Unlike what the govt would like you to believe, the reality is, your vote doesn't really matter. Your vote absolutely counts, but it doesn’t matter. Yes, you’ll change the total number of people who voted for one party, but you won’t change the outcome.
If everyone thought that way, then a fluke election result could happen - many in power would say, to frighten you. But the reality is everyone doesn't think that way. And even if you start thinking that way, your closest family member won't automatically follow you.
I have all past 12 general elections (GE) results to back me up on this. None of the 12 GEs came up with fluke results, not even close to one. The lowest that the PAP polled was in 2011, but still won 60.1 per cent of the total votes.
So the truth is you can just go out to the election booth and cast for the opposition or damage the vote, it doesn't really matter. Even if you have damaged your vote or refused to vote, they still need another vote to break any tie, not just your vote.
The chances of your vote becoming the decisive vote of which party to rule Singapore is 1 in 2.3 million (depending on total number of voters), as difficult as winning Toto lottery. It may take thousands of elections for any fluke results to happen, assuming no gerrymandering and tweaking of the election rules by the ruling party.
The argument that it is a duty of every citizen to vote, and exercise your sacred rights to decide the government, again doesn't hold water. The assumption here is that when you vote you will always vote the right people or party to best manage the country and it's resources. But we have seen how many MPs that the people voted, turn out to be scandalous individuals who needed to be replaced through by-elections. Their choice turned out to be hurting the voters themselves through bad policies and corrupt practises by those elected.
There is no guarantee that the PAP will take care of voters' needs and expectations, just as nobody can tell for sure, if the opposition could actually do a better job than the current government over time.
WHY PAP KNOWS YOUR VOTE DOESN'T MATTER
Over a period of about 20 years under the ironclad rule of Lee Kuan Yew, there was no opposition MP in the Parliament. It was embarrassing that every Parliamentary session was like a corporate meeting of PAP Incorporated, especially if one decides to telecast it on national TV.
So they started the Nominated MP scheme, now called Non-Constituency MP, where a few specially selected professionals or businessmen could ask some questions in Parliament, so as to provide some homework for the PAP Ministers and MPs to do, to justify their existence.
But this scheme, as long as it is still there, is a measurement of how confident the PAP is, of winning the next and future General Elections. As long as the number of opposition MPs is very low (say less than 20), the NCMP scheme will always be there.
In their best showing in 2011, the oppositions have 6 elected MPs in Parliament winning 6 out of the then 87 contested seats. That is less than 7% of the total number of seats, despite winning nearly 40% of the total votes in the General Election. This mismatch is so wide, it is unbelievable.
The voice of 40% of voters were represented by only 7% of the MPs in Parliament.
Gerrymandering of boundary, redesignating of Constituencies, the undemocratic GRC system, plus other constraints placed on the opposition helped made this happened. And it is why the NCMP scheme is still needed to make Parliament look less like a HQ of PAP.
So even if the opposition were to win say, 55% of the total votes, they will just have another 5 to 10 additional MPs in Parliament.
See? Your vote doesn't matter at all. PAP will still have around 80% of the MPs in Parliament despite losing the majority of total votes.
PAP would then have enough time to tweak the rules and Constitution to ensure the party stays in power in the following GE, if they decides to have one.
Remember, they also have the power to suspend GE in the name of national security, but at the moment, they have enough of mechanism to ensure they do not need to resort to this trump card.
Now you know why PM Lee was always smiling when talking about General Election. It is a non-event to him, probably like a Circus coming to town that he needs to perform in once every few years. The power given to PAP over the last 53 years had allowed them to change the rules of the game so much in their favour that it really is making a mockery of the democratic process of having elections.
They have enough safety nets to entrenched themselves permanently as the govt of Singapore and what LKY once said is now a fact (see photo below). The PAP, with no apology, is the permanent government of Singapore. And with no apology, your vote doesn't really matter to them.
SINGAPORE — From Dec 29, adults taking buses and MRT trains will have to pay six cents more for card fares, while single-trip train fare and adult cash bus fare will rise by 10 cents.
Students and senior citizens will pay up to 1 cent more in card fares.
The Public Transport Council (PTC) announced this on Tuesday (Oct 30) at the close of a first fare review using a new formula that factors in changes to operating costs.
It said that these fare changes amounted to an overall 4.3 per cent hike, which is the maximum allowable amount of increase going by the new formula, after factoring in a carry-forward reduction of 3.2 per cent from last year. Otherwise, the increase would have been 7.5 per cent.
The biggest contributing factor to the hike — other than a sharp 26.2 per cent rebound in energy prices — is the new “network capacity factor”, which tracks how much bus and rail capacity has changed in relation to real usage. It indicated that ridership had not kept up with capacity growth, and this accounted for 3 percentage points of the 4.3 per cent cap in fare increase.
There will be no changes to the cash fares for students and senior citizens, or prices of monthly concession passes.
The fare reduction measure introduced last December as part of the 2017 review exercise remains. This is the 50-cent saving for commuters who pay by cards and travel during the morning pre-peak hours by tapping in before 7.45am at any train station.
The Ministry of Transport has accepted the PTC’s recommendations.
In a Facebook post on Tuesday, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan said that raising fares is an “unavoidable decision” even if it is not welcomed by commuters.
Public transport operators rely on fare adjustments to keep pace with operating cost, he said.
Mr Khaw noted that commuters earned 10 per cent more in wages in the past three years, yet fares have gone down by 8.3 per cent in three consecutive fare review exercises before this year’s exercise.
Separately, the PTC said in a press release that this round of fare hikes is “necessary in a rising cost environment”, especially since public transport operators SMRT Rail and SBS Transit are facing “significant operating losses”.
“These cost pressures have also been faced by other cities which have had to raise fares to keep pace with the operating cost increases,” the council added.
With the hike, SMRT Rail will stand to take in S$24.1 million more for its higher repair and maintenance costs and the increase in manpower to run expanded operations and improve its rail network performance.
SBS Transit is expecting to earn S$10.9 million more, which will go into padding up its Downtown Line operations, increase in manpower and salary adjustments for workers.
The hike will also bring in S$43.2 million more in revenue to support public bus operations, which is facing an operation deficit to the tune of some S$1 billion a year, a sum to be borne by the Government through subsidies, PTC chairman Richard Magnus said.
Asked at a press conference on Tuesday why the full 4.3 per cent fare hike is implemented, Mr Magnus said that it is to “narrow the gap as far as possible” between rising infrastructure costs and what commuters are paying.
“Even with the 4.3 per cent increase, the gap continues to be there,” he added, noting that the revenue only “marginally” padded up and “contained” the rising public transport costs. “(Our approach is to) balance the economic aspects and social costs.”
FARE REDUCTIONS ‘UNLIKELY’ IN COMING YEARS
Analysing from energy prices, wage, and inflation trends, Mr Magnus said that fare reductions are “unlikely” in the next fare review exercise, and assessed that there is little need to carry over a certain percentage of the amount of increase into the next year.
The next fare review won’t be “a negative” where there is a reduction in fares, but a question of how much higher it might go, he said.
If the PTC were to bring over a 2 per cent increase, then next year’s increase will be higher. “It is better to spread out the fare increase over a period of time rather than a steep jump next year.”
Putting it in a larger context, Mr Magnus said that public transport fares had stayed affordable “for a good 10 years”, what with the percentage of household income spent on public transport having gone down since 2007.
PTC’s calculations showed that the average commuter spent 1.9 per cent of his income on public transport last year as compared to 2.9 per cent in 2007, while a commuter from the lower-income group spent 2.7 per cent last year versus 4.1 per cent in 2007, he added.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Looks like the govt had no other revenue to increase their ever greedy national funds and had to dig into every population and citizens pockets....no fish no eggs no water no vegetable no pork no haze no chewing gum no sugar drink no carbon emission no parking no bus lane no alcohol no gathering of 4 no sleeping security guard...the nation is in Decaying Mode... I don't know how we became like this........it is as if citizens here have no say, else they can kenna sued. Can we called ourselves a democratic country.....? Oil price fell from $85+ to $53+ & yet their tweaked fare formula sent fares up by 6cts. When oil price goes back up abv $80, will they not hike again The public transport here is monopolised, and all have no choice but to pay what they want to increase.....Here I see meritocracy, and democracy in slow decay. 70% voted for them. I have given up.... hope more and more increases until these people wake up ! GE is the best time to make your stand .... for now nothing you can do .... so no complain if you have read, bus fares also increase. Instead of thinking of silly things like boycotting public transport unless you drive, you may like to contribute $1 to the circus act by Leong Sze Han to register your unhappiness with the government and the state of affairs. only few cents nia ..u all buy Mac breakfast ,drink Starbucks but complain about few cents fare increase ..u all are xxx from smell holes lah. For the SMRT trains , whether they got do servicing , we dont know ... But we reported many of the SMRT buses never do servicing because we saw their buses emitting black smoke in the exhaust many times ... We think they are still cutting back on maintenance ... Or may be short of manpower like the ICA , SingPost , etc ... Since when do citizens have any say? The only and best chance for citizens to voice their unhappiness is by voting for opposition parties during General Elections. PM Lee HL said that Singapore is not repressive, and yet Channelnewsasia.com repeatedly censor my comments on their website. It is a violation of my human rights to freedom of speech. Please help to share this message to anyone you know. One month commuters have to spend $6 more For single trip to n fro. Can eat 2 packets of nasi lemak Lol Breakdowns could be a reason for them to increase fare. Need the money to hire more engineers to maintain the trains. Who are those idiots voted and supporting a govt to raise bus and train fares? 70% Idiots also supported water and electricity rates hike by 30% early this year .. To be fair. Maybe those 30% should be exempted from paying?
Have you thought of suing the prime minister of Singapore for all the bad things he did to you?
If you have, then probably you would have thought of how difficult that is. You would have considered that the AG was handpicked by the PM himself and that the AG was the personal lawyer of the prime minister. No lapdog will bite the hands that feed them.
That's cronyism. By the way cronyism like nepotism is never a crime in Singapore. In fact it was a tradition brought down by LKY himself.
So, even if you win your case in Court, you have to contend with the parliamentary whip that the PM possess at his disposal. Parliament is of course above the Law. There, you have a whole gang of cronies and lapdogs waiting to eat you up. The WP MPs will be glad to tell you more on that.
But what really surprised us is that the sibling of the Prime Minister that is Lee Hsien Yang is chipping in to support this suit against his own brother. He is donating money to help the blogger who is suing his brother to fight abuse of power by the prime minister. This is the first time that the PM got countersued. Also, it is taking the sibling war to a whole new level.
FACTS OF THE MATTER:
Lee Hsien Yang, the self-exiled younger brother of PM Lee Hsien Loong has taken the lead and donated to veteran blogger Leong Sze Hian’s Legal Defence Fund.
Confirming the donation with TR Emeritus (TRE), Leong said that Mr Lee was the first person to make a donation to his Legal Defence Fund.
Lee Hsien Yang sent me a message that he has transferred (lo and behold he is the first one to do so into my account!) and he also suggested that I can share his action publicly.
A Legal Defence Fund was recently setup to crowdfund for Leong’s legal expenses against PM Lee’s defamation suit and readers willing to contribute may use the following accounts:
Leong Sze Hian
POSB Savings: 064064070
Paynow: S0009739Z
Paypal: ecuadortrade@yahoo.com.sg
Leong had originally wanted to represent himself against PM Lee’s defamation suit but changed his mind and initiated a counter suit against PM Lee for supposed abuse of court process.
Mr Lim Tean of Carson Laws Chambers is representing Leong in both suits.
On his counter suit against PM Lee, Leong said:
Singaporeans must let our overpaid Ministers know once and for all, that it does not pay to sue ordinary citizens for defamation.
Singaporeans and their children, and their children’s children will never have to fear being sued, for exercising their rights of freedom of expression.
Leong also shared with TRE that Mr Lee had, after making a contribution, expressed his hope that others will be encouraged (by his action) to do the same (contribute to worthy causes).
Mr Lee Lee Hsien Yang also said “hope this will encourage others”, “you are welcome to post that I have donated”
.
Currently, Leong is hoping to raise S$10,000, the same amount which TRE is also trying to raise to upgrade its ailing website.
TOP PUBLIC COMMENTS
Regardless of how much Hsien Yang has donated (a token gesture since his wealth would cover 1000s of lawsuits), his action has a huge impact on how netizens are going to move forward till the next GE. I see it as Hsien Yang has just sent a stealth but STRONG signal and it is up to Singaporeans to receive it or not.
Should we continue to shut up with balls hidden between our legs or stand up, be counted and support worthy causes?
IMHO, as it stands now, those in the ivory towers has just snooked themselves. Maybe they should fire their “sue until your pants drop” panel of advisers who encouraged and suggested the latest slew of legal actions.
Mr Leong was a NOBODY compared to the plaintiff, but this lawsuit has just turned him into a SOMEBODY who is fighting for the rights of the PEOPLE. Only morons will think that Just because commoners remain quiet, they are not angry and eager for change. This lawsuit may inadvertently galvanize these angry groups.
The 2 lawsuits are no longer a simple defamation lawsuit, it is a mini GE and whatever the outcome, the ruling party has already lost (in the court of public opinion). Even if the plaintiff were to be awarded 200k in damages, it would also equate to the loss of the number of potential voters who donated even a dollar to finance the lawsuits.
What do you think?
_–----------_------------------
Not long ago, LHY n LWL have told Singaporeans in no uncertain terms with very significant keywords Bureaucrats Compliancy n such accusation was not dealt with as most loudly pronounced by the only three PMs all living at the time of their public announcement that any defamatory remarks will be dealt in a Court of Laws else the accusation will be deemed to be true n the said accuser will have to resign.
But in this case, surprising to most Singaporeans the siblings were not sued in a Court of Laws.
But most Singaporeans wonder n still wonder how could such accusation be brought before the Court unless the case is heard by a Court independent of bureaucracy but who can verify its independence unless the jury system is revived n the verdict to be decided by the Jury. It is at this juncture Singaporeans realized why LKY abolished the Jury System just because a jury found a man accused of murder not guilty on lack of evidence as seen by the Jury n from then on Court verdict is totally decided by the presiding Judge.
LHY’s contribution is thus
most significant in how the State vs Leong is dealt by the Court with the decision purely in the hand of the presiding Judge n the prosecution by AGC headed by AG once faced with conflict of interest which was publicly defended by Indrani by virtue that he has a successful legal career n therefore there is no conflict of interest, which was found ludicrous even to non legal professional with objective n independent thinking as conflict of interest arise solely on relationship which is seen possible to be the very source of career success.
This is indeed more significant to Singapore than the Trump Kim meeting which is seen by PAP n not by the citizenry to be a historic meeting worth $psoending $28 millions of Singaporeans State Fund to provide full financial support at least for Kim as reported but no report whether Trump also enjoyed the same privileges. 好賤哦！ Really pathetic n disgustingly depraving for the little red dot?
As 2018 draws to a close, there are some truths worth noting, and should not be forgotten as they can very well affect your future, and the future of this country.
1. Presidential Election
While I totally have no problem with Halimah as President, but the process of getting her there by the PM left much to be desired. There are plenty of excuses given by the govt, but deep down the heart of every Singaporean, including the people directly involved, knows very well there were enough of manipulations to ensure she got there.
The truth is, this absolute power of the PM to manipulate and control the country, if falls into the hands, will one day prove disastrous for the country.
2. The 38 Oxley Road Parliamentary Debate and Conclusion
This is another case of manipulation by the PM to get his wife out of troubles. Ho Ching obviously had committed a very serious jailable crime by signing off as as officer of the PMO, which she never is and never was. This was exposed by the siblings of PM Lee. To go around the legal process, the PM had the Parliament to decide on the issue, as Parliamentary decision is above the Law.
We all saw it "live" on TV, the Parliament debate was a shamble, with the ruling party avoiding and the PM openly ignoring any questions related to the Ho Ching crime, by attacking the oppositions for bringing it up. The case and anything related to Oxley Road was considered closed by the Parliament.
But the truth is, Ho Ching did commit a crime, and should be jailed like anybody else who did the same.
3. The exorbitant salaries of Ministers
This is another sad truth and a case of political manipulation for personal gains by the rulers of this country. They can use all sorts of excuses to justify that they deserve those high salaries. They can even change whatever Law there is to make it perfectly legal.
But the moment you walk out of Singapore, you will find it hard to reconcile the fact that our Ministers are earning many times more than the President of America, who is the highest paid leader in the world, outside of Singapore. And the current leader of China, Xi, who is so devoted and dedicated to making a huge country, China, great again, is happy to be paid about one-tenth of the salary of our PM.
The truth is there for the world to see. But crooks like ex-PM Goh, claimed that they are underpaid. Goh of course is still a Minister despite having resigned as PM eons ago, receiving his huge salary for doing nothing significant.
World Most Expensive Cabinet
Legally there is nothing wrong, morally and ethically this is absolutely wrong and untenable. This topic is like a bad smell that can never be washed away, because the truth will always stinks for the greedy and crooked. If the govt should fall one day, this will definitely be one of the main reason.
4. Collusion and Conspiracy?
Call it any name you like, but the truth is when the husband and wife are running 2 totally separate entities, the 2 most powerful and important entities to the country, that is the government, and the other one is a privatised company holding almost all the wealth of the country, how do you ensure independence of the private company from govt intervention? And how do you ensure govt confidential information not passed on to the private company?
The truth is, there is no way to ensure that, as proven by the signing off by Ho Ching as a PMO officer when she is not. This kind of marriage of convenience can never happen in any advance countries, not even communist China. And when this couple inevitably died, this kind of immoral practice of nepotism will continue, and if falls into the wrong hands, the country and it's huge reserve are screwed, like the 1MDB case up north of our border.
Mahathir is now back with a vengeance. Having lost the Tanjong Pagar railway station and a long stretch of railway land to Singapore through the incompetence of his predecessor, he is now given a second chance to make things right.
Mahathir have also opened another 2 fronts in his vengeance trail. He has revived the call for Singapore to review the price of water that Singapore is paying for the water from Johor, calling the 3 sen pricing ridiculous, which I must agree. But the greedy PAP ministers are not going to give up a sen (Malaysia currency term for cent).
And now we have a totally new front, the sea between Singapore and Johore on the western side of the Straits is now a hotly contested area. This is purely political, as there is no oil, gas or mineral in this stretch of sea. Perhaps a few fishermen.
Only old timer like Mahathir would know the history and evidence behind this latest claim, and he seemed confident of winning court case in this dispute. As usual, don't expect this cunning old man to reveal the evidence to us instead of the judge.
He has also ordered at least 3 Malaysian government-owned boats to enter this area, and remain there until negotiation or court case is over. Be prepared for a long and drawn out saga. It will likely be a permanent stalemate and likely lead to more conflicts later on, as the young leaders from Singapore are just not used to handling such bilateral dispute.
In preparation for future conflict, Mahathir had ordered an unprecedented closure of the custom complex for 2 hours on the 13th of December. They are having a drill on how to handle evacuation in times of emergency. War between these 2 neighbouring countries is looking like a distinct possibility, something we all took for granted for far too long.
Mahathir had also taken potshot at the high salaries of Singapore Ministers. He claimed that Prime Minister's pay of $20,000 is more than enough for himself. Lee Hsien Loong pay of $2,200,000 is widely publicised and he made no apologies for it, and arrogantly claimed that his pay is lower than an average CEO. We haven't talk about the bonuses and other benefits yet.
In fact, his supporters claimed that that is too low, even though it is already 5 times more than the next highest paid leader in the world, the President of USA. Being diplomatic and friendly to everyone, yes, but be humble, no. Not when they can loathe over anyone in the world with their stratospheric remuneration.
This, of course, is causing resentment among leaders of neighbouring countries and far beyond, whom they think is a form of corruption hidden in the paycheck. Karma has it, that Mahathir is now back to haunt the Lee family, just as PM Lee is about to retire as PM and enjoy his loot, while still collecting millions from taxpayers as a non-functional Minister Mentor or Emeritus Minister or whatever title he decides to give himself.
Readers often grumble that Singapore’s high commissioner to London (a public servant of great intelligence and charm) wastes inordinate time penning letters of complaint to The Economist, usually over any hint that Singapore is in effect a one-party state.
Banyan once argued that the ruling People’s Action Party (pap), with 82 out of 89 elected parliamentary seats, had maintained its uninterrupted rule since 1959 not only by governing competently, but also through gerrymandering, harassing opposition figures, cowing the media, threatening spending cuts in districts that vote against it and “inculcating the absurd notion that its survival and that of Singapore itself are synonymous”.
The high commissioner duly responded: Singaporeans vote for the pap “because it continues to deliver them good government, stability and progress”. One reader promptly called out the “delicious irony”: surely such claims are for the pap to make, not “the ambassador who represents the very state she insists is not synonymous with its ruling party.”
This column returns to the one-party theme, because years of speculation over who the next prime minister of Singapore will be would appear to have been settled. Lee Hsien Loong, eldest child of Singapore’s late independence leader, Lee Kuan Yew, has run the country since 2004. But he will step down ahead of his 70th birthday in 2022.
Never say that Singapore is a hereditary state, like North Korea. The fact that Lee family members occupy high positions in state bodies has nothing to do with nepotism but with talent and selfless energies. Admittedly, Lee Kuan Yew occasionally allowed that superior genes might have something to do with it. But those genes are not flawless. Their inheritors have indulged in an unseemly family squabble, played out in social media, over the great man’s will. That may have tarnished the family somewhat in Singaporeans’ eyes. At any rate, there is no strong family candidate to take over the reins.
On November 23rd came news instead that Heng Swee Keat, the 57-year-old finance minister, will be Singapore’s next leader. The pap didn’t put it quite like that: it announced that he had been appointed its first assistant secretary-general. But media with ties to the government, such as the Straits Times, lost no time inferring it.
So comparisons with China may be more apt. Its Communist Party loves to send signals through appointments to obscure positions within its hierarchy. It refers to party “cadres”—just like the pap. It emphasises “collective” leadership, or did before the rise of Xi Jinping. And it talks in terms of “generations” of leaders since “new” China’s founding in 1949: Mr Xi is of the fifth. Mr Heng’s elevation was supposedly a collective decision of the pap’s “4g” (fourth-generation) cadres. No intra-party democracy there.
Another parallel: for all the talk of a new generation taking over, the oldies never fade away. For 21 years after stepping down as prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew remained in the cabinet. And years ago Lee set up Mr Heng by saying that his bright former private secretary was destined for greatness. Deng Xiaoping also ruled from beyond the grave. Well before his death in 1997, he had picked out Hu Jintao, Mr Xi’s predecessor, who held power from 2002 to 2012.
The late Mr Lee’s only regret was that Mr Heng, at around five feet six inches, “is not of a big bulk, which makes a difference in a mass rally”. But then the pap loves a technocrat. Mr Heng, who has run the education ministry and the central bank, is nothing if not that.
Popular sentiment also surely counts. Singaporeans like Mr Heng’s soft-spoken humility, and sympathise over a stroke he suffered two years ago. Ad nauseam, the Straits Times and others praise his propensity to “listen”. That has come to matter since the pap’s poor electoral showing in 2011 suggested it had lost touch with ordinary Singaporeans.
A second assistant secretary-general was also appointed: the trade minister, Chan Chun Sing. A scrappy politician, you can imagine him thriving in any full-throated democratic system, unlike Mr Heng. He makes much of his humble origins and subsequent success, including scholarships and a brilliant army career. That grates on many Singaporeans, but there is no denying his ambition. And so, a final parallel with the Chinese Communist Party: might a populist challenge upset succession plans, just as Bo Xilai’s dramatic bid nearly did for Mr Xi in 2012? Best to leave any speculation about that to the high commissioner.
Singapore’s ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) will likely name Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat as its first assistant secretary general, local media said on Thursday, indicating the 57-year-old career public servant is poised to become the city state’s next prime minister.
Following party polls on November 11, the PAP is expected to announce a new line-up of its top leadership on Friday that will provide the firmest indication on who will succeed 66-year-old Lee Hsien Loong.
Insiders and observers have said the person who is made first assistant secretary general – a position traditionally held by a deputy prime minister – will succeed Lee as the country’s fourth prime minister.
Lee, son of the country’s founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, has been in power since 2004 after he succeeded Goh Chok Tong. Following a general election in 2015, Lee said he planned to step down before he turns 70.
The local Chinese daily Lianhe Zaobao reported “there are indications” Heng will be handed the first assistant secretary general position, while trade and industry minister Chan Chun Sing will likely be made the second assistant secretary general.
The Today newspaper, meanwhile, quoted a senior party leader as saying Heng was chosen because he could “rally the ground”.
Both men are part of the PAP’s “4G leadership” – referring to the younger generation of leaders in the party – who won spots in the party’s top decision-making body in the internal polls.
Separately, a source told This Week in Asia the 4G leaders recently held a meeting where they unanimously resolved that Heng, formerly a central banker, would be made “first among equals”.
The PAP, in power since 1959, has a selection process for the prime ministership that observers say resembles the way cardinals pick a pope. The sitting premier stays out of the succession process, and gives that responsibility to younger ministers who choose one among themselves as the first among equals.
Chan, viewed previously by some in the local commentariat as a top contender for the job, in a forum on Thursday said the city state’s leadership model “is stronger than a sum of individual parts”.
“Countries that do well, are those that are fortunate enough not just to have good individuals but to have a strong team,” Chan said. “A strong team that puts aside the individual interest but for the collective aspirations for the country.
“In Singapore, we are proud to say that for the last 53 years, we have been able to find … leadership teams that have been able to abide by this DNA and this set of ethos. And I think the younger generation of leaders are similarly focused on it.
Eugene Tan, a local political observer, said “it would not be too much of a surprise” that Heng was picked by his peers to lead them.
Heng was the managing director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) from 2005 to 2011 and also served a stint as the principal private secretary to Lee Kuan Yew -– a coveted position in the Singaporean bureaucracy.
Upon Heng’s political entry in 2011, Prime Minister Lee immediately made him education minister. He was made finance minister after the 2015 polls.
He suffered a stroke in 2016 which temporarily halted his quick political rise, but swiftly returned to the political front lines after a full recovery.
“Mr Heng brings to bear an entire career in the public sector and with that a nuanced understanding of how the government works,” said Tan, a law professor at the Singapore Management University.
“As managing director of MAS, he played a pivotal role in Singapore managing the global financial crisis of 2008-09. He is likeable and unassuming too,” Tan said..
Too much power in the hands of too few is dangerous for the future of Singapore it could end up with what we have seen in Malaysia where the new leader equipped with so much power that when they abused the system and embezzled the country's resources there is no alternate power to stop them other than through the electorate.
In Singapore the electorate is very much controlled by the ruling party via gerrymandering of the electoral boundaries and GRC system and tweaking of the Constitution which makes it impossible to remove future leader who has turn into a rogue or a tyrant. Hence any plundering of Singapore by rogue could only be stopped by external power like what we see in Libya under Gaddafi and Iraq under Saddam Hussein.
Also in Singapore where the husband and wife team also control the sovereign funds of the country in privatized corporations. The future leader will have total and private control over the funds of the country as well without anyone able to check on them. So any abuse and corruption will be impossible to be detected and no chance to be investigated. It will be a replay of the Najib story filled with murders, hidden extravagance, crony judiciary, and ever rising burdens on the people.
While things are looking rosy for Singapore today but that cannot be said of the future. In fact looking at the crop of new leaders it looks bleak indeed. Most of them are from the army and none of them are financially savvy. Running the country's financial is very different from running your own finance. So they will most likely end up running it and using it, like their own money.
Historically we have seen how the second generation of leaders showed signs of things to come by raising their salaries to exorbitant level never seen before in world history. Fortunately LKY was still around to prevent any massive abuse. But he is gone now and we have seen how his son betrayed him in the 38 Oxley Road saga within the first year of his death. Our hard earned reserves are as cold as ice now. For the ordinary folks, anyway, they will never get to touch these money in their lifetime.
Emigration is a good choice if you're thinking of your future generations. Many have done that, including the siblings and descendants of the Lee family.
The daughter-in-law of a former town council general manager on trial for corruption was paid a fair wage, said the woman who had interviewed her for a job as she took the witness stand on Friday (Nov 23).
The prosecution alleged that the daughter-in-law, Stella Le Thi Hien, was given the job as a form of bribery.
She worked for sub-contractor 4-Ever Engineering between March and July 2016.
Her salary, however, was allegedly paid by 19-NS2, a company owned by Chia Sin Lan, who is accused of bribing former Ang Mo Kio Town Council (AMKTC) general manager Victor Wong Chee Meng in return for contracts. Wong is Ms Le’s father-in-law.
On Friday, the woman who interviewed Ms Le for the job, Ms Goo Pei Koon, described how she first found out that Ms Le was joining the team.
"Boss told me he would be hiring a new girl to help me ... I told my colleague Lee Hui Ting and we had an interview. Both of us interviewed Ms Stella,” Ms Goo said.
She told the court how they hired Ms Le "and tried to give her a chance to learn", at a salary of S$1,600 a month, with a role in administration.
The prosecution showed the court an application form where there was an amendment to the salary, changing it from an original S$1,800 to S$1,600.
Asked why the amendment was made, Ms Goo said it was because she felt that Ms Le was inexperienced. She later explained when cross-examined by the defence that S$1,600 was the same figure her colleague Ms Lee had received when she first joined the company with no experience.
When asked by defence lawyer Melanie Ho, who represents Wong, if the S$1,600 salary was fair, Ms Goo said it was.
The court also heard about how Ms Le’s salary was paid.
The arrangement to pay her in a roundabout way was Chia’s idea, the prosecution’s prime witness Mr Tay Eng Chuan had said previously during the trial, as it would be “too obvious” if Ms Le had worked for 19-ANC as she had supposedly requested. 19-ANC is another of Chia’s companies.
When questioned by the prosecution about the salary payments, Ms Goo said the boss of 4-Ever Engineering, Mr Ngoi Fook Kong, gave her cash when it was close to pay day and she distributed the cash to all employees, including Ms Le.
Ms Goo explained that she took photos of Ms Le's salary vouchers and sent them to Mr Tay on her boss' instructions.
Mr Tay had told the court that he was instructed by Chia to give Ms Le's monthly salary in cash to Mr Ngoi, who had initially not wanted Ms Le to work for him as they did not need an extra worker.
According to Ms Goo, Ms Le left the company after an argument with her colleagues and she did not see her thereafter.
Earlier, Mr Ngoi himself took the stand and told the court that Mr Tay had approached him to see if he could provide employment for the daughter-in-law of a friend.
He said he agreed to hire Ms Le when Mr Tay said he would provide the salary while Mr Ngoi's firm trained her.
"Would I be right to say at that time when you finally agreed, in your mind, you were helping Mr Tay?" asked defence lawyer Michael Loh, who acts for Chia.
"Yes," Mr Ngoi answered.
Mr Loh had charged a day before that Mr Tay was the one masterminding illegal transactions that funded the alleged bribes, and that he was not acting on Chia's instructions as he claimed.
The third tranche of the trial begins in March, when Wong's China mistress is expected to take the stand.
A subcontractor tried to back out from a company whose director is accused of bribing Ang Mo Kio Town Council's (AMKTC) former manager, but was met with anger and a threat, he said in court on Wednesday (Nov 14).
Troubled by the "dirty" dealings, Mr Tay Eng Chuan decided to withdraw his shares from 19-NS2 Enterprise, a company owned by director Chia Sin Lan which handled repair and redecoration works for town councils.
Chia is accused of giving former AMKTC general manager Victor Wong Chee Meng about S$107,000 in gratification between December 2014 and September 2016 in return for contracts.
Mr Tay, who worked for Chia, sent a message to Chia in early August 2016, telling him that "there is no meaning to it, I have decided to withdraw my shares, now, you should honestly return my share price to me".
Deputy Public Prosecutor Jiang Ke-Yue asked Mr Tay on the witness stand on Wednesday what he meant by "there was no meaning to it".
Mr Tay said several complications had arisen in the dealings involving Wong, which he had provided details of in his testimony on Tuesday.
READ: Witness describes his increasing discomfort over ‘dishonest’ dealings
These were "related to bribery" and differed from the "original principles when we founded the company, and business morals", Mr Tay explained, and he felt it was better for him to withdraw his shares. He had already withdrawn his directorship at the company earlier that year.
However, Chia was angry. He sent Mr Tay a photo of a debit card and a phone SIM card.
"I am very angry, invite you go drink coffee," he wrote in Chinese. He then called Mr Tay "xiao ren", which literally translates to "small person" but is used as a pejorative term meaning scoundrel or villain.
READ: I told director remitting money to former town council GM's mistress was 'risky', says witness
Explaining the messages, Mr Tay said the debit card shown was the one Chia allegedly used to entertain Wong. It was in Mr Tay's company's name, and Mr Tay had signed up for it on Chia's request, believing Chia wanted to use it for his own mistress and girlfriend.
The SIM card was also an item Chia asked Mr Tay to help him buy so his family would not find out about his affairs. Mr Tay had asked his foreman to sign up for the SIM card.
Mr Tay said "drink coffee" was a reference to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).
"He's telling me he will use this debit card and this handphone SIM card to report me to CPIB," Mr Tay explained.
DEFENCE ASSERTS THAT LUNCHES WERE AMONG FRIENDS
After this, the defence began its cross-examination of Mr Tay, who is a witness for the prosecution.
Defence counsel Melanie Ho, who acts for Wong, asked Mr Tay if he knew about instances when Wong supposedly footed the bill.
The prosecution alleges that Chia paid for meals, karaoke lounge visits and hotel stays as a form of bribery, but the defence said in their opening statement that these expenses were shared among friends, who took turns to pay.
READ: Company director did not foot all bills on China trips with former Ang Mo Kio Town Council GM, says Defence
She asked Mr Tay if he was aware that for a trip to a karaoke lounge in 2016, Wong was the one who paid for the drinks and the room. Wong had also paid for the hotel rooms of Chia, Chia's girlfriend and Chia's China supplier David Gan during a trip to China, she claimed.
To both questions, Mr Tay answered that he did not know.
Ms Ho also asked a series of questions that showed Mr Tay's friendly relationship with Wong.
Mr Tay admitted in response to Ms Ho's questioning that he had gone for lunches with Wong and another business associate. He had said earlier during the course of the trial that he had lunch with Wong only occasionally.
He also admitted that he had visited Wong two days in a row when Wong was in hospital. He had also sent Wong a message which said to let him know if he needed anything.
The defence resumes its cross-examination of Mr Tay on Thursday.
I refer to the article “CPIB probes Ang Mo Kio Town Council’s general manager” (http://theindependent.sg/cpib-probes-amk-town-councils-general-manager).
It states that “a general manager and secretary of Ang Mo Kio Town Council is under investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) for “the way he handles contracts and dealings in the town council”. The general manager and secretary, Mr Victor Wong (picture), works for CPG Facilities Management. He has been put on forced leave.”
Conflict of interest?
Isn’t it a conflict of interest for an employee of the town council’s managing agent to be also the general manager and secretary of the town council?
After reading the subject news article – as a resident of Aljunied town council – I googled “aljunied town council conflict of interest secretary managing agent” and found the following:-
Same conflicts of interest flagged by Aljunied’s auditor?
“These were among several improper payments that the town council made to managing agent FM Solutions and Services (FMSS) and service provider FM Solutions and Integrated Services (FMSI), said KPMG.
Such improper payments were made in a situation where there were “control failures” and conflicts of interest, as the shareholders of the two companies were holding key management positions in the town council.
These include a failure to address serious conflicts of interest and a lack of meaningful oversight by town councillors, it added.
KPMG identified six FMSS shareholders who held key management posts in AHTC, such as secretary, general manager, and finance manager – creating a conflict of interest” (“AHTC failed to address conflicts of interest, says independent auditor KPMG” (Straits Times, Nov 7).
Why same conflict of interest in Ang Mo Kio?
In view of the the independent auditor, KPMG’s report on Aljunied town council regarding “serious conflicts of interest” – why do we have similar conflicts of interest in Ang Mo Kio town council?
Other town councils also have conflicts of interest?
Are there such conflicts of interest in the other town councils as well?
No action, talk only (NATO (about others))?
If so, what actions have such town councils taken, given that KPMG flagged such “serious conflicts of interest” in town councils?
For how long already?
How long have these conflicts of interest been going on?
GM replacement also same conflict of interest?
The Town Council has appointed another employee of CPG, Mr Lim Kian Chiong, as an acting general manager of the town council, but why are we still continuing to have such similar conflicts of interest?
Do town council councilors understand the meaning of “conflicts of interest”?
Mr Ang Hin Kee, MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC said, “if there are declarations to be made, if there are interests to declare, the people involved (must) make those declarations”. But do town councilors understand the meaning of “conflicts of interest”?
Mr Ang also assured residents that the MPs of the GRC do personally check on projects performed by its contractors to ensure oversight, but isn’t all these kind of superfluous when ‘serious conflicts of interest’ are already inherent and embedded in the town council system?
By: Leong Sze Hian
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
But don't you worry. I'm sure the CPIB will return a finding that there was 'no dishonesty' involved like what PA did in 2015 in the similar case of Tonic Oh, Chairman of the Admiralty ward of Sembawang GRC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole TC committee is in complicit with the conflict of interest. If they deny knowing or even think it's wrong, they are unfit to be in office to serve the people. I think CPIB should include them in their investigation. Then again, CPIB is under PMs control so again we see another conflict of interest. Corruption is pervasive.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Busy counting money no time to do own self check. Only when serious issue pops up then they say the law or policies outdated. Where's the passion to serve and what have they done other than raise costs of living for selfish reasons .. makes you now understand "own self check " is actually mean "being selfish ".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. PAP should keep its own TCs in order before they watch over AHTC like a hawk and whack them over the slightest thing. And where are the HDB Ministers Khaw and Lawrence Wong who are usually full of motherhood statements?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same problem with the prime minister and his Wife on Temasek holdings. If that is not a conflict of interest then this is not?
"MPs of the GRC do personally check on projects performed by its contractors". Come on Mr Ang, you think we people as stupid as you?
If they had personally checked on projects as they now claimed, why didn't they detect these corrupted practices much earlier and reported the bugger themselves instead of waiting for a whistle blower to blow the matter out of the water?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am looking forward to a robust response from Shanmuggam and/or Khaw Boon Wan; the kind they give if the offence had ocurred in the opposition ward. Or will everyone act blur?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOMETHING is rotten in the estate of Ang Mo Kio.
A general manager and secretary of the neighbourhood’s town council has been put on forced leave and is now under investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).
Mr Victor Wong works for CPG Facilities Management, the managing agent of the town council, which is helmed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. No details were given of the case, but the town council’s chairman Ang Hin Kee told The Straits Times (ST) yesterday (Dec 29) that a complaint was made against Mr Wong in September. Mr Wong was removed from his duties last month.
As to nature of the complaint, Mr Ang, who is also a Member of Parliament for Ang Mo Kio GRC, said it had to do with “the way he handles contracts and dealings in the town council”, reported ST.
The complaint “arose out of his dealings which relates to probable behaviour needing investigation done by CPIB”, he said. “Needless to say, the town council ourselves will render all assistance needed to ensure zero tolerance for corruption.”
“We will render all assistance needed to ensure zero tolerance for corruption.”
What exactly are we talking about here?
Clues from Mr Ang’s brief interview with ST point to contracts being handled by Mr Wong and potential conflicts of interests which were possibly undeclared.
Mr Ang declined to give any more details of the investigation, but said that town council staff are constantly reminded to declare any interests concerning tenders being awarded by the council, said ST.
He also said that staff from the managing agent were also reminded that “if there are declarations to be made, if there are interests to declare, the people involved (must) make those declarations”.
Meanwhile, an acting general manager, Mr Lim Kian Chiong, has been asked to replace Mr Wong, who could not be reached for comment yesterday. Mr Lim is also an employee of CPG.
