North Star News Vol 3 2008

2009-02-27T21:43:00.000-08:00

No one can claim all credit for Singapore’s achievements

There has been considerable hype these days about the perceived decoupling of the Asian economy from the Western markets, especially that of the US. However, despite the growing markets of China and India in recent years, a high percentage of exports from the SEA nations is still programmed westwards. The Asian Development Bank estimated that about 61% of the total Asian exports are eventually consumed by the US, Japan and Europe. With such a high “dependency”, we have yet to veer away from the colds and hiccups of the West. For instance, their persistent sub-prime woes have dampened consumer demand over the last two quarters.

In ASEAN, the record hikes in fuel prices have resulted in social disquiet in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia and the Philippines. Here at home, the inflation rate shot up through the roof, touching 7.5%, the highest in 25 years. As usual, the seemingly resilient Singaporeans choose to suffer in silence, apparently grateful to the Government for having achieved a first-world living standard – or whatever that may mean! Indeed, an external observer may have difficulties in trying to understand the Singaporean psyche.

Soon after the last General Elections, the Institute of Policy Studies conducted a phone inquiry with about 1000 respondents representing the universe. Some analysis were made to profile the respondents into different groups: the conservative; pluralist, and swing group. Generally, it was found that those aged 65 and above were for the pro-government status quo. More pluralists were found among those in the higher socio-economic classes and those between 40 – 54 years of age. Almost half of the “post-independence generation” were in the swing category.

Politically, the respondents vouched for the need for efficient government, for fairness in government policies, for check & balances in Parliament, and for the need to have an elected opposition. 83% considered them to be very important. At the same time, 56% felt that “estate upgrading” was not important, and 51% disagreed that the vote for the upgrading policy was fairly conducted.

There has been a marked departure amongst the electorate from its previous somewhat blind loyalty to the Government and the mechanisms of the ruling party. The younger generations appear to be more rational in their assessment of everyday politics. Indeed, many have expressed their opinions openly through the mass media. For example, Mr See Leong Kit (ST, late July) rightly pointed out that “no one group has a monopoly on ideas or can claim all credit for Singapore’s achievement.” He further challenged the politicians to consider whether to continue breeding “yes-man” citizens who will let them govern ‘their country their way’ or sincerely nurture thinking Singaporeans who will team up with them to govern ‘our country our way.’

Another forumer, Mr Jacob Tan (ST, early August) appealed for the original spirit and intent to spur political growth by reverting the mega-sized GRCs back to their original size of three. He felt that the GRCs are now seen as another tool by the PAP to consolidate its rule, and that the political integrity of the MP is being threatened. Under PAP’s manipulation, the GRC has ballooned from its original size of three when it was first introduced in 1988, to a super size of six in the last GE in 2006.

Thus, the hope for Singapore lies mainly with the younger, better educated, internet-savvy Singaporeans who have refused to be hoodwinked by the propaganda of the ruling clique inspite of its vast grass-root machinery. Indeed, it’s an open secret that the PAP’s once strangle-hold grip of the electorate has now been considerably weakened. The wind of change has been blowing quite strongly in this part of the world, causing dramatic changes in Australia, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia, Pakistan and recently even in Nepal. Singapore is next on the cards. And it’s going to be good for you, for us, for all Singaporeans!•

Are Foreigners a Boon or a Bane?

Recently, two of our NS men unfortunately collapsed and died during normal training exercises. It was the latest addition to a long list of statistics regarding abnormal deaths within our comparatively “young” armed forces.

The SAF then imposed a three-day break from all trainings to reassess itself, and to see if anything can be done to reduce such unhappy occurrences. Despite having the best air force in this part of the world, with the undisputed capability to inflict considerable pain to any foolhardy invader, our servicemen would still be required to withstand the stress and dangers of armed conflicts.

One wonders if three generations of peacetime pamper have really produced “a sheltered stock of softies”, according to an astute foreign observer. Even if this somewhat frank observation is only partially correct, the nation’s security planners would still have a difficult time. To whom then can we truly entrust our security, especially when even the once-feared gurkhas can allow a limping prisoner to escape from a top security detention camp?

Despite being better fed and bred, our post-independence citizens are somehow seen as “poorer” stock, in terms of tolerance, perseverance and community spirit. This perception is universally shared by the older generation. In the Singapore context where society is tightly monitored by the Establishment, most public expressions are skillfully filtered and channeled towards common, pro-government viewpoints.

Daily Diet Of Consumerism
Our youth are raised on a daily diet of consumerism and instant gratification, glorified by suitably enticing images from our State-affiliated mass media. Of course, our government leaders contributed their patronages with their swanky offices and opulent lifestyles befitting their ransom-sized remunerations. Thus, the bulk of our people are seized with a focused vengeance to seek materialism. The ceaseless need to catch up with peer pressure has become their foremost priority in life.

Consequently, those delusions and pseudo-realities bring about new records in failed marriages and divorces. Reproduction suffered, dropping below 1.2, denting the Establishment’s dream of upping our population by another two million. Apparently, being ‘realistic’ had been a long forgotten word in the vocabulary of our “first-world” government.

Well, what we can’t get from within, we get from without. Previously, immigration opportunities were mainly offered to the “better class” of foreigners in terms of maturity, education, finance and business acumen. Nowadays, virtually anyone without a criminal record can be accepted under the newly liberalized regulations. Inspite of their initial cultural “roughage” – in speech, mannerism and attitude – those new entrants would eventually be assimilated into the society. It is hoped that cross breeding would ultimately improve our physical stock.

Every 5th Person A Foreigner
Currently, almost 22% of the population are of a foreign stock. Should we manage to hit the target of 6.5 million within the next decade or earlier, that figure would climb to 40%. Already the sudden surge of foreign presence in our society has given rise to legitimate concerns over our nation-hood. How would Singaporeans come to terms with this rapidly changing multi-nationalism aspect of our “world cosmopolitan city”?

Why is the Establishment so intent on “diluting” the Singaporean identity per se with a multi-national mix? Are there any ulterior motives, political or otherwise? How would the newcomers contribute to our nation building efforts? Apart from overcrowding the already squeeze tight dot of an island, their additional demand for facility usage can only worsen the situation. Anyone can just take an MRT ride, to understand the crunch.

On one hand, the “internationalization” of our nation can also be viewed as a defensive posture to counter-weight our “giant” neighbours. On the other hand, it can also be a devious attempt to consolidate the present rule of our political elites. Sun Tzu’s Art of War lists Confusion and Diversion as two of the most effective techniques in both combating the enemy and controlling the populace.

Despite claims to the contrary, the Government’s objective are less transparent than they are apparent. Singaporeans have always been kept on a tight leash, since independence 43 years ago. There is little initiative for PAP to reverse the status quo, especially since it serves them well. Never mind, external concerns over their tight control grips. With their effective control over the treasury, the media and the grassroot organizations, they can be quite formidable in paralyzing the people with a generous dosage of threats laced with fear.

Corruption, Collusion, Cronyism
However, Nature abhors status quo, for Change is its Siamese twin. The Wind of Change has been blowing quite forcefully particularly over the Asia-Pacific region: Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, Nepal, Thailand, and Malaysia. No real improvement can take place, without first having change. And violence often precede change; history has seen countless consequences of pain and punishment. However, change can also be initiated by overcoming fear. The Malaysian recently demonstrated an excellent example of standing up against corruption, collusion and cronyism.

Alas, Singaporeans are generally known to be pretty docile – or rather paralyzed with fear -- thanks to the consistency of the depolitization programs. Over the past decade, the people have also witnessed various personality deitification attempts. For reasons untold, of course. But it does not require rocket science to see it through as an open secret. The question here is just how long can Singaporeans continue to be intimidated?

It depends! Perhaps, the newcomers with their rougher and tougher spirit, coupled with the fact that they had not been exposed to those insidious conditioning programs, can help out. Together, we can generate sufficient strength to lead the people out of its political lethargy. This could thus be the newcomers’ best gift to the people of Singapore. •

The Politics of Madness

Last week, a friend brought to my attention some newspaper articles profiling Chee Soon Juan after he was asent to jail for contempt of court. One piece suggested Dr Chee could be suffering from antisocial personality disorder. This conclusion was based on Dr Chee’s behaviour that had matched the symptoms of a condition that the writer had gleaned from a medical website.

Another piece in another newspaper, with some clever quotes here and there, even imputed that Dr Chee could be mentally challenged and might even be psychotic. I find those articles distasteful because the tone was to run down a person while attempting to look objective. It is one thing to disagree with a person’s ideology, his methods and his political agenda. By all means, attack his thoughts, his values and his principles. By all means, criticise him with the harshest of words on his methods and his agenda. But to suggest that a person may be mentally not right when there has never been a psychiatric examination, is the meanest thing to do, especially from journalists whom the public expect to be factual and objective. Where is the medical evidence?

I have previously worked in Woodbridge Hospital, a psychiatric institution. Before we make a diagnosis of a patient, he needs to undergo a psychiatric examination. This requires one to two hours of examination of the patient by the psychiatrist, another one to two hours of interview with his relatives, some days of observation in the ward, some psychological testing by a psychologist and a conference of doctors and psychologists before a firm diagnosis is made. How on earth then could a lay person have the temerity to make any claim on a medical diagnosis, especially a psychiatric one? If we can make diagnosis from medical websites, then everyone in this world would find himself or herself mentally ill. There are implications in such damaging articles and I do not know if the writers realize this.

In my opinion, it is all right for one politician to call another politician mad. I give leeway to political polemics. However, when writers, who are supposed to be objective and factual and not combatants in the political arena, take up the hatchet to demolish someone in this manner, I sigh and ask: As a society and a nation, where are we heading?

On reading the articles, I recall the use of psychiatry to suppress political dissent in some countries where, as New York Law School Professor Michael Perlin, an expert on this form of suppression put it, “a patient’s conviction that the state must be changed was seen as an indication of mental illness.” In such places, “If you protest politically, you demonstrate by that an absence of instinct for self-preservation, or if you pursue a legal complaint against a corrupted or repressive official, that’s a sign of mental illness.”

According to Professor Perlin, throwing dissidents into mental hospitals rather than prisons has three advantages:
a) It avoids the already limited procedural safeguards of a criminal trial.
b) It stigmatizes people to subordinate them,
c) It confines dissenters indefinitely at the State’s discretion.

Fortunately we are not in such a state. So far we have not used psychiatry as a weapon to intimidate or discredit citizens who tangle with the authorities. We have not criminalised dissidents or accused them of suffering from “Reformist delusions”. I know our psychiatrists very well. They are very ethical professionals and none of them are likely to put a psychiatric label freely on those individuals who hold strong vocal opposition to government policies.

I, therefore, hope our journalists will learn to be similarly responsible. Surely, all of us, including our journalists, do not want to see us becoming like Russia where, as recent as July last year, Larissa Arap, a Russian journalist, was declared as suffering from paranoid personality disorder and was thrown into a mental hospital for writing an article for a newspaper produced by Gary Kasparov’s dissent movement that focused on the treatment of children in psychiatric hospitals? According to MindFreedom director David Oaks said, “If a journalist and psychiatric critic and political party leader can be locked up in a psychiatric institution, then no one is safe.”
I am not a great fan of Dr Chee Soon Juan’s methods. Many years ago, when he was about to go on his hunger strike, Mr Chiam See Tong, his SDP party chief called me and asked me to try and talk him out of his impending action. I tried but failed and I told Chiam he was too obstinate to change his mind. He may be a stubborn person but that does not mean he is mad. Until a person is properly diagnosed, I think it is wrong to impute a psychiatric label on him.

Furthermore, by using a mental illness label to character assassinate a person, we would be perpetuating the notion that a mentally ill person has the status of an outcast and is something that our can society can do without. Aren’t we trying to de-stigmatise our mental patients?

Marina Trutko a nuclear scientist, a vocal activist and public defender for several years who had also been forcibly taken and thrown into a psychiatric hospital, knows what it is like to have a psychiatric label. “Now I have this stamp on my forehead that I am a psychiatric patient,” she said. “I will always have this medical record now. That means I cannot go to court because judges say I’m a psycho and call for an ambulance.” I hope the articles merely reflect the thoughtlessness of the writers and nothing else. Let us also hope that imputation of mentally abnormality will not become a popular way to discredit vocal people who hold alternative views. It’s not too late to save ourselves from dropping into the gutter. Just learn to be fair. •

Super Salaries - When will the self - justifications stop?

Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong once said that “there is never a good time to implement salary increases for Ministers and senior public servants.” More so at a time of hyper inflation, rising cost and diminishing value of our take-home pay.

Their latest salary hike, approved and passed by Parliament in April 2007, of between 4% to 21% had seen the salaries of the Prime Minister (PM), Senior Minister (SM) and Minister Mentor (MM) being raised to $3.09 million annually.

That was only the first phase of the planned increment. The second phase will kick in by end-2008 – pushing their combined salaries by another 21.64% to around $3.76 million annually. The PAP leaders justified it as part of the Government’s continuing efforts to retain talent, namely themselves.

Can You Believe It? In view of rising retrenchments worldwide, shrinking value of money, global uncertainty and escalating fuel cost, it is hard to accept the SM’s argument that the series of planned increases will ensure that the salaries of public servants will be competitive with those in the private sector. Instead, it will become over-paid and hyper-inflated, more so with the anticipated year-end hike.

Many previously top earners in the private sector are now jobless? Most bankers related to Citibank, Bear Stearns, UBS, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers are now clinging on to their jobs for their dear lives. Theirs is not an iron rice bowl –
like what our local Ministers and civil servants seem to have.

They are subjected to the vulgarities of market forces. Should the earnings of their companies fall, their CEO’s will most likely get the sack – as seen in the likes of Charles Price, former CEO of Citibank last year, and most recently Martin Sullivan of AIG. They were sacked for poor operational performance. Same for General Electric. How long will their CEO Jeffery Immelt survive?

But this manner of removal and job uncertainty apparently never happen in PAP land, regardless how badly the Minister fare in his portfolio. Instead, the failures or short-comings will merely be acknowledged as genuine mistakes on the part of their subordinates. And then life goes on.

It is one thing to acknowledge that their members can be protected and not dismissed for job failures; it is totally callous and incomprehensible to expect that their salaries will continue to rise up (by end-2008) by a ridiculous 20% jump. Especially so, when most average Singaporeans are suffering. They are seen struggling to make ends meet, and extending the value of their limited take-home pays by buying cheaper frozen meats, switching to cheaper house-brand products, eating out less often, and taking more public transport to work.

Are the salary increases for Members of Parliament justified too? The table above shows a salary scale of around $225,000 annually. It is not reasonable that they should be paid full-time salaries for part-time work – considering that Parliament does not normally sit for more than 3 days every month, except during budget debate sessions. The weekly meet-the-people sessions held by the MPs are their personal obligations to their wards, to stay in touch with the electorate, and to solicit their electoral support. These areas are part of the job description of being an MP.

Just ask yourself. How many Singapore citizens and residents, working full time day jobs (or even 2 jobs) earn more than $60,000 a year? Statistics from the Inland Revenue Authority show that 60% of Singaporean residents with full-time jobs, each earn below $60,000 per annum. It is therefore incredible that the PAP Government should remunerate the MPs with an absurd amount of salary for their part-time work.

Ordinary wage-earners are currently reworking their home budgets to cope with costlier food, transport, cooking gas, petrol, utilities, rice and other necessities. Many will find no time to be concerned with the excessive millions paid to those Ministers and top civil servants – which altogether number a total of 351 persons.

The intended wage increases will add another $37.6 million to the total wage bill for top public-sector leaders, to $228.2 million for those 351 officials. It is no longer “just a plate of char-kway teow from every Singaporean” as claimed by MM Lee when he first justified the salary increases in the early 90s. That plate of “char-kway-teow” has now become an expensive menu with prawns, lobsters, abalones and shark-fin.

Singapore had scored another world first record: having the highest pay for a public official. With such consistently high salary adjustments, it is only fair and natural for the people to expect a high value performance from our Government leaders, as equitable returns for their hard-earned tax dollars. And that being so, it is perhaps high time to start headhunting for renowned but retired world politicians to come and run Singapore. The current constant inbreeding amongst the PAP ranks can be detrimental to the nation in the long run – as it is right now, they’re very, very expensive; and they can do no wrong!

Singapore has always welcomed qualified foreign talents to work and live here, and ultimately be assimilated into our society. There is thus no reason why better experienced but less expensive world leaders cannot be invited to help run Singapore. This is a real challenge, if not for the PAP leaders, then for all Singaporeans everywhere. •

Appointment Annual Pay 2007 Annual Pay 2008 % Annual Change

President 3,187,100 3,870,000 21.43
Prime Minister 3,091,200 3,760,000 21.64
Minister/Sr Perm Secretary (MR4) 1,593,500 1,940,000 21.74
Entry Superscale Grade (SR9) 384,000 398,000 3.65
Member of Parliament 216,300 225,000 4.02

More People-Orientated Policies Required

Singapore has been through numerous periods of ups and downs. Unfortunately this year, it is in the midst of economic uncertainty, despite official predictions of positive GDP growth. Globally, inflation in both food and fuel has affected the life of people everywhere. Singaporeans are no exception. They suffer the tension of seeing the diminishing value of their incomes and savings. Opportunities for local entrepreneurs are also lost daily, as the inflation rate seems to climb faster than their incomes.

Singaporeans also have to face the high competition for jobs, the increase in daily expenditure on public transport and basic necessities – with the installation of more ERP gantries and the increment of their rates at the same time, as well as the increased GST charges. Singapore has been successful in global markets, and in attracting foreign investments which have contributed to our economic growth. Most local properties have appreciated in value. It is also easier to make purchases on credit -- credit cards are comparatively easy to apply and use. But not everyone is benefiting. A recent MOM report estimated that only about 40% of all newly created jobs went the local workforce, many of whom got lower paid jobs.

Replacing Local Workers
The mass media reported that though the local market had a somewhat positive growth, most SMEs face a tremendous stress over the jump in operational costs coupled with declining business volume, as a result of fuel price hikes, increased space rentals, increased ERP rates, and even competition from our own GLCs. Most companies (even large foreign ones) have little option, but to trim their operational costs by passing the increased costs to the consumer, by retrenchment, by reducing workers’ pay, by adopting a flexible pay scheme, and by replacing local workers with lower paid foreign ones, as part of their survival strategy. Some even chose to close shop to avoid greater losses.

The National Solidarity Party (NSP) has with its limited resources, extended help to several low income groups with some assistance and contributions from certain NGOs. The NSP has also proposed to the Government, through the mass media, to consider the reduction or even total exemption of the GST charges on certain basic food items. It would also be a great help to local SMEs with the deduction or removal of tax on diesel, and the provision of subsidies on ERP charges. Employers should be encouraged to give preference to the local workforce. These policies would initiate keener competition, and better motivation for organizational growth. They would then contribute to the nation’s economic expansion. Such policies will attract more foreign investments, and at the same time moderate the jobs competition with our highly skilled workforce.

Many Poor Left Out
The PAP Government has promised to work for the continuous growth of our GDP, but has to be reminded of the consistent plight of the lower-income groups, many of whom have contributed to national development in their own ways. Still, many poor citizens have somehow been left out from the Government’s “public assistance” schemes. The people are more concerned with having steady jobs with steady pays, instead of those PA schemes, which are rigidly constructed and subjectively applied, albeit to discourage abuse but consequently rendered with little or no compassion.

Singaporeans face a consistently level of stress each day, with more and more concerns piling up. These have correspondingly made life in general less and less tolerable. If Singapore is to have a more equitable level of growth for both the nation and its people, the Government must inevitably implement more “people-orientated” policies to generate a widespread positive effect for all concerned. •

Are we closer & closer to Fascism?

Fascism is a form of totalitarian government that had its birth in 1922 when Italy was then under the dictator Benito Mussolini. It is characterized by a highly centralized, autocratic regime, regimentation of national life, promotion of nationalistic sentiments, and a subtle subordination of the people to the State.

Emphasis is given to the structural hierarchy of both the State and the Party. There are duplication at several levels, to the extent that the distinction of camp leadership becomes blurred. Its similarity with communism can be seen in the organization of the State, the concentration of leadership in the hands of an elite group, the one-party system with considerable stress on party discipline, and the centralized control/influence of thought and behaviour through State apparatus such as the security institutions, the mass media, and the grassroot organizations.

Fascism acknowledges the importance of economic development, and recognises the interdependence of labour and entrepreneurship. In fact, it institutionalized the concept of tripartitism, with the State (and/or its representative) as the “arbitrator”.
In his article “Fascism Anyone” which appeared in the ‘Free Inquiry’ (a journal of humanist thought), Dr Lawrence Britt, a renowned political scientist, listed several critical features of Fascism including:

1) Obsession with National Security - the use of fear is widely used as a motivational and justification tool by the Government over the masses.

2) Continuing Nationalistic Fervour - consistent use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia such as flags and banners.

3) Using enemies as a Unifying Cause - the people are often rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe such as communalists, liberals, communists, socialists, terrorists, etc.

4) Disdain for Human Rights - mainly due to the fear of enemies and the need for security, the people are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases such as imprisonment without trial, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

5) Supremacy of the Military - even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of Government funding. Soldiers and the military service are glamorized.

6) Mass Media is Controlled
- direct and indirect control by the Government, through an array of water-tight regulations, coupled with sympathetic media spokesperson. Censorship is not uncommon, whenever it suits the regime.

7) Corporate Power is Protected
- industrial and business bigwigs are often closely linked with Government leaders, thus creating a mutually beneficial Government-business relationship and power elite.

8) Obsession with Crime & Punishment
- the police and judiciary are given widespread power to enforce laws with heavy fines, mandatory canings, harsh jail terms and other punitive measures.

9) Cronyism & Corruption
- State institutions often are governed by groups of friends, relatives and associates who appoint or support one another, with suppressed accountability and transparency.

10) Unfair Elections
- highly manipulated with threats, use of legislations to control or influence the voters, boundary gerrymandering, smear campaigns, character assassinations, hounding of opposition candidates, and media manipulation. Law suits are also common.

How really closed are we to fascism is anyone’s guess. We are sometimes portrayed, quite generously, to be a liberal democracy. One then wonders if it’s not a new but thinly disguised term for fascism. •

Up, Up & Away

Over the past one and the half years, since the last elections, life in our little red dot of a country has been anything but generally one of stress, anxiety and uncertainty. Our cost-of-living shot up to 7.5% in May, the highest in 26 years. Thanks to the PAP Government for leading the way by thrusting up the GST rate by a massive 40% which netted an extra $990 million, virtually immediately after their “resounding” victory at the polls. They were also smart enough to raise their own remunerations, not much later, by another massive 15% - 20%, to help cushion the impact of the anticipated rising costs.

Then came the explanations for their inconsiderate actions, followed by attempts to pacify the bewildered populace. The blame was conveniently cast on factors beyond their control –- of course -- namely the sub-prime crisis in the West and the blooming price of fuel oil. One smart aleck of a minister even suggested that the poor could substitute rice with tapioca or sweet potato! Harvard-trained scholars groomed in posh, aircon ivory towers can be pretty ignorant of wet market prices at the ground. Both tapioca and sweet potatoes are often more expensive than rice. Some simple checks with hawkers, before blaring and blasting, could save loads of embarrassment.

Dow Jones said the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased by 7.7% in May, on a month-on-month basis. The Singapore Purchasing Index (SPI) also slid for the 6th consecutive month, the lowest since December 2001, owing to a decrease in new orders and output. A survey by DP Information Group showed that Pharmaceuticals were down by 48.5%, Electricals by 30.6%, and Semiconductors by 12.6%.

Unemployment Rate Up
Factory output was down by 12.8% in May, compared to last May. It was the biggest fall in 7 years. Retrenchments went up, and the unemployment rate grew to 2%, up from 1.7% last December. And when employers tried cutting costs in order to survive, workers’ woes escalated further when their remunerations and work benefits declined correspondingly.

Fuel oil prices jetted to a record US$144 per barrel by end-June, despite Saudi Arabia’s promise to increase production. Subsequently, pumps prices went up for the 13th time -- nearly doubling that a year ago. Grade 92-Octane petrol costs $2.203 per litre, Grade-95 at $2.236/litre, and Grade-98 at $2.31/litre. Some 1800 owners rallied to an official suggestion to use the “cheaper” compressed natural gas (CNG), and either bought or converted their vehicles, only to find themselves facing rising CNG prices by 16% - 26% over the last four months.

SIA and SilkAir recently raised their 3rd fuel surcharge hike, to an additional US$10 for regional trips and US$60 for long haul trips. Coach fares to Malaysia now carry a surcharge of $5 - $15 per trip. Local premium bus fares are also up by 30 - 60 cts per trip, while private buses upped their fares between 10% - 20%.

More ERP Gantries
LTA meanwhile installed an additional six new ERP gentries. There are now a total of 65 gantries all over our little, very “fine” island, with more being planned to “tackle” the traffic congestions. While it is uncertain how the gantries can really solve those traffic problems, they will certainly contribute another large cache to the Government’s coffers.

Compared to that last year, the price of Cooking Oil shot up by a whopping 47.6%, Rice & Cereal by 19%, Utilities by 18.7%, Eggs & Diary products by 13.6%, Accomodation by 12.6%, Food by 9%, and Health Care by 6.1%. Education, Childcare and Kindergarten fees also flew up, some by 35% in this year alone.

Electricity bills went up by 5% in July to 25.07 cts per kilowatt. The power tariff is reviewed on a quarterly basis, and has increased by 8.83% since last July. On the average, a HDB one-room flat has to pay an additional $1.20 per month, while the 5-room flat pays an extra $5.

Higher Property Tax
Property Taxes collected by the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) increased by an estimated 10% since last September. The tax is based on the potential annual rental returns of properties, as evaluated by the Authorities. However, most homes are owner-occupied, and since there is no rental income, the homeowner is “penalized” for living in his own home! The Government, on the other hand, continues to encourage greater home ownership as a national pull.

The Straits Times Index continued to head south, with a 15% slide, the biggest first half fall in market capitalization since the Asian crisis of 1998. It translated to a massive loss of $120 billion in the market value of Singapore Listed Companies. These do not include any gains/losses from the $30.67 billions which the Government Investment Corporation (GIC) and Temasek Holdings had “invested” in helping to rescue some American and Swiss banks, around the beginning of this year.

On the social front, more and more young adults (20 – 30 yrs old) are being bankrupted, many due to share trading misfortune. They formed 15% of those mired with credit woes during the first quarter, upped by 2% from the same period last year. On an average, each owed at least $55,000 to seven creditors.

Rich Got Richer
Though the entire scenario is not generally rosy, the rich do get richer and the poor poorer. At a recent count excluding dwelling properties, there are now about 77,000 Singaporean millionaires, an inspiring growth of 15.3% over 2007. And out there, many bright-eyed youngsters aspire to join the band-wagon by becoming a minister someday. To each his own then. Materialism is a double-edge sword as many will find out to their peril later in life. Meantime, we do wish them well. •

Government blamed it as a “Global Problem”

Where Are The Jobs ?
The increased retrenchment rate recently released by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has caused considerable pressure on the people. A large number of Singaporeans have lost their jobs, directly or indirectly due to the current global inflation and the declining US market. However, a number of new foreign investments in Singapore is alleged to have created a pool of new job vacancies, mainly in the manufacturing and service sectors. But, where exactly have all those job vacancies gone?

According to the Labour Market 2007 Report, an estimated 45,200 residents were unemployed in December 2007. 40% of the new job vacancies were filled by citizens, while a larger 60% went to foreigners. From public feedbacks, and a survey carried out by NGOs, it was found that certain companies maintained a high 70% foreign workforce.
Apparently, Singaporeans have problems in filling up these job vacancies?

Why do local companies prefer to employ foreigners? The Government has somewhat contributed towards the current situation: local companies turn away local workers, partially due to the flexible employment regulations, despite the fact that many locals are unemployed. Because of the high competitiveness in the employment market, many locals have little options but to take up lower paid jobs which may not be sufficient to support their families.

The Shrinking Dollar
”Global price hike have hit Singapore. We can’t get away from it. We must face it. It a global problem” said the Government, in its almost daily exhortations, as if the people are ignorant, stupid and robotic.

Singaporeans are matured enough to understand the present “global problem” and have adapted themselves to new measures to save costs both at home and at work. Practically everyone contributes a part as a responsible citizen. However, apart from making the occasional proclamations, the PAP Government is seen to be wanting in its efforts to help the people combat this global problem.

On the contrary, the PAP Government disregarded public sentiments by deliberately increasing the Goods & Services Tax (GST) rates from 5% to 7% soon after the General Elections. Despite widespread clamourings, it refused to reduce the increased GST rates which subsequently led to increased consumer prices island-wide. And if as to take advantage of its over-whelming strength in Parliament, all Ministers and MPs were then “compensated” with a jaw-gapping increment in their salaries and allowances. Obviously, the fact that the MPs are answerable to the electorate, has been conveniently ignored, the increased Government spending notwithstanding.

Facing Triple Pressures
Singaporeans now face the triple pressures of inflation, reduced purchasing power and job uncertainty. Inflation has driven the price of certain essential needs by an incredible 58%. Even middle-income families are reeling from such price hikes. As a result, more and more people have approached both the community channels and the NGOs for help to tide over these difficult times.

What can the Government really do, even if it did not make the matter worse by increasing indirect taxes (eg. GST, ERP, etc) and packing the pockets of their Ministers and MPs? It is in these trying times, that the Government of the day must come forward with concrete measures to tackle the runaway inflation. Making common knowledge proclamations is the least one would expect of the allegedly “First World” Government which is saturated with “returned scholars” and other cronies. •

A Government for the People?

I am terribly shocked by the PAP's inconsistency in its economic policy; or rather, the consistency in its approach to take care of the rich, powerful elites and capitalists rather than the people at large. Let’s examine its current strategic economic posture:

The GST is indisputably a regressive tax in the Singapore context. The PAP Government increased the GST rate from 3% to 5% and then to 7%, while it reduced income taxes for companies and wealthy residents. The timing of the increase from 5% to 7% was bad -- it coincided with the rapid increase in oil and food prices. When critics questioned its untimely increment, PAP defended it as a mere matter of fact.

The people generally suffered from high inflation. Instead of doing something about it, the PAP merely brushed it off, saying that it was due to “market forces." However, if it really believed in "market forces", then it should allow the market to determine the prices of petrol and diesel, and not impose hefty duties on them. While cities like Hong Kong have started to waive diesel tax to reduce fuel-induced inflation, PAP has steadfastly refused to do so.

Imported Inflation
However, where wages were concerned, PAP did not feel that it was inappropriate to intervene. Instead, it suppressed wage increment with remarks like "pay rise will increase inflation." It also blamed the inflation as being "imported" and that it could hardly do anything about it. So, instead of championing wage increment for the workers so that they could cope with the rising cost of living, the PAP turned around and said it would be a source of inflation!

Ironically, the PAP ministers themselves had recently increased their own salaries by double digits. But they deemed it inappropriate for workers to have any pay rise!

While pointing out that workers pay rise could worsen the inflation, the PAP was comparatively quiet on landlords who increased their commercial rentals in leaps and bounds! In fact, commercial rent hikes formed one of the main sources of inflation. The Govt failed to show concern with the runaway commercial rent hikes, although it had the means of influence, since many of its GLCs are key landlords in Singapore.

PAP instead showed concern that public transport companies should be profitable by allowing fare increases. This, inspite of record profit returns for these companies, partly due to past fare increases.

Higher ERP Charges
To add salt to injury, while admitting that higher wages can contribute to inflation, PAP was unable to see that the introduction of more ERPs and the rise in ERP charges could also contribute to inflation.

The Govt was able to talk from one end of logic to the other end of ill logic, and in the process contradicted itself. It is least concerned with the impact of inflation on the middle and lower classes of workers. Conversely, it is concerned with the welfare of its own GLCs (viz. the public transport companies), the commercial landlords, and also with its own purse strings.

PAP has resisted suggestions to reduce inflationary pressure, by brushing them off as being "against market principles." And when faced with requests to remove/reduce taxes, it became capable of ridiculous explanations like "reducing petrol/diesel tax will make prices even higher.” Workers were made the sacrificial lambs in the fight against high inflation. After all, it costs nothing but added some benefits for its GLCs!

Government Of Refusals
The Government was unreasonable and inconsiderate in refusing to reduce petrol/diesel duties; refusing to reduce the GST rates; refusing to influence rental hikes which were within its influence; refusing to curb public transport fare increases; refusing to hold back ERP rate increases; and refusing to reduce its own outrageous salaries – but went ahead to increase them instead. All these while, the people had to make tremendous personal sacrifices to live with the mounting inflationary pressure!

The Government lacked empathy of the hard-pressed workers. It was not prepared to make sacrifices for the people by reducing relevant rates and taxes. On the other hand, the people had been ploughed to make the necessary sacrifices. This is really ironical when the Government’s Investment arm channeled billions of dollars to rescue foreign banks, and in the process suffered tremendous losses.

Recently, PAP announced the deferment of constructing a hospital in the West, citing the high cost of construction. It was alright to suffer huge losses in trying to rescue western banks. And also alright to compromise the peoples’ healthcare needs. Generally, healthcare costs in government polyclinics and hospitals had risen to a high level. A friend waited for months to have a ear-wax cleaning in a government polyclinic, found out that it was actually more expensive than doing it in a private clinic! And while wage increment for the people was deemed as a source of inflation, PAP was unable to see that the imposition of means testing for healthcare would actually create a big inflationary pressure on the peoples’ essential healthcare needs.

Thus, is the PAP Government really a government for the people? There are considerable doubts. The people – Singaporeans – should relate this very experience of hardship, due partly to questionable government policies, to the fact that the Government has lost its touch with the people. Singapore will be walking down the slippery road of extreme capitalism, if our elite rulers can hardly empathize with the people at large. Our middle class squeeze will worsen, and our income disparity will be further widen. Most of us will eventually become just another digit slave to the whole elitist system. So, are we really prepared for this way of life …. for you and your children? I don’t, definitely not! •

More Equitable Assistance Necessary

Global inflation has affected the market worldwide, as well as the political stability of many nations. Consequently, many responsible governments have initiated a variety of programs to tackle inflationary problems, some of which involved cutting down on national expenditure. Others have introduced policies and other administrative measures to help reduce the otherwise runaway rate of inflation.

The rapid hike in the cost-of-living has created considerable tension amongst the people everywhere. Recently, the Hong Kong Government abolished import duty on diesel. The move was much welcomed, especially by public transport operators and the public at large. Public transportation is an essential need; it constitutes a main determinant in any cost-of-living evaluation.

At home, the PAP Government alleges that it has assisted the lower income families to tide over rising consumer prices across the board. Many local Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) have also contributed much efforts in helping the less fortunate community. But all those assistance may not be universally equitable, in the sense that the spread may not be thorough enough -– not everyone benefitted.

In view of our comparatively stronger economy, the Government should do more to alleviate the peoples’ sufferings brought about by the inflation. Whilst it may be concerned with the probable economic slowdown and its potential impact on our employment rate, the Government is not well focussed on the dangers of a prolonged inflation. It is apparently too fist-tight with its fiscal assistance.

Without liberalising its monetary policy, the Government still retains a great deal of fiscal leverage. More effective administrative measures are required to ease the problem of domestic inflation. The PAP government owes the people a responsibility of care to help all Singaporeans during these difficult times. •

NSP North Star News

NSP National Day Message 2009 Video

North Star News Vol 3 2008