PM Lee apology

Credit where credit is due, it's refreshing to hear PM Lee admitting and apologizing for 'mistakes' that had been made over the years. It is also admirable of him to stand up to MM Lee and tell voters that he does not feel the same way, and that he sending a reminder (to his dad no less) that he is now the man in charge.

However, the timing and sincerity of the apology left many questions unanswered. Why now?

If the apology had came IMMEDIATELY after the mishaps, I would have praised PAP for finally manning up and admitting to their fallacies.

If the apology had came AFTER THE ELECTIONS, after their expected re-entry as the legit govt for the next 5 years, I would have praised them for being a gentleman, and looked forward to see them carrying out changes.

Now, with the apology coming in the heat of the elections, after denying that there was a problem for so long, why now?? Pressure from opposition?? It seemed to lend weight to the opposition's argument that having a 'co-driver' or simply someone to watch over and instil pressure on the incumbent to do what they are supposed to do, and do it better. Yet another own goal from the PAP?

To PM Lee, thanks for taking the effort, I may give my vote to you as a person if I still reside in Amk, but I do not thing that your party is deserving of it.

Growth and share package

This morning I encountered a long queue outside a local bank at 830am. Opening hour is 9am, but there was easily more than 50 people already in the queue which is far more than normal. I later realised that it was for the encashment of growth and share package cheque.

I remember when I used to work in our local banks, queues like these formed into the hundreds before branch opens during periods like this. Most of these people are the elderly and retirees which needs more attention in filling up forms or where to go etc so we try to help out the best we can.

I remember asking an elderly customer once.

"Why so kiasu auntie?" I said jokingly. "Wait a few more days then encash lah, or just drop into the quick cheque deposit box, tomorrow after 2pm can withdraw via ATM, no need to queue."

I can still remember what she said even now.

"Ah di, auntie no money already. Don't encash now how I am going to buy food for my next meal? I don't have any bank accounts with any banks as I cannot afford the minimum balance required and the banks keep deducting money from me every month!"

There are a lot more of these 'aunties' that I used to encounter almost on daily basis. They are mostly uneducated, illiterate and needs help to use machines or read the english letters the bank sent out. It seemed like the world has passed them by. Worst of all, they did not realised it.

They know that things are getting more expensive, but they don't understand why.

They know that jobs are getting more difficult to come by, but they don't understand why.

What they 'know' is that the government is 'helping' them by giving them money to spend. So they keep voting for the party that is actually causing them their problems in the first place.

Sad.

Thoughts on CNA TV debate forum

Touted as first time ever in Singapore, unedited, uncensored. It got me all excited staying in on a Saturday night to catch it. Honestly, I was kinda disappointed but I probably got my hopes up a bit too high. Some positives to take away from the whole show though, and it certainly changed my opinions on some of the parties involved. A very good writeup on the performance of the participants are provided here Just like to add some individual comments.

Vincent Wijeysingha from SDP really wooed me. To me and I believe alot of other Singaporeans, the SDP is a party characterized by CSJ. Love him or hate it, its a there isn't much middle ground. Often seen as extreme and attention seeking party by many, I'm pleasantly surprised to see someone like Vincent who speaks well, calm and collected, making decent points for us to think about along the way and backs up his arguments with facts instead of succumbing to emotions. Based on the performance of all present at the debate, he would get be the one getting my vote. 9/10

Minister Tharman was pretty decent too. The 2nd best performance in the entire debate. Calm, speaks clearly, and comes across as sincere and genuine. Didn't say anything that we haven't already heard but doesn't come across as snobbish at all which is not something I can say for most PAP candidates. 8/10

Gerald Giam from WP did decent. Not spectacular, seems to show some nerves, but able to articulate and brings his point across. Nowhere as witty as Vincent from SDP, but bring up some valid points and comes across as genuine was well. Does have a mummy's boy feeling though. Need more experience and perhaps a stronger guiding hand. 6.5/10

Josephine Teo from PAP came across as scripted and fake to me. Maybe I'm biased, but she seemed to have a condensing look and tone when speaking to the opposition which I personally can't stand. Didn't offer much at all. 4/10

Nazem Suki from SDA looks very uncomfortable. The way he keep looking at the fellow opposition members when he speaks and constantly asking for reassurance doesn't inspire confidence. I ended the show not really knowing what he or his party stands for. 4/10

Lina Chiam from SPP comes away from the debate rock bottom. Honestly, whenever the camera pans to her, I cringe a little. There was this period she totally went blank and tried to blame it on a headache or something which I felt totally disgraceful. Did she fall asleep while the others are talking?? I don't know how I can trust a person like this with my vote. 0/10

On smear campaigns against Tin Pei Ling

I'll put this across bluntly. People of jealous of this gal.

I'll put my hand up and admit it. I am jealous of her, I truly am. Because like many of the netizens, I feel that even I could make a better candidate than her. Nothing against her personally, she's probably a nice gal and all, your average gal next door, but its like.. she just lacks depth... What does she stands for? Who is she speaking for? Her biggest regret is not having brought her parents to Universal Studio?! I mean, seriously??? WTF?! Honestly, with people like her as your MP is like having Ris Low as Miss Singapore. It really really doesn't put Singapore in very good light. Is this really the best we got?

Irregardless, she is going to be someone, that apart from keeping her high-paying day job, gets another 'part-time' job that not only is probably going to pay higher than what you are getting in your full time job, YOU, as a tax payer are going to pay for it and there is nothing you can do about it cos of this bloody joke called the GRC.

In essence, the PAP could put their favorite tea-lady from the minister office say in MM Lee's GRC ward. She could be your next MP! So what if she may hail from China and doesn't speak a word of english and never attended school in her life? What are you going to do about it? You can be a degree holder and work yourself to death and chances are you would not be getting more than her 'part-time' job. To add insult to injury, the money you worked so hard to earn, goes into funding the fat paychecks of people like these. Are we suckers or what?! Angry? No, I'm JEALOUS!

Thats why everyone hates her. They want to be in her shoes.

Empty vessels make the most noise

Was doing some bedtime reading before heading to bed when i saw the following article on CNA

It is healthy that there's political contest in S'pore: Ng Eng Hen

By Lynda Hong | Posted: 11 April 2010 1940 hrs

It is healthy that there's political contest in S'pore: Ng Eng Hen

SINGAPORE : Education Minister Ng Eng Hen on Sunday said it is healthy that there is political contest in Singapore.

He was responding to reporters who asked him about the recent activity by opposition parties in various constituencies.

Dr Ng joined 300 residents in Toa Payoh for some Sunday morning exercise.

Elaborating on his point that political contest is healthy, Dr Ng said he would encourage would-be candidates and opposition parties to meet residents so that residents could ask them questions about what they stood for.

He said: "I think it is healthier for Singapore, rather than just appearing before the elections and then not continuing. I have noticed that opposition parties are doing this more regularly, and I think all-in-all, it is good for politics in Singapore."

Dr Ng said PAP MPs assume that there would be a contest each time, and so the MPs have been working the ground to improve the lives of residents.

This point was also emphasised by Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong at a separate community event.

Mr Gan also told reporters that there has not been a shortage of ideas within the ruling party.

He was asked to respond to Reform Party leader Kenneth Jeyaretnam's comments in a TODAY interview that a one-party system will lead to a society closed to new ideas.

Mr Gan said that PAP MPs have been proactive in implementing their ideas.

He said: "During the last recession, you also see that we have rolled out many initiatives, including the Jobs Credit, SPUR and so on.

"They were very effective in helping our companies and workers cope with the recession and allowing our economy to recover very strongly, very quickly since the second half of last year."

Mr Gan added that the PAP MPs have also been focused on serving the residents and improving their estates. - CNA/ms

Not wanting to elaborate too much on the highlighted text, but based on my own personal very unscientific, biased and non-proven experience, I would like to re-account on the following,

I have lived in my current estate since year 2001. I have NEVER seen any walkabout by ANY political parties until 2006. Given that my estate was previously a walkover GRC, only to be remove and gazetted into another zone for the 2006 elections, it wasn't all that surprising. That was the first time I started seeing any parties appearing in or near my estate. So BOTH parties i would say are guilty of what Mr Ng mentioned, "just appearing before the elections". It was during this period though, that attending rallies etc that i know more or what each candidate, not just their party stood for, before I cast my first ever vote in 2006.

Fast-forward to today, 2010. My estate is a PAP ward. Over the last few years, I have seen the Workers Party people around my area, but they didn't come door to door I assume, cause I never did get to speak to them, but I recognised them through their party uniform. I also saw Mr Low twice, and said hi to him because I know and recognised who he is. On the other hand, I have yet to ever see any PAP people around my area, maybe they weren't wearing the party uniform, or they were not doing any group event, I honestly do not know. I have NEVER seen my MP, who is a full minister, and probably very busy with his work to come down from his ivory tower to talk to us lesser mortal.

Or maybe its just me who never had the good fortune of running into them when I'm in around the estate, and/or that I'm never home when they visited my place over the last couple of years. Just for the record, I think I have struck 4d about twice over the last couple of years, yet I have not met my MP before. So my personal conclusion is that, its easier to strike 4d than meeting your my MP?