COEs were introduced as a means to control the vehicle population growth. The fact that COE prices have risen on the back of a lower supply is an indication that it is working as it is supposed to.
Yet we find in today's headlines that the government has answered the call to ease the COE supply crunch. Is the government trying to win friends/voter support by appearing to be uber responsive to public demands? Is the torturer who is keeping your head under water your friend when he lets you up for a gasp of air?
What is more troubling is that for this relatively minor matter (compared to other issues) of the COE supply, the government is prepared to kick the can down the road by deferring what needs to be done. Who was it that said the government will not shy away from hard decisions? None other than our inestimable DPM Teo Chee Hean...
The very same outstanding individual that will tell you in a white paper at the end of the year that Singapore needs at least an 8 million strong population. Given that we are already having COE problems at a 5 plus million population, are we to assume that the additional 3 million new Singaporeans will not have aspirations to own cars? Will NOT be ALLOWED to own cars as a condition of citizenship?
In the recent Hougang by-election, the quality of Mr Png's candidacy was brought up. Is Mr Png the 'BEST' WP candidate? The jury is still out pending his future performance. Is Mr Lui Tuck Yew the best minister for the Ministry of Transport? In this case, I believe the verdict is already in. What do you think?
Thursday 31 May 2012
Friday 25 May 2012
Being Inclusive is Apparently an Exclusive Activity
"Inclusiveness" as we all know is the new buzzword from our government's PR spin machinery. The government is hoping this inclusiveness meme will help to address the wage/wealth gap that is apparently fraying the bonds of society here in Singapore.
Yet, strangely, all the effort thus far (community games etc...) has focused exclusively on the relatively poorer HDB heartlands. It would seem the government's strategy is to cultivate inclusiveness only amongst HDB residents themselves.
Citizens living in gated private condominiums and landed property are thus 'unfairly' excluded from these activities. They have either been forgotten or have their own community bonding activities exclusive to them.
One would think that efforts to address the wage/wealth gap should be directed at bringing together these two segments of society together. Either the well-off don't want to bond with the unwashed poorer masses or the government is making some assumptions they are not telling us about.
For a start, perhaps exclusive clubs like the SICC can open their grounds for community bonding activities during the weekends. Who knows, they might be able to recruit some new caddy talent from among the participants!
Yet, strangely, all the effort thus far (community games etc...) has focused exclusively on the relatively poorer HDB heartlands. It would seem the government's strategy is to cultivate inclusiveness only amongst HDB residents themselves.
Citizens living in gated private condominiums and landed property are thus 'unfairly' excluded from these activities. They have either been forgotten or have their own community bonding activities exclusive to them.
One would think that efforts to address the wage/wealth gap should be directed at bringing together these two segments of society together. Either the well-off don't want to bond with the unwashed poorer masses or the government is making some assumptions they are not telling us about.
For a start, perhaps exclusive clubs like the SICC can open their grounds for community bonding activities during the weekends. Who knows, they might be able to recruit some new caddy talent from among the participants!
Tuesday 22 May 2012
Taking a Life is a Capital Offence
Murder as we know, is a serious matter. Making a new life should also be taken no less seriously. Acting Minister for MCYS Mr Chan Choon Seng was reported in today's paper as saying that Singapore will have to make some difficult social choices if it wanted to solve its twin problems of a low fertility rate and low wages.
He suggests that to 'cure' our low TFR (total fertility rate), we may have to accept women having babies outside of wedlock. That's not really a problem I think. If we were to make it legal for middle aged and older men to have sex with teenage girls, we should be well on our way to increasing our TFR. Unfortunately, instead, the men are being humiliated in public and jailed.
Having children is a responsibility that comes with a lifetime's worth of commitment. Mr Chan in following the governments script is simply looking at the numbers, specifically at the number of working adults supporting the elderly which apparently will fall from 7.5 now to 2.5 in 2030. He however is making a very big assumption and that is: WORKING Adult. What guarantee does he have that if we were to make babies with gay abandon now that in 2030, all of them will have jobs to support the elderly?
Today, in some Eurozone countries, the youth unemployment rate exceeds 50%. What contingency plans does the government have if come 2030 we face a similar if not much worse situation here in Singapore? Instead of just having an elderly problem we will additionally have the problem of looking after these jobless adults. Or was this scenario never even considered? We should expect better in a plan coming from an ex-SAF general...
As for raising the S&C charges in order to pay cleaners higher wages, I think Singaporeans would first need more transparency on how existing S&C monies are being spent. The ratio of cleaners to households is almost negligibly low, so we should be able to pay them more at current S&C rates. It is not uncommon to come across frivolous/unnecessary works being done in HDB estates If money is more carefully spent, I think we can already pay our cleaners (most of whom are foreigners by the way) better!
I'm not sure why an Acting Minister of MCYS is espousing on these issues. My unsolicited advice is that a potential PM should have a mind of his own and not just blindly follow the script he is given. You are no longer in the army and this is not a Brigade exercise where you follow the mission scenario to the letter. This is the real world and you are not playing a war game anymore.
He suggests that to 'cure' our low TFR (total fertility rate), we may have to accept women having babies outside of wedlock. That's not really a problem I think. If we were to make it legal for middle aged and older men to have sex with teenage girls, we should be well on our way to increasing our TFR. Unfortunately, instead, the men are being humiliated in public and jailed.
Having children is a responsibility that comes with a lifetime's worth of commitment. Mr Chan in following the governments script is simply looking at the numbers, specifically at the number of working adults supporting the elderly which apparently will fall from 7.5 now to 2.5 in 2030. He however is making a very big assumption and that is: WORKING Adult. What guarantee does he have that if we were to make babies with gay abandon now that in 2030, all of them will have jobs to support the elderly?
Today, in some Eurozone countries, the youth unemployment rate exceeds 50%. What contingency plans does the government have if come 2030 we face a similar if not much worse situation here in Singapore? Instead of just having an elderly problem we will additionally have the problem of looking after these jobless adults. Or was this scenario never even considered? We should expect better in a plan coming from an ex-SAF general...
As for raising the S&C charges in order to pay cleaners higher wages, I think Singaporeans would first need more transparency on how existing S&C monies are being spent. The ratio of cleaners to households is almost negligibly low, so we should be able to pay them more at current S&C rates. It is not uncommon to come across frivolous/unnecessary works being done in HDB estates If money is more carefully spent, I think we can already pay our cleaners (most of whom are foreigners by the way) better!
I'm not sure why an Acting Minister of MCYS is espousing on these issues. My unsolicited advice is that a potential PM should have a mind of his own and not just blindly follow the script he is given. You are no longer in the army and this is not a Brigade exercise where you follow the mission scenario to the letter. This is the real world and you are not playing a war game anymore.
Sunday 20 May 2012
Why DPM Teo Chee Hean Is Not The Best Man To Be The Next PM (or PM-in-waiting)
Firstly, he is our equivalent of Prince Charles, too young to leave the scene but yet likely too old to occupy the position for any meaningful period of time to make any significant contribution as PM. So why bother? Might as well invest the effort in grooming someone else (younger) who will last longer in the position.
Secondly, does he have the EQ to connect and schmooze with politicians on the international stage? He may have some exposure to regional politics but is deficient when it comes to experience on the larger international arena. He just doesn't have enough political depth/ballast/cachet to make any impression outside of the local context.
Thirdly, does he have the intellectual depth for the demands of the office? If his latest remarks on the Hougang by-election are anything to go by, longer term strategic thinking is not his strong suite. In referring to the WP by-passing Mr Png Eng Huat for the NMP post he asks: "If he (Mr Png) was their best member, why didn't they choose him?"
I do not presume to know the internal workings of the WP, but a reasonable explaination is they are planning for their party's future leadership renewal. It is in their (WP's) interest on balance that the younger Mr Gerald Giam be given the opportunity to be exposed to politics in parliament. This is forward thinking and would be in stark contrast to the PAP if they should so decide to anoint him (Mr Teo) as the next PM-in-waiting.
This may just be Mr Teo grabbing at straws for anything even remotely plausible to try to persuade the voters of Hougang to vote for Mr Desmond Choo. But given his earlier remarks on telling the TP (traffic police) to be tougher on traffic violations by owners of supercars (laws should be applied equally to everyone), it gives one pause for doubt.
As for Mr Desmond Choo, he is presenting himself as a messiah (with an ego and skin thick enough to match) sent to save the residents of Hougang. Unfortunately, from the few clips shown of him on TV, he isn't coming across as being very sincere. In fact, I'm not sure even he himself believes in the BS he is saying. Most of the deficiencies he has promised to address are caused by the very government formed from his own party. If the government had been doing a better job, these 'problems' should not be plaguing the residents of Hougang in the first place!
Secondly, does he have the EQ to connect and schmooze with politicians on the international stage? He may have some exposure to regional politics but is deficient when it comes to experience on the larger international arena. He just doesn't have enough political depth/ballast/cachet to make any impression outside of the local context.
Thirdly, does he have the intellectual depth for the demands of the office? If his latest remarks on the Hougang by-election are anything to go by, longer term strategic thinking is not his strong suite. In referring to the WP by-passing Mr Png Eng Huat for the NMP post he asks: "If he (Mr Png) was their best member, why didn't they choose him?"
I do not presume to know the internal workings of the WP, but a reasonable explaination is they are planning for their party's future leadership renewal. It is in their (WP's) interest on balance that the younger Mr Gerald Giam be given the opportunity to be exposed to politics in parliament. This is forward thinking and would be in stark contrast to the PAP if they should so decide to anoint him (Mr Teo) as the next PM-in-waiting.
This may just be Mr Teo grabbing at straws for anything even remotely plausible to try to persuade the voters of Hougang to vote for Mr Desmond Choo. But given his earlier remarks on telling the TP (traffic police) to be tougher on traffic violations by owners of supercars (laws should be applied equally to everyone), it gives one pause for doubt.
As for Mr Desmond Choo, he is presenting himself as a messiah (with an ego and skin thick enough to match) sent to save the residents of Hougang. Unfortunately, from the few clips shown of him on TV, he isn't coming across as being very sincere. In fact, I'm not sure even he himself believes in the BS he is saying. Most of the deficiencies he has promised to address are caused by the very government formed from his own party. If the government had been doing a better job, these 'problems' should not be plaguing the residents of Hougang in the first place!
Thursday 3 May 2012
If You Never Admit You Are Wrong Does It Make You Right?
We have :
And the latest gem from :
To date, we have yet to see the government make ANY hard decisions. All we have seen thus far are at best minor tweaks and the easy let's kick the can further down the road type.
Prison does not reform the criminal. To truly begin the reformation process, the criminal has to first admit guilt and wrong doing BEFORE the process of redemption can occur. The government has YET to admit that it had made ANY mistakes with its policies in the past. All we have heard to date are excuses trying to justify its past actions.
Indeed when an opposition MP made the suggestion during parlimentary debate that recent moves by the government to address issues like employment, housing and transport, were due to electoral losses, government MPs robustly denied it. It would appear that next to saying you are sorry, admitting you are wrong is a very difficult thing to do.
Without admission of guilt, it is very difficult for the government to truly embark on corrective policies. As it is, the government does not yet appear to realise that with each (incredulous) attempt to justify its actions, it is losing more of its credibility.
As an act of penance, perhaps we could have the cabinet ministers shave their heads bald and walk barefoot around the padang (or Marina Bay!) three times as part of this years' National Day parade. Those ministers who are TRULY repentant could kneel down every three steps and bang their foreheads on the ground. All in favour of this idea can spread it via their facebook friends or twitter feed. Now, THAT would be one NDP I won't want to miss :)
Mr Lui, Minister of Transport saying: MRT breakdowns are unavoidable
Mr Tharman, Minister of Finance,Manpower,DPM saying: Average Singaporeans are not affected by inflation
Mr Teo, Minister of Defence, DPM saying: Government is not afraid to make hard decisions
And the latest gem from :
Mr Khaw, Minister of National Development: HDB hasn't shrunk flat sizes.
To date, we have yet to see the government make ANY hard decisions. All we have seen thus far are at best minor tweaks and the easy let's kick the can further down the road type.
Prison does not reform the criminal. To truly begin the reformation process, the criminal has to first admit guilt and wrong doing BEFORE the process of redemption can occur. The government has YET to admit that it had made ANY mistakes with its policies in the past. All we have heard to date are excuses trying to justify its past actions.
Indeed when an opposition MP made the suggestion during parlimentary debate that recent moves by the government to address issues like employment, housing and transport, were due to electoral losses, government MPs robustly denied it. It would appear that next to saying you are sorry, admitting you are wrong is a very difficult thing to do.
Without admission of guilt, it is very difficult for the government to truly embark on corrective policies. As it is, the government does not yet appear to realise that with each (incredulous) attempt to justify its actions, it is losing more of its credibility.
As an act of penance, perhaps we could have the cabinet ministers shave their heads bald and walk barefoot around the padang (or Marina Bay!) three times as part of this years' National Day parade. Those ministers who are TRULY repentant could kneel down every three steps and bang their foreheads on the ground. All in favour of this idea can spread it via their facebook friends or twitter feed. Now, THAT would be one NDP I won't want to miss :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)