the HDB concessionary loan. Now don’t be afraid*.
*I mean that literally. Don’t. Like any wild animal, bankers can smell fear, and it sends them into attack mode.
You should, however, be aware that certain macroeconomic factors, and recent government policies, will impact your decision. Those of you intending to use private loans need to consider:
- Increased Difficulty in Refinancing
- Rising Interest Rates
1. Increased Difficulty in Refinancing
Refinancing has become more complicated, with the new Total Debt Servicing Ratio (TDSR) framework.
Remember your finances are evaluated every time you want to switch loan packages. And because the new TDSR factors in every single debt, even credit card bills, there’s now greater risk you’ll be unable to refinance.
And that was how the bank’s appeals department saved on time AND manpower.So if you want the biggest flat, here’s the question you need to ask: Can you maintain loan repayments, even after the fourth year (that’s usually when your home loan rates shoot up)? Assume you will be unable to change to a cheaper package.
If you’re dependent on switching to cheaper loans, you’re playing chicken with a 16-wheeler. That’s the kind off assumption that later results in a fast, costly sell-off. Think about it before getting, say, a five-room flat or EC.
(PS: If you’re having trouble refinancing right now, try asking the mortgage specialists at SmartLoans.sg. It doesn’t cost you anything!)
2. Rising Interest Rates
This is not a concern with HDB concessionary loans (those home loan rates are fixed at 2.6%).
But interest rates for private bank loans have gone up, with some banks raising the spread by around 0.5% over the past year. American Federal Reserve policies, expected to come soon, might also raise SIBOR and SOR rates. And If I’m speaking Klingon right now, refer to this guide.
In short, if you take a private bank loan, be more careful about the size of the flat. A huge loan quantum can make even small shifts in interest rates quite devastating.
The Conclusion
Circumstances vary for each individual. But in general, people using a HDB loan shouldn’t be afraid to grab the largest flat. The drawbacks seem minimal.
But people using a private bank loan have to be careful they’re not over-leveraged. I don’t think these people will be bankrupted by rate hikes; but it can make their lives more deprived…for a long time.
Would You Buy the Biggest Flat? Comment and Let Us Know!
Image Credits:
jonolist, merick.fightBoredom (thumbnail), dinuks, iamlemonflim, bigpresh, sboneham,
Source: http://www.moneysmart.sg/housing-property/should-you-buy-the-biggest-flat-you-can-get-august-2013/
How Singapore’s Latest HDB Cooling Measures Affect You
Affordable housing is a big ticket issue right now. And when our government tackles a problem, they do it with a uniquely Singaporean slant: That is, the unshakeable conviction that anything worth doing is worth overdoing. Enter the latest HDB Cooling Measures:
“Hello, what you want? Clothes? Camera? Watch? HDB resale flat?”
What are the Latest HDB Cooling Measures?
- Reduction of the Mortgage Servicing Ratio (MSR) from 35% to 30% for HDB Concessionary Loans
- Reduction of the maximum loan tenure from 30 to 25 years for HDB flats; and 35 to 30 years for bank loans.
- 3 year increased wait time for Permanent Residents (PRs)
Here’s a quickie explanation:
1. Reduction of the MSR to 30%
The MSR measures the percentage of your income that would go toward repaying your home loan monthly.
In the past, HDB buyers had a MSR of 35%. So if you had an income of $2,500, your MSR would have been (35% of $2,500) = $875.
That means the maximum allowable repayment on your home loan, every month, would have been $875. The loan amount granted to you will be calculated based on this amount.
With the MSR now lowered to 30%, your maximum allowable repayment (again on a $2,500 income) would be a paltry $750. Which means the loan amount granted to you will be reduced accordingly. Yeah, you may have to shelve those upgrading plans for now.
Incidentally, the MSR for HDB Concessionary Loans are now similar to bank loans: Both are at 30%.
If the new MSR just wrecked your home loan approval, contact SmartLoans.sg for help. The mortgage specialists there can figure something out. It’s free, so long as we keep shoving them stale bread under the cellar door.
2. Reduction of Maximum Loan Tenure
The maximum loan tenure* is now set to 25 years for HDB Concessionary Loans and 30 years for bank loans.
*The time before a loan is repaid in full
A 30 year loan tenure with a bank loan will however only grant you 60% of the purchase price. If you need the full 80%, the maximum loan tenure you can take is 25 years, which is the same as the HDB Concessionary Loan.
A shorter loan tenure means higher monthly repayments for the same loan amount. Combined with the lower MSR, this means home buyers in general will be borrowing much less.
Follow us on Facebook, and we’ll address how the HDB and bank loans compare under the new ruling.
While that sucks, it does mean fewer Singaporeans will be over-leveraged. This should brace us for potential liquidity crunches, once the Americans change their fiscal policy.
3. Increased Wait Time for PRs
On the plus side, pets aren’t a problem.This is perhaps the biggest, most significant change. Previously, someone could buy a resale flat as soon as they got their PR status. It was a major contributor to rising resale flat prices, and sudden paranoid xenophobia. Now, a 3-year waiting period has been implemented.
The new restriction means some PRs will now have to rent (unless they can afford other private property). That’s good news for landlords, and for flat owners who have started letting out rooms.
If you have a sizeable 4-room or 5-room, now may be the time to keep an eye on the rental market.
A Message to Property Investors?
After the latest cooling measure, the Loan Applications Department was never the same.Resale flat prices were already plummeting, even before this cooling measure. Just yesterday (26th August 2013) we heard that zero COV flat sales tripled, from 14 in January to 49 in July.
(A zero CoV sale means the seller was only paid the actual valuation of the flat).
The new cooling measure makes it worse. Expect the resale market to contract, like a well salted slug, because PRs made up a significant part of the market. Now the new arrivals won’t be able to buy for three years, even if they had the cash.
The message to property developers is clear:
HDB flats are for housing first, and investment second.
The government isn’t going to temper its policies to cushion investors, so don’t count on resale flats prices hitting the dizzying heights they did a few years back.
How do you think these cooling measures will affect the property landscape in Singapore? Leave us a comment here!
Image Credits:
Oldandsolo, jaqian, Balaji Dutt, cubmundo
Source: http://www.moneysmart.sg/housing-property/how-singapores-latest-hdb-cooling-measures-affect-you/
The Rudd awakening
By P Francis
News
DESPITE fine spring weather across most of Australia on Friday, a tsunami of primary votes against the Labor Party caused a landslide in favour of Tony Abbott’s Liberals. To date, no reports were received of any deaths or serious injuries after the calamity.
Seriously, PM Kevin Rudd has been shown the door nationally, but in his own electorate of Griffith he scraped through by the skin of his teeth on Green preferences against Dr Bill Glasson, the former head of the Australian Medical Association and an ophthalmologist.
Labor’s implosion has helped the runaway victory of PM Elect Abbott, who gave a 10-minute acceptance speech that was humbling, short and sharp. After thanking all involved, he said: “And I can inform you that the Australian Labor Party vote is at the lowest level in more than 100 years…From today, I declare that Australia is under new management and that Australia is once again open for new business. I give you all this assurance – we will not let you down. I pledge myself to the service of our country.”
Gillard and Rudd
Rudd must have seen the disaster coming around the corner and pulled out all stops in a fragile attempt to turn back the high tide of discontent in several opinion polls. But he was not the Moses, who parted the Red Sea, and the waves kept coming! Instead of being the saviour, after throwing overboard his usurper – former PM Julia Gillard – Rudd was like a drowning man clutching at a straw. The ditched Gillard, probably, would have been sipping a cool chardonnay with a smirk, in her new multi-million dollar house in Adelaide, as she watched the predictable election results unfold on TV. She did tweet her congratulations to the new PM, and commiserations to Labor: “Congrats to Mr Abbott & Mr Truss for leading their parties to victory. I wish them & their teams well. It’s always an honour to serve. JG”
Certainly, Rudd did not fiddle – like Nero did as Rome burned to the ground – as the faction-ridden Labor Party began to crumble. The only fiddling Rudd did was with the Opposition’s budget plans and statements, which some would say bordered on ‘white’ lies. Instead, now the ‘white’ ants have come home to roost within the Labor Party amid soul searching and chest thumping.
Who’s next opposition leader?
Yes, D-Day has come and gone, and Rudd has left the building – it is the end of the Rudd. The question being asked is “Who wants to lead the Labor Party now in Opposition?” Possible candidates are deputy leader Anthony Albanese, MP Jenny Macklin, treasurer Chris Bowen, and former union boss Bill Shorten, who is Governor General Quentin Bryce’s son-in-law. Ironically, Rudd’s own newly-introduced party leader voting rules will include Labor’s rank and file, which will delay the selection process – and Rudd, even if he wants to stay on, has to re-nominate, too! But in his concession speech, an unusually happy Rudd seemed in high spirits as though he had won. As he rambled on, he said he would not contest the Labor leadership so as to allow Labor a fresh start. Then he took a heavily-criticised unwarranted dig at his opponent: “It would be un-prime ministerial of me to say Bill Glasson eat your heart out, so I won’t.”
Will Rudd stay on in parliament or quit soon for a by-election? The grapevine has it that if he quits, Rudd will see UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon for a position to strut on the world stage, which is what he likes to do. Or even take over as secretary-general at the organisation some have dubbed ‘the toothless tiger’. However, that is all conjecture even though there is no smoke without fire.
What happened to Labor?
What happened to the ruling Labor Party is a candid lesson to any government in any part of the world of what not to do to stir up the ire of the people who vote. It all started with a fairytale – once upon a time there was a PM Rudd, who was replaced by his trusted deputy under dubious circumstances. However, Rudd relentlessly ‘rocked’ his government in an attempt to exact revenge on his successor Gillard. His ambition to be a ‘recycled’ PM eventually came true, but there was no living happily ever after. Instead, a nightmare unfolded during the election campaign as more and more voters saw through “his blatant lies and negative personal attacks on rival politicians”. On the eve of the election, Rudd said Abbott would privatise Medicare – that caused confusion to voters who did not check the logic of it.
Commenting on the election, treasurer Bowen admitted: “This result was because of the Labor party disunity.” But former Liberal PM John Howard pulled no punches when he declared: “Abbott did a splendid job. A very unstable and incompetent government was wasting people’s money and deserved to be thrown out. You can trust Tony Abbott, he will look after you and he can be trusted with your money.”
Remember, the people have spoken – never take the electorate for granted – after considering other ‘hidden’ factors, which do not include the ‘staples’ such as the economy, jobs, health, pensions and illegal immigration with the help of people smugglers.
‘Hidden’ factors
The ‘hidden’ factors, which slowly built up to trigger the huge backlash against the Labor federal government, included the divided factions within Labor causing ‘musical chairs’ for the position of Prime Minister – the highest position in the land. Divisions were also caused by Gillard in her ‘misogynist’ attacks on Abbott as a woman hater. Employers were pitted against workers (backed by Labor’s union supporters). A mini-riot was narrowly avoided when Aborigines were told an untruth by a Labor staffer about Abbott’s views. Then there was Labor’s unhappy relationship with the media – especially Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers – and the attempt by the government to muzzle the press by the introduction of laws to ‘censor’ media and others whose political opinions may offend certain groups, cultural or otherwise.
Smear campaigns did not go down well with voters, too, as Labor targeted their rivals – again starting with Abbott, labelling him a thug and a bully. Add to this the multiple lies of Rudd about border protection and drowning at sea; Budget deficits and savings; drop in taxes paid; alleging the Coalition (Liberals/Nationals) had a ‘black hole’ in funding of their policy and planned A$90 million of cuts. Certainly nobody can be fooled all the time and voters do not like being treated as idiots especially by a politician! But, that was not all. There were broken promises, such as by Gillard on not having a carbon tax, a reduction in the number of poker machines and a Budget surplus that never was.
Rudd’s ‘wrong’ calls
Former Labor PM Bob Hawke claimed that Rudd should have called for a much earlier election after he had ousted Gillard – to take advantage of the ‘honeymoon’ period. Hawke conceded defeat on the polling day eve and told Sky News: “In my judgment it was a mistake that he didn’t go much earlier. If he’d gone pretty soon after he got the change of leadership and opened with a campaign like that, I think it might have been a different story.”Hawke also admitted that the leadership battle had affected their support and Labor made a mistake of underestimating Abbott. “Tony has historically been capable of some awful gaffes … but he’s shown considerable discipline in this campaign.” He also said Labor’s attempt to discredit the cost of the Coalition policy was “embarrassing” for Labor when the heads of Treasury and the Finance Department rejected Labor’s statement on Coalition costings.
Prominent businessman Roger Corbett, who is a Reserve Bank of Australia board member and chairman of Fairfax Media agreed in part with Hawke on Rudd’s downfall. Corbett told ABC TV: “He’s a man that really has done the Labor Party enormous damage, destabilised it…I think it would have been much better that they’d come undone with Julia Gillard leading them than Kevin Rudd.”
Then there was Rudd jumping on the gay bandwagon to win votes from homosexuals and lesbians by supporting them to marry legally. Bert Mahoney, a Catholic and member of the Knights of the Southern Cross, who lives in Boxhill in Victoria, said: “Although Rudd is a Christian, he alienated many – religious or not – who believe that marriage is a sacred institution strictly between a man and a woman, and that sodomy was unnatural sex and unacceptable. “
Even ‘parachuting’ in former Queensland premier Peter Beattie did not help in the Labor heartland of Forde in Queensland. Beattie lost to Bert van Manen and blamed the poor overall performance of Labor to disunity in Labor over leadership, which was responsible for the party’s woes. Former Labor leader Simon Crean agreed: “You have to change the leadership style, not the leaders.”
Labor’s faulty election mechanism was shown up again when it featured New Zealander Paulla Millar on a Rudd pamphlet urging readers to vote for him and saying what a great bloke he is. Millar had been photographed by junior staff when she visited Rudd’s electorate office to complain she could not vote in the election because she was not allowed to be a citizen despite living in Australia.
Abbott’s agenda
Meanwhile, the Liberal Party stuck to their game plan for the election campaign and refused to be cajoled into releasing their budget and expenditure costings too early “to be mauled by Labor and the media”. They waited until 72 hours before the election – an improvement on Labor at the previous election where they avoided scrutiny by showing their costings only at 5pm on the eve of the election. The Liberals even went as far as to mail out ‘Our Contract With Australia’ cards which stated: 1 A stronger, diversified economy; 2 Carbon tax gone; 3 End the waste and debt; 4 Build modern roads and improve services; 5 Stop the boats with proven policies; 6 Two million new jobs within a decade.
The determined Abbott has stated in the run-up to the polls that, if elected, within the first 100 days in office he will ensure that the Liberals will “conduct ministerial visits to Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Nauru and PNG (Papua New Guinea) to discuss operational matters under Operation Sovereign Borders”, which is all about border protection against illegal ‘boat people’ arrivals.
Just three days before the polls, AFP reported: Australian election frontrunner Tony Abbott on Wednesday vowed Asia will be his main foreign policy focus if he assumes office, as an influential media group turned on incumbent Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. The conservative Abbott, whose diplomatic credentials came under fire this week after he said the Syria conflict was “baddies versus baddies”, is on track to win Saturday’s poll. His first travel priorities would be Indonesia, China, Japan and South Korea, he said in an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald, the flagship paper of Fairfax Media whose chairman Wednesday declared his support for the conservative. “Only after our regional and trading partners have been suitably attended to would I make the traditional trips to Washington and London,” Abbott said, adding that “in the end your focus has got to be on the relationships that need the most attention”. “Decisions which impact on our national interests will be made in Jakarta, in Beijing, in Tokyo, in Seoul, as much as they will be made in Washington.”
Former leader of the New South Wales Parliamentary Liberal Party Kerry Chikarovski revealed to ABC TV what kind of man Abbot is. She said he would be a great PM, he has strong convictions, is clear and has a very good team for the front bench. “The best politicians know what they are not good at and employ people to do what they cannot. Abbott will have to re-establish the credibility and trust in politicians.”
On a lighter note, Australia’s SBS reported 10 days before the election that Liberal MP John Alexander of Bennelong had a rather novel way to campaign. When asked by comedian Michael Hing how he communicated with his diverse community, the former tennis star said: “We have a program, table tennis in schools. We started that because we could see there were too many students – Korean and Chinese students – who were being left out of what you would call ‘traditional’ Australian sport. At no stage was I thinking ‘Oh this is going to win a vote ’I thought it was really a great thing to do and it really made my job fulfilling.” Call it ping pong diplomacy with the Asian community if you must! For the record, Alexander cruised home comfortably against Jason Yat Sen Li.
An old friend in Singapore emailed me last week – after reading of the Aussie elections on TISG – asking: “How many election rallies are being held and how many did you attend?” My reply was that there were none like in Singapore at Geylang Serai , Jalan Eunos or other venues. Instead, the main two political party leaders had three debates on TV, while advertisements on TV and the internet, in newspapers and fliers dropped into letter boxes were the modus operandi. Early voting and postal votes also helped ease the crowd on polling day.
So what will the morning after be like for Abbott? “I will probably go for an early morning bike ride with the guys I’ve been riding with for years for an hour or so. Then it will be basically into the office,” the regular swimmer, runner and cyclist told Melbourne radio station3AW.
As the dust settles on the election, life returns to normal – but with a new man at the helm of the Good Ship Australia. The course it navigates as it repels the swarms of ‘boat people’ heading to the Land of Plenty will indicate whether Abbott will rule with an iron fist or a velvet glove come hell or high water. Countries in Asia, too, will have a chance to see the new ‘Wizard of Oz’ as he travels to meet his counterparts in the region and forge closer ties in trade, investment and security matters.
P. Francis is an English tutor in Melbourne, who has more than 20 years’ journalism experience with newspapers, books and magazines in Singapore and Australia.
Singapore: Cool and Uncool
By Augustine Low
Everyone has an idea of what’s cool about Singapore and what isn’t.
I’ll have a go at making my top two picks of each.
Cool
Singlish: Love it or hate it, Singlish is here to stay so we might as well embrace it as cool and colourful.
To some, Singlish proudly displays the multi-cultural character of our society; to others, it is a colloquialism that makes them squirm
How not to like Singlish? It is fun, quirky and energetic. It is cobbled together from various influences including English, Malay, Tamil and dialects such as Hokkien, Teochew and Cantonese.
Our government may sometimes frown on Singlish, but Singaporeans have quietly grown accustomed to it. There is no evidence that Singlish has led to the decline of English in Singapore. And besides, we have the annual Speak Good English Movement as a reality check.
Come what may, we do it our way: Ban chewing gum and be the butt of jokes and ridicule? No problem. Tired of neighbour’s threats on water? Try and try until we convert wastewater into NEWater.
Think also of all manner of schemes – from car use and car ownership to housing, health, wage credit and baby bonus.
Where there’s a will there’s a way – the Singapore way.
It’s a curious mix of resilience, resourcefulness and inventiveness. Sounds simple, but hard to replicate.
On that chewing gum ban again – there’s now available in the market the non-stick kind which disperses easily (Google “biodegradable chewing gum”).
Maybe Singapore could consider lifting the ban – and having the last laugh. That would be cool.
Not Cool
Casino for an Icon: Other cities may have an opera house, a giant clock and a statue, but Singapore has Marina Bay Sands as its iconic landmark.
I have a photographer friend who has amassed an extensive collection of images of the Singapore buildings and landmarks. He tells me that – hands-down – the MBS shots are his bestsellers. They are purchased by local and foreign publications, news agencies, travel agencies and Singapore Tourism Board.
I knew the fate of MBS was sealed when real estate agents started jumping on the bandwagon. The clincher that’s calculated to woo any prospective buyer: “You can see MBS from here!”
Unless something more spectacular comes along, the money is on the casino to remain Singapore’s most distinctive icon.
Chope-chope: Chope-ing (Singlish for ‘reserving’) at food courts and hawker centres always puts me in a dilemma.
Here I am, food tray in hand, and I spy so many seats around, but each is choped by a tissue pack. Every so often, I’ve thought of removing the offending pack and taking the seat. Only to pull back, at the thought I could be accused of being ungracious, ungentlemanly.
I’ve also thought of joining in the act, but that would be so uncool. Besides, I don’t carry tissue packs, I use old-school handkerchiefs.
If I may chope with the Chief of National Campaigns: Should there be another new campaign, let it be the Anti-Chope-ing Campaign.
Augustine Low is a communications strategist. He is always cool about coming home to Changi Airport.
SingTel subsidiary buys US startup
Amobee, the mobile advertising company bought by SingTel for $321 million last year, has bought Gradient X, a young Los Angeles-based developer of a real-time bidding platform for mobile ads, which has just come out of beta.
The undisclosed sale price is understood to run to tens of millions of dollars – not bad for a startup that had only raised $3.75 million from backers, reports TechCrunch.
According to Trevor Healy, the CEO of Amobee, the acquisition is as much about picking up a product that fills a need at Amobee, as it is about picking up some key talent. “The founders and engineering team of Gradient X are technology rock stars, and when we met them we knew they had to be a part of the top team at Amobee,” said Healy.
“We are excited to join Amobee, which is globally recognized as the leader in mobile marketing,” said Brian Baumgart, CEO of Gradient X.
With the acquisition of Gradient X, Amobee will be able to offer companies the ability to make media buys through multiple channels and formats like video and HTML5, with bidding and pricing marked in real time, and with analytics for improved targeting. This is expected to give media buyers a better return on their spend.
Gradient X will remain in LA, and Amobee plans to capitalize on that by setting up a sales office in the city as well.
Amobee, a division of SingTel’s Digital L!fe Group, is headquartered in Redwood City, California, and has offices in Europe, Asia, Australia, Latin America and throughout the United States. Helping its customers run targeted, leading edge mobile ad campaigns on a global scale, Amobee was declared the winner of the “Mobile Marketing & Advertising Agency of the Year” award at the 17th Annual Global Mobile Awards, held at the GSMA Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.
Amobee serves not only SingTel but other carriers as well as including AT&T, Sprint, Vodafone and Telefonica. But the Asia-Pacific portion of its business is now growing. Whereas last year it made up 10 per cent of Amobee’s revenues, this year that rose to at least one-third, according to TechCrunch.
SingTel is believed to have bought Amobee to gain better control over ads across its network of operations, and offer publishers a more attractive, targeted advertising option than going with one of the other established players, such as Google.
That strategy will take on a new twist for SingTel in the coming years. SingTel is one of the 18 carriers that has signed on to work with Mozilla in the development of the Firefox OS for mobile.
Haze to return next year
By Amy Chew
Corruption by Indonesian local governments and weak law enforcement are blamed by environmentalists for the recurring forest fires that spew noxious fumes over to Malaysia and Singapore.
Greenpeace Indonesia warned of more forest fires to come as the country approaches 2014 general elections as historically, local authorities give out land concession in exchange for funds for their respective political campaigns.
“This has happened in the past. I ask the public to be aware of this, to make sure that our forests and peatland are not sacrificed for political deals,” said Bustar.
Corruption by local governments often resulted in authorities turning a blind eye on fires started in the land concession held by large plantation companies.
“There are lots of corruption taking place at the local level. Foreign investors operating in Indonesia should not pay bribes so that they can carry out wrongdoings,” said Bustar Maitar, head of Greenpeace Indonesia forest campaign.
While the central government has strengthened its efforts at reducing deforestation by placing a moratorium on the issuance of new land concessions since 2011, local authorities have not fallen in line.
“It is very difficult to control everything at the local level,” said Greenpace’s Bustar.
On June 14, Riau governor Rusli Zainal was detained by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) for his alleged involvement in two separate graft cases. One of them involved a forestry permit case.
Indonesia’s Forestry Ministry confirmed the central government has not issued any new land permits since 2011 but admitted there were instances of local authorities giving out licences.
The regents (in a province regency) has the authority to issue land permits,” said Hadi Daryanto, secretary-general of Indonesia’s Forestry Ministry.
Prior to Indonesia’s ousting of the late autocractic President Suharto in 1998, land matters was controlled by the central government.
As part of the reform process, Indonesia devolved power from the center to the provinces right down to the regencies in 1999.
Consequently, deforestation increased exponentially as provincial governors and regents used their newfound authority to issue land permits at will.
In 1998, deforestation totaled two million hectares per year. In 2001-2003, the rate rose to 3.5 million hectares per annum, according to the Forestry Ministry.
“The euphoria of 1999-2003 over Regional Autonomy without governance resulted in the high rate of deforestation,” Daryanto added.
Currently, the central government practically only holds 15 per cent of the authority to protect the forests, with the other 85 per cent in the hands of local administrations due to regional autonomy, according to Daryanto.
To rectify the problem, the Indonesian Parliament is currently debating a bill to withdraw the right to decide land matters from regents and instead place the authority in the hands of provincial governors.
“The Parliamentary debate is still going-on,” said Daryanto.
Greenpeace’s analysis of NASA hotspot data in Sumatra 11th to 21st June revealed hundreds of fire hotspots in palm oil concessions that are owned by Indonesian, Malaysian and Singaporean companies.
Bustar said large Malaysian and Singaporean corporations need to “clean-up” their suppliers to ensure they are not engaged in setting fires to clear the land.
Large companies source for supply from smallholders who typically cultivate between 2 to 5 hectares of land. Small holders account for 35% to 40% of Indonesia’s total palm oil output.
“They (large plantations) need to raise the awareness of smallholders not to burn the land and supply them with machinery to chop down the trees,” said Bustar.
“As plantation companies are large corporation with much resources, they must bear the greater responsibility for preventing fires,” Bustar added.
Forest fires from the Indonesian islands of Sumatra and Kalimantan have emitted noxious haze to neighbouring countries in 1997, 2002, 2005 and 2008.
The haze in 1997 was one of the worst ever, as the fires burnt for months before they were put out, causing an estimated economic loss of US$4 billion to the region.
The severity of this year’s haze highlighted that little has been done despite the passage of time to eradicate this problem.
Indonesia authorities also face great difficulties in investigating the fires in the effort to bring guilty parties to justice.
“Quite a few (plantation) companies will put up a fight to prevent us (investigators) from entering their land to investigate,” said Indonesian fire investigator Bambang Hero Saharjo.
“Often, they (companies) also falsify their maps…making it difficult and time-consuming to verify the location of hotspots,” said Bambang.
Educate the educated
By Robin Low
When I was studying in Singapore, I too had felt the stress of exams. I did what everyone else was doing — memorizing notes, regurgitating textbooks, mugging through “10 year series assessment books” — and got good grades.
However, rather than focus on creativity, capability and intelligence, I find this approach favors diligent scholars. Our system is skewed so students who do well academically are given opportunities for highly paid government positions or entry into politics. The over emphasis on grades in an exam-centric system creates tremendous stress on students. This is because exams and streaming end up tied to the value of the people. No surprise many parents pay for private tuition and enrichment classes for their children.
In his latest National Day Rally speech, PM Lee acknowledged the current system was stressing parents and students and announced upcoming changes. But, will the changes be too little too late for the tiny red dot?
“Every School a Good School” sounds like a good start. The top 5 Junior Colleges in
Singapore produce 80% of the top scholars. This however, is because they only accept top students. It is socially unhealthy when most students in elite schools come from similar socio-economic backgrounds. This reinforces notions of exclusivity. It also threatens social mobility through education. (http://www.moe.gov.sg/initiatives/every-school-good-school/)
Because Singapore’s education system is centralized, best practices are shared and new “innovative ways” are introduced constantly. Based on this systematic approach, many students do very well in exams for Math and Science. However, people like Apple Co-founder Steve Wozniak have questioned Singapore’s creativity.
In 2006, the Ministry of Education launched a new policy: “Teach less, Learn More” to create a flexible system which promotes independent thinkers. According to feedback from teachers and parents, this drew mixed reviews. While teachers thought students spoke with greater confidence, some shared they still relied on rote learning to help students clear exams because assessments had remained the same. (http://www.nie.edu.sg/newsroom/media-coverage/2012/teach-less-learn-more-have-we-achieved-it )
A centralized bureaucratic education system poses many challenges. At planning stage, more initiatives seem ideal. However, implementation is a different story. “Innovative projects” are supposed to encourage students to be creative and to develop critical thinking. However, due to their training and pressure to maintain school rankings, well-meaning teachers may steer students towards scoring good grades for the project and remove most of the decision making process.
Because creativity and critical thinking are difficult to measure, the effectiveness of a new initiative can be judged on students’ feedback. While some new initiatives may give students room to do research and learn to think critically, many will not try them, as they are afraid mediocre grades will affect their future. Those who do try them may not like the ambiguity and lack of defined scope in the syllabus. This is the challenge in a grades oriented environment and the learning culture built up from young.
With too many reporting procedures and accountability structures to align schools with national direction, teachers spend more time on paperwork than teaching. They are also expected to think outside the box while performing well — within the box.
Society also has a part to play when it comes to “lack of creativity. Talent in the arts, sports, music, leadership ability, etc. is not sufficiently recognized. There may be a few outspoken and bold students but they are probably also labeled as trouble makers. In an orderly society that follows rules and regulations, creative people who do not conform get into trouble with the law. Local artists, Samantha Lo and Leslie Chew have got into trouble for expressing their views with art.
The challenge of Singapore’s education system goes beyond education. It will not happen by planning and through innovative ways of teaching and borrowing models from other countries will not work. It has to come from societal change and having more meaningful conversations with the people. Empowering citizens to co-create our future maybe the best move for a brighter future for Singapore.
VW's resignation: some clues better than some truths
By Kumaran Pillai
News Analysis
The exit of Vincent Wijeysingha from the Singapore Democratic Party can be traced to the change in the party’s political strategy in the last three to five years.
The party has steadily moved towards the centre, perhaps to win more votes. Wijeysingha gave me an interview some time ago and I remember asking him: What made you join the SDP?”
He said that back in 2007 the SDP had stated that it was in support of repealing 377A and it also reiterated that point in its vision:
“As a nation, we must not only show tolerance but also acceptance of our fellow citizens regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation, or political persuasion.”
In what appears to be an email exchange published on their website between John Tan, the Asst Secretary General of SDP, and a SDP supporter, John wrote:
“The SDP, on the other hand, while trying to be as practical as we can at some level, must constantly be guided by our foundational tenets. When we say equality for all, we mean equality for all.”
Prior to GE 2011, SDP often championed non-mainstream issues such as the abolition of the death penalty, repealing of 377A and promotion of free speech and assembly.
The party’s run-ins with the law were notable and their activists took pride that they made sacrifices for the greater good of the country.
All this stopped, partly due to the influx of new members who have begun to influence the core team with a more “moderate” positioning.
Transitioning from a radical left wing party to the middle is not an easy undertaking. It is a delicate process and sometime it requires a leadership change to make that paradigm shift.
Like other political parties, SDP looks unified from the outside; they look like a team with strongly-driven values of liberal democracy, but in actual they are split along the lines of morality. The irony is, while the liberals in the party saw Wijeysingha as the likely successor to Dr Chee Soon Juan, the conservatives thought that he was a liability.
Responding to Dr Balakrishnan’s gay agenda insinuations, party leader Chee Soon Juan said:
“We are not pursuing the gay agenda and none of our MPs will,” he says at the beginning of the video, and repeats himself near the end: “Will the SDP pursue the gay cause? I answer forthrightly and without equivocation: No.”
There was a perception among the party conservatives that the middle ground comprises those who are opposed to any extension of rights to the LGBT community and having a gay candidate would cost SDP precious votes.
To add insult to injury, some of the more statistically-inclined members have put a number to it. According to them, having Wijeysingha on board would mean a loss of 4 to 10 per cent of the popular vote.
Needless to say, the grapevine had it that SDP lost in Holland-Bukit Timah because of Wijeysingha’s sexuality.
There was also concern that his recent outing on his Facebook before the Pink Dot event would cost them more votes in the next election.
In order to mitigate the risks of losing the previous 20+ per cent vote swing, SDP on the other hand made a tactical move to “side-line” LGBT issues and to focus more on the bread and butter issues.
As recently as July 11, Chee posted this curious statement on his party’s website::
“I had stated in 2011 during the general elections that the SDP would not pursue a gay agenda. I say again: Neither the Party nor any of our members, including Vincent, will embark on a gay agenda.”
In pursuit of the political middle ground, it appears that the SDP has let down the LGBT community by rescinding on their liberal values. It is no longer guided by its “foundational tenets,” that there will be equality for all.
Wijeysingha found that the party he helped to build has shifted away from its core values. But he has vowed to bring those values, including equality for all, to the civil society space.
From a strategy point of view, SDP’s shift to the middle ground might look like an expedient political move. But it may not work.
Both Workers’ Party and the People’s Action Party have crowded that space… For the SDP to enter that fray at this juncture can be suicidal.
As Singapore politics matures, what might look like fringe causes can become vote winners in the years to come.
Look at how the Green Party has performed in Germany. Although they are far, far away from forming the government, they do influence politics in a big way.
SDP needs some patience and the will to stick to its principles to make headway in Singapore politics.
Maslow's tyranny and Singapore's needs
By Nazry Bahrawi
For his unwitting role in shaping Singapore, Abraham Maslow can be seen as the modern equivalent of Sang Nila Utama. Like the Hindu prince, the American psychologist was central to defining this island-state on the back of something imaginary.
If Sang Nila’s illusionary lion gave us our name, Maslow’s concept of human motivations is imprinted into our soul.
Popularly known as ‘Maslow’s hierarchy of needs’, this theory states that human needs are structured and incrementally fulfilled. We operate by first satisfying our basic physical needs such as sleep and food, then working our way through a series of other needs before finally seeking to attain self-actualisation through the pursuit of virtues like morality and creativity, among others.
Agreeing that material needs matter most when Singapore first gained independence, political elites were quick to profess economic pragmatism as our national philosophy. Policies were crafted to ensure that resource-scarce Singapore attracts foreign investment and stays that way.
Almost 50 years later, signs are suggesting that Maslow was not quite right – people do not necessarily pursue their needs in stages, but all at once.
Take the recent Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) survey that found Singaporeans expressing a desire for a less competitive and more compassionate society. Also consider the emergence of a greater number of ordinary Singaporeans championing non-economic, organic causes like the anti-death penalty campaign, LGBT rights and Internet freedom.
Things are changing even in the business sector, as more young Singaporeans venture out to set up SMEs with some degree of civic conscience. A good example is Poached, an online lifestyle magazine that injects their otherwise ‘fluff’ articles with a dose of social commentary.
Despite these indications, policymakers are not quite ready to rethink their appropriation of Maslow’s theory.
Having proposed that Singapore is fast becoming post-pragmatic at a closed-door conference three years ago, a senior political figure said to me that Singaporeans have not fully resolved their bread and butter issues. I distinctly remember him saying with conviction: “Recall what Maslow said.”
Newer political leaders are no different. Reacting to the above-mentioned IPS survey, MP Zainal Saparin was quoted as saying: “When ours was a growing economy, and survival was a key concern, there was a lot of emphasis on being hardworking, accumulating wealth, fighting for a better life.”
But contrary to Maslow’s postulation, Singapore is proving to be a place where even the poor dreams. We are capable of self-actualising even if we have not slept nor ate enough.
One possible way of sidestepping the tyranny of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is to look for alternative measures of progress. A viable example is the Social Progress Index (SPI) introduced just this year. The SPI tabulates national progress by measuring GDP growth in relation to social and environmental outcomes. Some ASEAN member-states like Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia have already become signatories to this index. Why not Singapore?
Another suggestion is to establish a national body that will fund serious study of the arts and humanities in the same manner that the National Research Foundation (NRF) and A*Star sponsor science and technological research. Such an institution will be different from the National Arts Council, which focuses on funding practitioners, because its aim is to build up a repertoire of cultural critics and experts who can help Singaporeans make sense and appreciate this much-ignored aspect of human life.
This disjuncture at this juncture of the Singapore story has placed us in danger of losing the plot. What will be our next move?
Nazry is a lecturer at the Singapore University of Technology and Design, and research fellow at the Middle East Institute-NUS.