GE 2015: The 1st By-election

It was expected to happen anytime after GE 2015. The question was where it will happen first and it has been answered today. Bukit Batok SMC is up for a by-election. The MP who won the seat of Bukit Batok Town Council for PAP has resigned.

There were two by-elections following GE 2011. Both incumbents were from different parties and they resigned because of extra-marital affairs. The latest resignation was for the same reason and the by-election date will be announced in due course. While there are people who are interested in talking about why these marital affairs happen so often and speculating over whether there could be other MPs who are engaged in such "personal indiscretions", others are more interested in exploring the likely scenarios for the coming by-election. Who will be contesting and who will likely emerge as the winner?

This by-election presents a precious opportunity for another alternative voice to be heard in parliament and many aspiring candidates are already sitting up straight and contemplating. In GE 2015, there was a 3-way contest in Bt Batok in which the ward was won by the PAP candidate with 73.02% votes and the SDP's candidate garnered 26.38%. The independent candidate who entered a token appearance lost his election deposit with only 0.6% votes. Aspiring candidates in the upcoming by-election will need to assess their familiarity and appeal to the voters of Bukit Batok SMC before they take the plunge. It will be remiss of them to count on the intuition that by-elections tend to work against the PAP for no one can be sure of voters' behaviour on polling day.

Historically, Bt Batok SMC had been close to being an opposition ward before GE 2015. It was abolished as a single-seat ward in 1997 after PAP won it narrowly against SDP and merged twice - first with Bt Timah GRC (in 1997) and later with Jurong GRC (in 2001). It was restored as a SMC in GE 2015 only to see a by-election barely 7 months later. 

The voters of Bt Batok SMC will have a second chance to exercise their voting power and to present their message. How they vote will now be the focus of public discourse, as will be the likely candidates for the by-election. We wait with abated breath to see what message the voters of Bt Batok SMC will be sending to all of us.

The Un-elected Members of Parliament

The idea of allowing the citizens of a state to elect their parliamentary representatives is a fundamental feature of democracy. The citizens vote in a general election who to send into the highest policy-making body in their country to be their representative and to decide their future. 

In a majority electoral system, the candidate with the highest votes in a particular constituency gets elected into parliament. By contrast, in a proportional electoral system, political parties are allocated seats based on the proportion of the votes their candidates win. In either system, the idea remains that members of parliament are elected. An unelected representative in parliament is therefore anathema to the concept of democracy.

NMPs ("Nominated MPs") and NCMPs ("Non-Constituency MPs") belong to a special category of parliamentarians. They exist only in our political system and nowhere else.

NMPs have not been elected by the citizens but appointed by Parliament to speak purportedly as independent, non-partisan voices. However, because our parliament is consistently overwhelmingly represented by one political party, the NMP is largely perceived to be nothing more than a political appointee for one party. They serve for two and a half years, representing sectoral interests in civil society and do not have to answer to the voters of any constituency. The NMP scheme has been around since 1990 and it is interesting to note that no former NMP has ever ventured to participate in the general elections despite having gained invaluable experience in parliamentary work.

The NCMP scheme has been around longer than the NMP scheme. It was implemented in 1984 and allows NCMPs (Non-Constituency MPs), who were unsuccessful electoral candidates at a general election, to be sent into parliament. NCMPs are deemed elected to the post by vitrtue of their standing as the highest election losers. Given that every electoral candidate contests to win a constituency and not to lose, it is hard to accept the argument that NCMPs are deemed elected to Parliament. The notion of an elected NCMP was finally demolished by Parliament's recent approval to transfer a NCMP seat from one losing candidate to another (Click HERE).

The two unelected MPs' schemes have drastically changed the concept of democracy as it existed in Singapore at the time when the first general elections was held in 1959. In the last 57 years, we have evolved a political system that has become a pale shadow of what it used to be - that was when all MPs must be elected by the people in a general election. The current electoral system is reminiscent of the colonial system of elections where the predecessor of our Parliament, then known as the Legislative Assembly, comprised of both elected members and appointees of the British government. Whether this circular evolution of our political system augurs well for the future of our young nation is something that only time can tell. And it would be hard to gainsay the suggestion that our generation will not be around to find out the answer.

Plans are now afoot to further tinker with the NCMP scheme by giving NCMPs the same voting rights as elected MPs (Click HERE). Many on the opposite side of the divide have expressed their misgivings about these changes. But from a practical perspective, an NCMP appears to stand in a more enviable position than an elected MP in that he/she is freed completely from the burden of running a town council and could dedicate more time in parliamentary work. NCMPs are also not prevented from continuing with their ground engagements with the voters in their chosen constituency and the only apparent disadvantage is that the elected MP would have more resources at his disposal and a wider reach to the same voters. This does not seem to be worthy of concern to someone who had already lost in the elections. At least as NCMP, he/she has now every opportunity to lend an alternative voice in Parliament.

The real question to ask about these changes to expand the number and role of un-elected MPs and future modifications in the same vein, is the extent to which our rights as voters in what remains of our democracy are being diminished when there are Members of Parliament who are not elected by us but have the privileges of speaking and voting on all matters that concern us. If we carry these changes to their logical conclusion, will Parliament end up having the power to constitute itself without an election?

Don't Quit Singapore

A resident in Potong Pasir told me that he was very disappointed at the results of the recent general election and was planning to leave Singapore for good. In response, I expressed my strong disappointment at his plan and urged him to stay.

General elections are a part of the political renewal process that happens once every 5 years or so. The result of the recent election is already an established fact and the higher the votes for the winning party, the greater will be the voters'  expectation of its performance. The new cabinet has just been installed and how it performs will be closely watched. Hopes are running high after SG50 and everyone should rally together after the elections and put aside their political differences. Rather than being pessimistic because many issues seem unresolved as yet, we should learn to be optimistic and hope that the government will have learnt from its past mistakes and address the many issues that bug ordinary Singaporeans.

Singapore is a beautiful place. A small, tropical island with no natural calamities, except the seasonal haze because of the fires in Indonesia which is aggravating. An enlightened government with a responsible citizenry would be all that we need to make this country a modern paradise and the happiest nation in the world. Many foreigners aspire to live and work in Singapore and if Singaporeans should leave one after another, they can be sure that there will be more new citizens. As it is, Singaporeans are not producing enough children and that has been a justification for adding a large number of new citizens each year. If this continues, the Singaporean identity and culture that we know, will eventually disappear.

Besides, billions of dollars in national reserves have been accumulated over the last 50 years. Unlike many small countries, Singapore has a strong financial safety net that will help her weather the storms ahead. Every Singaporean has a stake in the national reserves which is still accumulating. For as long as our government remains incorruptible and financially prudent, and the formulation and implementation of national policies are able to imbue greater confidence in our future as a nation and not just as an economy, there is still a lot that Singapore and Singaporeans can achieve and be proud of.

So stay and do your part.

GRCs - The Filler Effect

No democratic country in the world has an electoral system where Members of Parliament may be elected in teams except in Singapore where we have the Group Representative Constituencies (GRCs) system.

Before the implementation of the GRC system, there was only the Single Member Constituencies (SMC) system where individual candidates compete with each other and stand or fall on their own merits. The candidate with the highest votes gets elected. 

With the GRC system, a few candidates band together to contest as a team against other teams. The team with the highest votes gets elected. This GRC system allows candidates who would not otherwise have made it on their own account to be elected into parliament by riding on the coat-tails of other members in their team who are more credible. Such a system has the potential to dilute the quality of the representatives elected into parliament. And it is beginning to show.

In the current general elections, there are a total of 13 SMCs and 16 GRCs. Depending on which GRC they are contesting in, the teams will need to have between 3 and 6 candidates. Looking at all the teams, one begins to form the view that in almost every team, there are at least one or more candidates whose suitability and ability are clearly questionable. How can this happen? Don't all parties screen their candidates and select only those of calibre to stand for election?

The fact is that good candidates are hard to come by in Singapore politics and with the requirement of a minimum number of candidates in a GRC team, there is a filler effect for teams to make up the numbers. Unsuitable candidates are slotted into the teams to satisfy the minimum number and in this way, they affect the overall quality of the team. The situation is made worse by the requirement of a minority candidate in a GRC team. And good minority candidates are even harder to find.

The filler effect of the GRC system paves the way for opportunists and other undesirable characters to make their way into our legislative body where important matters such as our legislations and national policies are decided. When voters are swayed by the strongest and most credible candidate in a GRC team, they may not pay heed to the fact that the others in the team are undeserving of their vote. The consequence is that more and more weak candidates will make their way into parliament. Is that not something of grave concern to the nation?

Decision to not contest in Potong Pasir SMC

Last night, I was doing my usual walkabout. As I was driving out from the carpark near Block 108 in Potong Pasir after 11 p.m., I saw a Mercedez Benz waiting to park. It has just entered the car park and its headlights were shining in my direction.

As I exited from my parking lot and passed by the Merc to my right, I noticed the lady driver struggling to turn her steering wheel so as to move her car aside to let me pass. As I drove passed the stationary Merc, I saw that the driver was Mrs. Lina Chiam. She was in her party T-shirt and looked rather haggard.

Along the way home, I kept thinking about my encounter with Mrs. Chiam and felt sorry that she was still out at such a late hour. I recall her recent statement about this election being her last election and that she will be retiring with Mr. Chiam. I began to have this feeling of sadness and couldn't sleep after reaching home.

I contacted my team members this morning and shared with them my thoughts and feelings. And I told them my decision. I have decided not to contest. Instead, I will lead my team to show our support for Mrs. Chiam at her rally and hope she succeeds to regain Potong Pasir SMC and continue Mr. Chiam's dedicated service to its residents.

The 3-cornered fight in Potong Pasir SMC that was meant to be will no longer take place. I am sorry to disappoint all those who have encouraged me to offer my candidacy and to serve the residents of Potong Pasir SMC as their Member of Parliament. In my walkabouts over the last 2 months, I have come to know many of you at a personal level and appreciate your warm support. Let me assure you that notwithstanding this decision, I will continue to be at your service. For Potong Pasir SMC will always be my kind of town.

Peolitics Model of Politics

Current Political Ideology

The current dominant political thinking in Singapore is an economy-centred ideology. This ideology is based on the government's "Singapore Inc."  model which places economic interests at the heart of government policy-making. The result is the Singapore that we have created today. A country that has achieved economic success at high social costs with over-population, intense competition for jobs, housing and transport, runaway costs of living, stressful lifestyle and a severe income gap.

National policies which place the economy at their core without counting the social costs can only make the rich richer and will never lead the ordinary citizens to attain the first goal of our national pledge - happiness. Our experience in the last 25 years tells us what we need to know. The way forward in the next 25 years depends on a change of mindset. We need to build a people and not just an economy. In order to do that, national policies must be centred on the people’s welfare and aspirations. Lest it be mistaken, we are not talking about welfarism. We are talking about not building an economy at the expense of the people’s welfare and nation-building.

People-Centred Political Ideology

Politics is about people. People-centred political ideology (“Peolitics”) is premised on the principle that the people’s welfare and aspirations are paramount in national policies. In order for the leaders and their people to achieve unity of purpose, the Peolitics model emphasizes the importance of a Sensitive and Responsive Leadership and a People with a Political Conscience and Responsibility.

Leadership

Leaders must deploy their five (5) senses to understand the needs and wants of the people. A good leader must be adept at all the following:

1. See what’s been happening;
2. Listen to the noises in the voices;
3. Sniff out the real problems;
4. Taste the lives of ordinary folks; and
5. Touch base with the ground always;

People

Just as the leadership has political responsibilities, the people must also do their part to help create a positive political culture. The people must motivate their leaders to do their best to meet their needs and wants by behaving:

1. Rationally;
2. Reasonably; and
3. Responsibly.

Political Conscience and Responsibility

Every decent human being has a conscience. This arises from one’s ingrained sense of values. We feel a sense of guilt when we do something that runs contrary to such values. Hence, Political Conscience refers to the national values that are ingrained in our people. These national values are encapsulated in our pledge:

"We, the people of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion, to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality, so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation.”

The Political Responsibility of the people is premised on their Political Conscience. The values that we pledge shall guide the people in the discharge of their political responsibility. This responsibility is particularly important for democracy to succeed. It has often been said that democracy is the rule of the majority and the minority may feel threatened by the “tyranny of the majority”. This scenario may be pre-empted if all people in a democracy are guided by their political conscience to discharge their political responsibility in a manner that does not betray their national values as one people. Only then can we achieve a positive political culture.

Positive Political Culture 

Politics in Singapore is becoming radicalized as we witness more and more social agencies being used for political ends and grassroots leaders engaging in partisan politics. Such a development is unhealthy and will lead to repugnance for politics and politicians. The social contract between the state and the people has to be premised on a relationship of trust and respect. In order to sustain that relationship, it is important to build a political culture that not only encourages people to engage constructively in political discourse without fear of victimization but further motivates those with the necessary talents that we need to spontaneously offer their services to the people and the nation.

Improvement Projects in NRP Constituencies - The use of CIPC funding

The idea of forming grassroots organisations like Residents' Committees (RCs) and Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs) was to enable volunteers in the community to help the government in implementing its policies and reaching out to residents. Those who manage RCs and CCCs are invariably identified as supporters of the ruling party though many may be motivated to volunteer by a desire to serve the people in their community.

It is often lamented that an MP from a non-ruling party (NRP) taking over the running of a constituency from a ruling party MP has to countenance difficulties from RCs and CCS in the implementation of their programmes. Both MPs and NCMPs have expressed that major obstacles still remain for opposition parliamentarians (Click HERE). One of these obstacles is in tapping on state funds which are set aside for improving infrastructural and recreational facilities for the benefit of residents in their constituencies which include covered walkways, footpaths, cycling tracks and playgrounds.

In one parliamentary session, the Minister for National Development ("MND") was asked for the guidelines for the utilisation of the Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) funding (Click HERE). In his reply, the Minister answered that "CIPC funds are disbursed through the CCCs as they are close to the ground and will be better able to decide on the projects which will be most useful for the local residents. The CCCs are given flexibility to assess the relevance of any proposal and to prioritise them for implementation so that the CIPC funds are optimally utilised. The operating principle for the CCCs is to ensure that the approved CIPC projects are useful, functional, represent value for money, freely accessible to the community and properly planned." 

In short, CCCs have the power to decide if an elected MP may go ahead with his plans to improve infrastructural and recreational facilities for his residents. Given that CCCs are not apolitical in character,  this arrangement poses a serious obstacle to an elected NRP MP's programmes to benefit his constituents. The question that arises is whether funds meant for community improvements should be disbursed to CCSs if the CCC and the MP do not share the same political affiliation. Obviously, if all political contests are confined only to the election period and are not carried over into the term of whoever may be elected as MP to the detriment of the constituents, there will be no necessity for us to review the present arrangement. 

However, as we all know, political contests tend to spill into even the most mundane things that CCCs do for their residents. Until grassroots leaders learn to rise over politics and are no longer seen to be taking sides with the ruling party, there is a need to ensure that these community improvement funds do not become an instrument of politics. As a step towards developing a more positive political culture, why not let the MND decide on the applications to use such funds by all MPs?

SOCIAL: Sports - Nurturing True Sportsmanship

In the recent SEA Games, Singapore collected 84 Golds, 73 Silvers and 102 Bronzes with Thailand finishing top with 95 Golds, 83 Silvers and 69 Bronzes. This has been an impressive record and a fitting tribute to SG50. 

Our 259 medals have surpassed our precious haul of of 164 medals (50 golds, 40 silvers and 74 bronzes) in 1993, when the Games was last held at home. We are all absolutely thrilled that we have done well as a nation that seeks to excel in everything that we do. But let's pause for a moment to look at the results and ask some questions.

The medals tell us which sports we are good at. One report (Click HERE)  said as follows:

“Over the past 18 days in 36 sports, Singapore’s largest-ever contingent of 747 athletes also delivered 25 Games records, 29 national records, 74 personal bests, and many first-time medalists. 421 were also making their official Games debut. Of the 36 sports, the Republic’s swimmers achieved the highest medal count of 42 (23 golds, 12 silvers and 7 bronzes).

Swimmers Joseph Isaac Schooling and Quah Zheng Wen were the most bemedalled athletes, winning one in every event they competed in. Schooling won nine gold medals and set Games records in all nine events, while teammate Quah finished with 12 medals (7 golds, 4 silvers and 1 bronze).”

One piece of glaring information comes across from the wins. A great majority of the medals were won by local-born Singaporeans.  And we are able to clearly identify the sports that we can be really good at. So, do we still need foreign talents to buttress our sports achievements when we could save our money on them and groom our own talent pool from young in the sports that we are potentially good at?

Say what you like, there can be no real pride in winning medals through the Foreign Talent Scheme which started in 1996. One sport that relies heavily on the scheme is table tennis. Even after 20 years, we are still relying on table–tennis players from China to win our medals. If we are unable to produce local-born table-tennis players to lead our nation in this sport after all these years, we need to ask whether the scheme has usurped the need to nurture our local talent or is table-tennis not really our cup of tea?

We also need to ask ourselves whether it is necessary for us to excel in every sport? To-date, more than 60 foreign athletes have been granted citizenship since the Foreign Talent Scheme started in 1996 (Click HERE). We do not know exactly how much we have spent in the scheme but it should run into the millions which could have been used more productively and meaningfully. 

Since we can now identify a number of sports where our potentials lie, wouldn’t it be make more sense to save our money on foreign athletes and invest in our local sports talents instead? We can bring in foreign coaches instead of foreign athletes? Afterall, sports is not about winning medals alone. It's about the spirit of true sportsmanship.

SOCIAL: Culture - Saving our Food heritage

One of the unique features of Singaporean culture is its food heritage which began with itinerant hawkers peddling on the streets. With the erection of hawker centres, Singaporeans found their favourite foods like char kway teow, laksa, mee siam and roti prata prepared behind more hygienic stalls which were leased from the government at cheap rentals. And the majority of Singaporeans take their daily three meals at these hawker centres which offer a great variety of affordable local food options.

Unfortunately, stall rentals escalated after the government's economic policies went on high gear. The National Environment Agency ("NEA"), which currently manages 107 markets and hawker centres, began selling the stalls in 1994 with takeover fees that ran into hundreds of thousands of dollars. About 2,000 stalls in 15 centres were sold in four phases between 1994 and 1997, and their leases were slated to expire between 2014 and 2017 (Click HERE) .These stalls were sold at between S$26,000 to S$ 141,000 each, depending on their location and size and owners re-sold and pocketed huge profits only to buy more stalls when they were allowed to sublet their stalls. The costs of running a hawker stall invariably shot up. So did food prices at these hawker centres.

Rental costs escalated even further for food stalls when the government stopped building hawker centres for some 26 years while air-conditioned food centres in shopping malls sprouted up like mushrooms. The impact on food prices was significant and families on tight budgets had to forgo at least one meal. Many Singaporeans eat out at coffee-shops too. These are located in housing estates and are the regular venues for many family dinners. With liberal policies on coffee-shop ownership (which attracted foreign investors looking for capital gains) and higher and higher tender prices for coffee-shops in new housing estates, stall rentals in coffee-shops shot up as well. High turnover of business owners in coffee-shops are now a regular feature and the quality of food has suffered. Old food stalls with huge followings and customers who grew up on their menu begin to close down one after another.

After GE 2011, the government announced in October 2011 that it will restart the programme of building of hawker centres after 26 years with a new policy direction (Click HERE). There will be 10 new hawker centres to be built over 10 years. These new hawker centres are to be run on not-for-profit basis instead of by commercial operators. This was a tacit acknowledgment that food prices in our iconic hawker centres have gone up too high. The first of these new hawker centres is now operated by NTUC Foodfare in Bukit Panjang with 28 cooked-food stalls offering at least two low-cost main dishes.This new policy direction in letting only social enterprises and co-operatives manage hawker centre has already led to disgruntled hawkers who were unhappy with the price-caps on the food they sell and that the centres are operated more like food courts which require them to pay plate collection and dishwashing collection and dishwashing fees, use common utensils and wear uniforms (Click HERE).

The idea of bringing down food prices in hawker centre is applaudable but the new management model of hawker centres looks set to have another negative impact on our heritage food culture as hawkers think of ways to cut costs. Why can't we go back to the old model of leasing out hawker stalls at low monthly rentals with a government agency managing the hawker centres? Such a model was working perfectly fine until they started to tinker with it. As they say, if it ain't broken, why fix it?

THEME: Public Housing - A Home for Every Singaporean

HDB's housing mission was originally premised on nation-building. Public flats were initially sold on a "construction cost-based" pricing policy to enable every citizen to own a HDB flat. Later, "land-cost" pricing was added and this eventually changed to "market pricing" which is based on resale prices. This last pricing policy has led to prices spiraling higher and higher, making owning a HDB flat out of reach for many young citizens today. 

These pricing changes ride on the back of promises to enhance assets and HDB's rigorous innovations to create public flats that are more like private apartments. These innovations moved HDB into the realm of real estate business, selling land to private developers. Consequently, a HDB flat can now cost more than a private apartment.

If nation-building is still HDB's sacred mission, then HDB has a duty to ensure that Singaporeans are the only ones who are eligible to buy HDB flats. If this is no longer its mission, then it should no longer be called the Housing Development Board.

As a public housing agency, HDB need not be concerned at all with the housing needs of foreigners and permanent residents. If foreigners and permanent residents choose to own their flat, they should look at private flats and not compete with Singaporeans for public flats which are built with taxpayers money.

HDB flats should also not be approved for use as dormitories for foreign workers or leased by HDB directly to foreigners or permanent residents.

HDB flats should not be acquired or rented to any public or private corporation, even if there are excess public flats. Excess flats ought to be rented out to meet the needs of Singaporeans who do not have the means to pay for a flat or are not yet ready to do so. In particular, 3- and 4-room rental flats should be made available to young couples, including single parents, who need a place with adequate living space to start a family and to raise children . 

If these measures are kept in place, there will be no need for HDB to keep building new flats. There will be more than enough flats if permanent residents are no longer allowed to own any public flat. HDB could revert to construction-cost pricing for new flats. In order not to impact upon the prices of existing flats which were bought based on market-pricing, these new flats that are sold more cheaply should not be re-saleable in the secondary market and must be re-sold to HDB when they are no longer needed.

Private developers are clearly motivated by profits. HDB should not sell land to private developers to build public flats and then disclaim any responsibility for building defects or non-compliance with building specifications. After-all, these flats are still sold with HDB's minimum occupancy requirement for resale which do not exist for private flats. If HDB chooses to disclaim such responsibility, then it should cease selling land to private developers. 

These are just some ideas. There are probably more and maybe better ideas that others may be able to come up with. Whatever it may be, we should not stop thinking of ways to improve our public housing predicament. May every citizen who needs a public flat be able to afford one without paying for it with an arm or a leg.

The Trolls Are Amongst Us

The internet is abuzz with commentaries about the upcoming elections. There are heated exchanges amongst netizens who speak without restraint about their feelings on a wide variety of subjects. Sadly, it is also the time when the most vulgarities and expletives are used.

Reading the commentaries brings me back to my first day in national service. I had a culture shock when the sergeants and corporals were verbally abusing every recruit with that infamous four letter word and a myriad of Hokkien expletives. I guess one of the best things that the army has done for me is to numb me to the impact of such vocabulary. But for those who have not gotten use to it, try and see it this way. When people run out of words to say or use to express their anger and frustration, they jump straight into their pool of swirling unpalatable adjectives and nouns. Learn to read the feelings and not the words. They are just human.

But there is a group of netizens who do give rise to some concern. They enjoy name-calling, inflaming matters and inciting negative emotions to derive a certain psychological thrill. They deliberately choose to use mocking, insulting and incendiary language to work up a storm in the forum and to provoke a response. The term "trolls" is used to describe them.

How do you identify trolls? Well, they do not use their real names and would work behind an air of mystery. Sometimes, they would use monickers which are derogatory names of the people they are targeting. Their tactics are easy to detect. They use strong abusive language to throw a rational discussion off-course by refusing to accept any logical reasoning and then make personal attacks without checking out their facts.

We need to be aware of who are the trolls and avoid becoming their prey. They are out to thrill themselves at the expense of a serious public discourse on matters that deserve to be treated rationally, reasonably and responsibly. If you identify a troll, all you need to do is to ignore them. Don't give them the thrill that they are looking for.

I Am Not Alone

Some people think that independent candidates are working all by themselves and are short in resources and may not be able to run a town council. Conversely, they think that party candidates have more resources and are better able to run town councils. If we care to think deeper, these are merely assumptions and are not absolute truths. 

I may be an independent candidate but this does not mean that I do everything by myself. The amount of work that I have been able to do on the ground and in so many places would not have been possible without a dedicated team of supporters and their resources.

As a matter of fact, when it became known that I no longer had any party affiliation, there were immediate invitations from various political parties for me to join them. Some had even sought support to tap on the resources that my supporters have as they do not have adequate resources of their own.

A political party cannot succeed without strong supporters. With so many political parties on the scene, there is not only competition for talent but also resources. I am open to sharing the resources of my supporters with anyone who genuinely wish to serve the people and are not involved in politics for ulterior motives.

The idea of making MPs run a town council is an unfair political move that has shifted municipal duties from HDB to an MP. It not only makes the job of an MP more onerous so that he has less time in his parliamentary work but to also act as an electoral hurdle. It has been seen that even PAP town councils have their own issues. Voters, however, choose their candidate not because the candidate will be good in running a town council but because he or she can be their effective voice in parliament. Otherwise, their estate manager would be their best candidate as MP. And many may not know that I am not entirely new to town council work and was once a volunteer lawyer in the drafting of tenders and contracts for the Bukit Batok Town Council when it was first formed under the late Dr. Ong Chit Chung.

Having said so, since running a town council has been thrust upon an MP as his municipal duty, it makes sense for any new MP to continue to employ the services of the existing staff who are managing the estate. This is a step towards depoliticizing the system and ensures continuity of service with necessary improvements under the new MP. Obviously, if this continuity is not possible because there are issues of political ties, which will be truly regrettable, my plan will be to adopt a direct management approach with the help of my team of supporters which comprise people with the relevant skills and experience.

As an independent candidate, I am no different from a party candidate. In fact, I may be more equal to the task of running a town council.

THEME: Employment - The White and Blue Collars

In recent years, our legal profession has seen an open-door policy that allows foreign lawyers to practise law Singapore law in transactional matters. Yet, even though the rules are relaxed to admit foreign law practices into Singapore, there is still one category of foreign lawyers who remain subject to a long-standing strict legal regime for their admission here - Queens' Counsels.

The rules permit the admission of Queen's Counsels (or "QCs") for them to represent a litigant before our courts if the QC has, inter alia, special qualifications or experience pertaining to the case. This idea in the admission of QCs ensures that a real foreign talent is being allowed to represent a litigant in place of a local counsel. This same idea of "special qualifications or experience" should be considered as part of the criteria for allowing foreigners to take up any job in the category of Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians ("PMET") in Singapore where we are not short of suitable candidates.

It is a reasonable assumption that each job taken up by a foreign PMET in our job market means that one potential Singaporean candidate is displaced. The justification for doing so must be that the applicant is a "real foreign talent" who is not paid a less favourable remuneration package than that offered to a local candidate. Where a real foreign talent is recruited, there should be a requirement that a transfer of his/her knowledge and skills should take place during the tenure so as to upgrade the quality of our own local pool of PMETs. Any extension of the foreign PMETs' eligibility to continue working here should be supported with cogent reasons and corroborated by a statement from a local apprentice.

The construction industry has traditionally relied on foreign construction workers and there are not many Singaporeans who will consider taking up construction work except as foremen and project managers. Construction workers do not seem to pose a threat to our workforce and have become more or less indispensable. However, in the F&B industry, the need for cleaners, waiters, front service and other workers has not been adequately met by our local workforce because of low wages and a lack of pride in such jobs. In order to develop our own labour force to undertake the work that is now substantially taken up by foreign labour, we need to take a hard look at the costs of living that our workers at the lowest rung of our economic ladder are facing and how to inculcate job-pride.

There is a growing need for us to seriously consider whether minimum wages should be imposed to protect the rights of the most vulnerable groups in our workforce who contribute to the massive profits that many of our local companies are generating. The Progressive Wage Model advocated by NTUC to increase the salaries of workers in the cleaning and security industries, which is enforced only through licensing requirements,is in substance a minimum wage scheme and a step in the right direction, But more can be done to match up the wages to the minimum costs of subsistence.

Wages and work morale are not unrelated. In fact, low wages lead directly to low morale. Perhaps, there are business owners who will be genuinely troubled by wage increases because of their costs of doing business such are high rental costs. But if businesses are taking care of their workers, then the state with all its resources, ought to step in to see how they could help these businesses.

THEME: Transport - Making the COE and ERP systems more equitable

The costs of owning a car in Singapore are the highest in the world because of COEs or Certificates of Entitlement. To buy a motor vehicle, including motorcycles, taxis, buses and goods vehicles, one must first bid for a COE.

The COE bidding system is the means by which the state seeks to control vehicle population and the ERP system is for controlling traffic flow. Looking at the congested roads everyday even on ERP roads, many have come to see both COEs and ERPs as revenue churners rather than truly effective vehicular control mechanisms.

Any good policy to control vehicle  population and traffic flow must be equitable both in principle and in implementation. The COE works on a bidding system that has led to spiraling COE prices. Bidders include car dealers who drive up the bids in order to clear their stocks. High COE prices increase the costs of transport and lead to higher inflation, which in turn contributes to high costs of living. The ERP charges, which are now collected at all expressways and major roads leading into and out of the central business district, have exacerbated the situation and adversely affected businesses during the ERP operating hours. Orchard Road, for instance, sees motorists paying to drive in and drive out even on Saturdays.

It is time to review the roles of the COE and ERP systems, especially when our MRT system has become more unreliable. There is a social injustice in a situation where people are left with a Hodson's choice - forking out huge sums of money to have one's own means of transport or taking public transport which are hard to get on or often disrupted.

Until a better system is devised, the current systems can be improved upon to be more equitable. Instead of being conducted monthly, COE biddings can be carried out quarterly and the COE premium should be fixed for every quarter. This fixed quarterly COE premium will provide some certainty for prospective buyers working on their budgets and to plan their expenditure accordingly. 

Only car buyers should be allowed to bid for COEs and they should pay for what they bid subject to a non-transfer-ability period to prevent profiteering. The there could be a restriction on number of times that a person may bid within a fixed period so as to allow others a chance to bid, COEs should also last longer instead of the current 10 year period as cars are made to last much longer. This is also more ecologically friendly and helps reduce wastage of limited resources.

Motorcycles, or at least those of lower capacities, should be exempted from the COE system. They are the means of transport for many dispatch riders and lower income workers. Taxis and buses, which are a means of public transport, should also be considered for exemption from the COE system. Commercial vehicles should also be considered for exemption in the interest of lowering transport costs for businesses, thereby reducing the prices of goods and services.

ERPs should operate only on major roads leading into the central business districts and only during the peak office hours. Saturdays should be free from ERP and the collection of ERP for vehicles leaving Orchard Road should stop. Whilst there may be a case to collect an administrative fee non-payment of ERP charges and a penalty for further default despite reminders, inadequate payment due to insufficient stored value in cash cards should not attract any such fees or penalty. The ERP system should deduct whatever is available in the card and allow the motorist to pay the shortfall within a prescribed period.

Traffic congestion can be substantially reduced construction works are not carried out so intensively.  Heavy trucks and construction vehicles add to the traffic volume and and certain arterial roads could be designated off-limits to construction vehicles during peak hours. More traffic policeman should be deployed on patrols and traffic lights could be better synchronized to smoothen traffic flow. 

State policies should be imbued with pro-people sensitivities to promote trust and respect for the systems that are suppose to operate for their benefit. We can certainly do more in this respect.

Why I cannot join SPP to contest in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC

Some netizens have expressed their wish that I avoid a 3-corner fight with SPP and reconsider the suggestion by a cadre member of SPP to join them instead to contest in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.

I am glad that there is an intense interest in the contest in Potong Pasir SMC which would otherwise have been just another one of those constituencies with only 2 choices for voters in the coming general elections.

Please allow me to explain why the suggestion is not workable. 

1. I have no wish to be a party-hopper and made this commitment to myself when I joined the National Solidarity Party ("NSP"). I repeated this commitment to myself when I left NSP. 

2. There are many former members from NSP who have joined SPP. If I join SPP, I will be seen as part of the NSP faction in SPP and this will not be in the best interests of SPP.

3. Every political party has its internal politics and I am totally unfamiliar with SPP's culture and internal workings. And I have no wish to be embroiled in any internal party politics at this time.

4. It would not be fair for me to displace anyone in the team that has already been formed to contest in Bishan-Toa Payoh for all the efforts that he/she may have put in.

5. It takes time for the members in SPP's team for the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC to know each other and they would have formed their synergy by now. It would not be right for me to disrupt their team spirit at this crucial time.

I thank all those netizens who support my decision to contest in Potong Pasir SMC and those who encourage me to remain firm in my decision. May the best candidate in Potong Pasir SMC win on his or her own merits.

THEME: Medical Care and Costs

There is an old saying by Singaporeans that derides the medical costs in Singapore. It says that in Singapore, you cannot afford to fall sick and it is better to die. The underlying sentiment is that the costs of medical care and treatment is beyond affordability.

Medical costs have been constantly rising like the earth's surface temperature and in the last five years, there has been a sharp rise in private healthcare costs (Read HERE). The fastest rising component appears to be doctors' bills. According to a report, the costs of doctors in private practice have jumped very significantly and even a simple lumbar disc surgery by a junior doctor has shot up 5 times from S$5,000 to S$ 25,000. The other components that have risen rapidly are clinic costs and overheads.

When private medical costs shoot up, there will be a flow of private patients into the public healthcare system. Medication and lab tests fee have risen across the board. Over at the 18 neighbourhood polyclinics, even the costs of consultation have risen. Singaporean adults pay up to S$11.90 and children and non-pioneer generation patients pay a maximum of S$6.80 for basic consultation. Up from S$11.00 to S$11.30 and S$6.10 and S$6.40 in October 2014. The reason given was that operating costs such as utilities, infrastructure, equipment and inflation, have gone up.

There does not appear to be a ceiling to the medical costs that patients have to pay and the sky is the limit. The recent case of a Singapore surgeon charging a foreign patient S$ 24.8 million has sent shock waves throughout the land. Doctoring is seen as the most lucrative professions to be in and many doctors prefer to practice plastic surgery and aesthetic medicine which are considered the most profitable. With high medical costs, "pay as charged" medical insurance became popular but these policies began to see medical costs rising even higher as they encourage doctors to charge higher fees with insurers footing the bill. Medical tourism brought in well-heeled patients who are willing to pay high charges for health screenings and various surgical procedures, leading to a vicious cycle of higher and higher medical costs.

How can we address the concerns of ever-rising medical costs in a fast expanding population where the number of aged people is growing rapidly and further ensure that all those who need medical care will not be left out? I will share some of my thoughts in my next blog.

Debunking the myths about Party Candidates and Independent Candidates

Some people think that independent candidates are working all by themselves and are very limited manpower and that therefore, they may not be able to run a town council. They even think that conversely, political parties and party candidates have better resources and are better able to run town councils. If we care to think deeper, these are merely assumptions and are not absolute truths.

Political parties and party candidates cannot merely rely on the identity of their organisation alone to reach out to voters. There is physical work to do - reaching out to people and engaging them and for all these you need supporters and various resources. Identity alone as a registered political party is not going to make things work which is why some registered political parties are unable to function at all or do so effectively.

As a potential independent candidate, I do not come under any party banner. This is by my own choice. I do not have a party identity but rely on my own identity. I am what you see and but not everything you see. I am not a one-man show and do not do everything by myself. Behind me, I have a strong team of supporters who are dedicated to help me in my candidacy.

As you would have noticed, I have done substantial groundwork. The amount of work that I have been able to do on the ground and so extensively speak for themselves. It would not have been possible without the support of my team of supporters.

As a matter of fact, when news of my departure from the National Solidarity Party was released, various political parties were quick to invite me to join them. Besides knowing the extent and quality of my work, they are also interested in the support that I have in terms of manpower and resources. The fact is that, with my team of supporters, I am in a position to compete against any party candidate standing for election in any single-member constituency and run a town council. 

I will, however, emphasis that not all independent candidates come from the same mould. The supporting manpower and resources would be different for each of them. People should not discount an independent's potential simply because he has no political party to fall back on but should judge them by their work. My team functions like a party machinery and after the elections, there are plans to register a political party to provide a platform and support for those who prefer to be party candidates and subscribe to Peolitics.

We should be able to see the difference between form and substance when comparing party candidates with independent candidates. And you will be able to appreciate that some independent candidates may indeed be substantially better than party candidates.