Afterthoughts – Punggol East By-Election

Finally found some time to put my thoughts down…

“Take me to the magic of the moment
On a glory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
in the wind of change”

– Excerpts, Winds of Change
(by Scorpions)

As the Workers’ Party did not have an assembly center and gathering point last Saturday (26 Jan 2013), a friend and I made our way to the unofficial one at the coffee shop in Blk 322, Hougang Avenue 5. We met at Hougang MRT station, and had our dinner at Hougang Mall. On hindsight, we should just have eaten at that coffee shop instead since we might have gotten a table in front of the TV. When I was on my way, another friend has asked me in sms why I am wasting my time to go to Hougang (from Jurong), and I told him I just want to be there to witness a historical moment – regardless whether the WP win or not. A part of the Winds of Change lyrics basically summarizes what I thought. Ya, I know I am very corny, even lame.

As we were having dinner, my friend and I discussed much, and on one occasion we spoke about the reasons why the other two candidates (i.e. Kenneth Jeyaretnam and Desmond Lim) insisted on contesting even when most felt it would be futile. I said it was purely foolishness and they did so for personal glory. My friend pointed out that he doesn’t see it that way. He explained that even really intelligent people at times are blind to the fact that there are just things that they are incapable of. If not, then some capable people just do not realise they aren’t cut out for some roles. He has a good point, because the PAP has too often made us believe that academic qualifications not only equate to capabilities, but capabilities in everything. Unfortunately, qualifications and capabilities are really very different things. Academic qualifications is used to gauge a person’s capabilities simply because there are no better yardsticks.

On the other hand, being very capable in some of things you do doesn’t mean diddly-squat for the role of an MP as well. So all that talk about one’s success in other fields (whether you are the top hedge fund manager or the best colorectal surgeon), or what one has done in another town council is rather irrelevant. In fact, self-understanding – as in having the knowledge of what one is not cut out to do – is important. I understand that many gurus will say I am wrong because if people just simply give up when they fail then no one would have ever made it. It is understandable, since they need to justify that success story they are trying to sell everyone. To put it in a simple analogy, you can try using your teeth to chew on a piece of steel to get it into the shape you want, and die trying. But the knowledge that a diamond cutter would do the job and your jaws just can’t is another matter entirely.


The WP “Party Herald”

Anyway, we arrived at the unofficial “assembly center and gathering point” slightly after 7pm. When we arrived, there was no indication that any Workers’ Party [WP] supporters are around. Even though I can count at most 4 to 5 people in light blue shirts, it’s hard to tell whether they were there to support WP. It remained that way until 8 plus, after polling closed and the polling boxes were underway to the counting centers that the “Party Herald”that chap with the drum and trumpet – showed up. Suddenly the coffee shop erupted into cheers for the “Workers’ Party!!!” and we knew we are at the right place – the unofficial ‘Workers’ Party Canteen’.

More people start filing in after that. People with cameras at first, then members of the press (I saw a guy with a CNA camera). Though I couldn’t tell how many people there were from my position, I told my friend that times have indeed changed because I suspect in the past the riot police would probably have showed up and disperse the crowd standing around the coffee shop. By 11pm, there were actually enough people there for a successful political rally and all of us have probably violated the public gathering laws more times than we can count with our fingers.

The atmosphere was electrifying. People broke into Hokkien songs, cheers for the Workers’ Party and its candidate Lee Lilian from time to time. While I have often felt that Singaporeans are far less passionate about elections in the past, my impression completely changed at that coffee shop. The crowd was generally orderly, since they would make way for people who just simply want to be on their way without much a fuss. The only thing that I really dislike would be when they boo’ed and jeered at the other candidates when they appeared on TV. Incidentally, that reminded me of one of the WP speakers who had made fun of Dr Koh’s name. I simply felt we can be above that, in spite of our frustration and prejudices. Perhaps I was expecting too much, since there’s simply still a long way for democratic ideals to grow and take root after so many years of one-party rule.

While that was a low point, there was also a high. At one point, just a few minutes before the results were announced, the crowd even broke out singing the National Anthem. For a moment it was like we won the Malaysian Cup, and the patriotism almost brought tears to my eyes. To me, I felt we turned out that night not just for our displeasure (or even dislike) of the PAP, but rather for a common belief that there can be alternatives to make our country better.

That reminds me of a memorable conversation with one of the supporters at the coffee shop. As the crowd sings and more people filed in, my friend told me that slowly and surely the blue sky (the Workers’ Party) is melting away the white glaciers (the PAP). A Workers Party volunteer who has been chit-chatting with us, heard him and turned around and told us she understood the analogy. She told us she does not wish to see the PAP go in a bang, but would rather it goes like the polar ice cap or glaciers melt away. The reason is that the PAP has sunken its roots into many aspects in Singapore, both economically and socially. No one would expect that tree to be suddenly uprooted. That resonates our thoughts as well, and I dare say that is the typical profile of the WP supporter – rational and thoughtful. None of us are loonies, and in fact we do not want to see the PAP go abruptly even when some of us feel it is inevitable it will lose its grip on political domination.

Anyway, we went there without expecting a WP win that night. Rumors were flying fast and furious by 9:30pm, when one chap put his beer on our table and told us that a WP victory is confirmed and that Lilian has won 16000 votes. We though the chap was drunk so we ignored him. After that there were rumors that the PAP was leading by 2% and vice versa. By 10pm, we were sort of convinced that the WP has won because I recalled that the results for Hougang’s by-election was out way earlier and we were speculating that the votes are so close that a recount is underway. I failed to noticed that another friend who was a counting agent had sent me a Whatsapp message saying that there isn’t a recount. I suspect by then he was already released from the counting center and was free to text anyone. The wait dragged on and the crowd begin to chant the name of the returning officer – Mr Yam Ah Mee. I was prepared to hunker down for a long night when another friend who has just arrived called to ask us where we are.

It wasn’t long after he made his way through the crowd to our table that the results were released. The crowd literally exploded, and even cars driving past were honking in sync with the whistles and chanting of “Workers’ Party”. It was almost as if the country has emerged victorious from a long war.

The crowd stayed on in jubilant celebration as my friends and I hastily made our way to the MRT station while the trains are still in service. We pondered upon some of the reasons why the PAP has lost. Other than the fact that this is a by-election and everyone knew for sure it wouldn’t seriously impact the government, the PAP faces a rather serious problem. That is, it is seen as a party that is elitist and that it no longer cared. That has made it doubly hard for Dr Koh to connect with voters. The repeated emphasis on Dr Koh’s success story only served to distance him further from the voters. On the other hand, I met Lee Lilian more than half a decade ago at the WP HQ and she gives me the impression of being an approachable, affable person. She was the first person to not only welcome me, but made me feel at home, even introducing me to some of the other party members as if she has known me for a long time. There are just certain things a person cannot fake and her personality, plus her life story on how she worked her way to her degree would have endeared her to the voters. If Dr Koh is the Son of Punggol, then Lee Lilian is our sister, if not the people’s daughter. Even though this by-election is no indication of how Singaporeans will vote in the future, the PAP has an uphill battle to fight to earn the hearts and minds of Singaporeans again. In light of recent failures and oversight, the PAP should realise that its image as the ‘political party of the elite’ is already bankrupt. The electorate wants a person to serve and deal with their problems, and has very little respect for credentials.

As for the Workers’ Party, do not be proud. The electorate has given you the fourth chance to prove yourself. When we would only scrutinise the WP closely in the past, now we will be scrutinising it even closer with a magnifying glass. The Singapore Democratic Party [SDP] had its time of glory back in 1991, and it was subsequently found to be wanting. By the next election, all of its MPs were swept out of Parliament.

The will of the people is as fickle as the weather. As an ancient Chinese minister Wei Zheng (魏徵) once told the Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty (唐太宗) in a discussion: “The will of the people is like water. Water can carry a boat as well as it can capsize it.”

The WP should also expect underhanded attacks from supporters of other parties, if not the other political parties themselves. After all, everyone has the same objective and none of these parties will sit back and watch the WP grow stronger, regardless whether it is at their expense or that of the ruling party. In fact, there was already one such attack just a few days ago in which a writer to the Straits Times forum tried to smear WP as a Chinese-only party. It is utterly deplorable that the Straits Times even allowed that letter to be published in spite of the fact that WP has won a Group Representative Constituency [GRC] when no party can even contest one without a minority candidate. That seditious piece and racial politics simply have no place in Singapore.


Advertisement:



Random Discourse – Section 377A Revisited

Pastor Lawrence Khong of the Faith Community Baptist Church made a direct appeal to the ex-Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong against the repeal of Section 377A of the Penal Code. Any Christian who read the Scriptures in its context will understand why the Pastor did so, because it is upholding of God’s moral laws. For a Christian to support the repeal of Section 377A would mean more than just tolerance, it would mean the affirmation and endorsement of homosexuality. From events that has transpired in the United States, Christians are also clear that homosexual activism will not end with the repeal of Section 377A. I will not speculate on where homosexual activists will be taking it in Singapore, because there will always be that person who calls it a red herring, and then accused me of the slippery slope fallacy.

Because of this, Christians often end up being accused of imposing our morality upon others, and even worse labeled as intolerant and bigoted. But we Christians are not alone in our objection of homosexuality. Some might not realised that there is also a harsh punishment for homosexuals under the Shariah Law, but I will not go into the details of what the punishment is, lest I be accused of instigating hate. Furthermore, this is not a blog post to defend or justify the Christian position. I am also not attempting to point out that Christians are right because we are not alone. Numbers doesn’t mean right. The intention of this blog post is for non-Christians who are neutral in the matter to take a better look at Section 377A and consider the matter objectively, and also to examine those notions in favor of homosexuality. Let me present my case on for non-Christians to consider why Section 377A should not be repealed.


Sections 375 ~ 377D in the Penal Code

For starters, what is Section 377A? It is a section in the Penal Code which criminalises sex between men. Anyone can look it up in the statutes, and see that it is lumped together under ‘Sexual Offences’ in the Penal Code. It starts at Section 375, and ends at 377D. Apart from Section 377A, the other sections criminalise rape, sex with minors under 16, paid sex with minors under 18 (where a whole lot of men were recently charged and subsequently convicted in a high profile case), sex with dead bodies, incest, bestiality (i.e. sex with animals) and also the interpretation of some of the legal terms used. Without any intention to prejudice the audience with regard to Section 377A, I believe most would agree that some of these sexual offenses, in particular bestiality, necrophilia and pedophilia, are repulsive and disgusting.

Homosexual activists at times would call anyone a bigot for merely even bringing up the fact that Section 377A sits between the clauses criminalising necrophilia and bestiality. Less aggressive ones would point out that it stigmatise homosexual males and indirectly the rest of the LGBT. They want everyone to believe that Section 377A in particular “discriminates” against male homosexuals and it should not be there with the other sexual offences.

But is it so? Let us consider Section 376A and 376B, which respectively made it an offence to have sex with a person under 16, or paid to have sex with a person under 18. The definition of ‘minors’ (sometimes also known as ‘the age of consent’) in some countries varies so what is perfectly legal to a foreigner may not even legal in Singapore. So, even when it is perfectly legal in another country like Japan to have sex with a girl above 13 year-old, it is not legal to do so in Singapore. Does the law thus “discriminate” a Japanese person?

Next consider the preceding Section 377 itself, which made it an offence to have sex with a corpse. If I recalled correctly, Egypt allegedly planned to allow men to have sex with the dead bodies of their wives up to a certain number of hours. Considering how that outraged most of the world, I can safely conclude that even if something can be legalised, it doesn’t really legitimise (i.e. to make morally right or reasonable) it. In comparison, that also explains why some of us are rather indignant about the entire AIM-affair as well, even when the PAP want us to believe that it is right by showing that everything done was above the board and within the law.

Thus, the attempt to repeal Section 377A has only one main objective – i.e. to justify that sex between men must be “ok” because it is not illegal under the eyes of the law. Because the attempt to legitimately strike down this piece of law during the review in 2007 has failed, the only avenue left is to strike it down legally through wordings in the law, which explains why certain people have taken it to the courts to argue it is “discriminative” against a certain group of people under the Singapore Constitution.

It is very clear that only males are specified in some of these sexual offenses. For example, Section 375, 376, 376G, 377 and 377A all contained “Any man who…” in the wording. If we were to repeal Section 377A on the grounds that it is discriminative, why then do we retain Sections 377 and 377B as well? I am not not suggesting that some one will one day argue for repealing Sections 377 and 377B after Section 377A is repealed. But rather, I am asking why is it, and what is so much more offensive for a man to have sex with a dead body or an animal that we should keep those laws in place? I would like to listen to why the same does not apply for Section 377A. If it is said that human beings are not supposed to have sex with dead bodies or animals, please explain why males are “supposed to have sex” with males. Love? Let me get to that part in a short while.

Of course, in the case of necrophilia, pedophilia and bestiality, the element that is glaringly missing is that of consent. I agree, because it is obvious that the victims are either in no position or have no capacity to object. That is why there is also Section 376F to protect those who are mentality disabled. But is that good enough reason to repeal Section 377A? Is all sex between males necessarily be under mutual consent? It is often argued that Section 375 (which criminalises rape) can be expanded or modified to cover cases of non-consensual sex between males, but my point is simply why we should make consensual sex between males legal in the eyes of the law at all when there isn’t a part on the male body that is actually meant for sex with another male?

As my friend rightly pointed out – the mouth is for eating and the anus is for shitting. The mouth and anus can act as a substitute, and so does the hand for sexual gratification, but so can a hole in the wall. I know some would argue that Section 377A discriminates against male homosexuals because it is not an offence for a woman to have consensual oral and anal sex with a man, but the point is that Section 377A will also target bisexual males and transvestites. Interestingly, homosexual activists wants everyone to believe that Section 377A has also something to do with stigmatizing all LGBT persons when it has nothing to do with lesbians at all. I have to say it is ingenious but it also made all that talk about love in any male-to-male sexual relationship to justify repealing Section 377A a red herring. True love often includes commitment, and a male in bisexual relation would actually show the lack thereof, or else a polygamous relationship would be justifiable. Sex with a transvestite is also often transactional, which is also clear that it has nothing to with love. Not all sex is love either, or else sex with a prostitute or a fling would also be love. While there is no dispute that two men can love one another, whether there is love involved is irrelevant and immaterial in the argument for repealing Section 377A. Section 377A is a law about sexual misconduct, and not about love and the right to love. All this talk about love is nothing more than a sleight of hand, to hoodwink people so they will not consider Section 377A objectively. It is intended to mislead the public into believing that Section 377A “discriminates” against a certain group of loving people, which is why the cases are now heard in Court.

And to round it up, I understand that some will be asked then what is going to happen to those men who truly loves one another and need to have sex. My answer is this: There are many types of love, and there is only one kind of love that should involve sex – the kind of love between a husband and a wife. In short, there is really no reason for a man to have sex with another man, regardless whether it is consensual or not. That is why I also believe there is no reason for the state to repeal Section 377A just to make special concession for a particular group of people who insist in doing so.


Advertisement:



Current Affairs – Punggol East By-Election

Now that the candidates are known, it means Punggol East voters can start their decision process. For those who have decided to vote for an alternative candidate and would prefer to see one win, it is time to eliminate some of the choices. This would be how I would reduce the number of choices without using 1D6 (a six-sided dice).

Fortunately, the independent candidates all failed to get nominated so it saves everyone the trouble. Even if they managed to succeed, they will still be ruled out because of the requirement for the winning candidate to run the town council. While Mr Chiam See Tong also started off as an independent, he ultimately also founded his own party. In other words, the requirement to run a town council has more less eliminated the possibility of another person repeating Mr Chiam’s feat at Potong Pasir. So, that leaves the alternative candidates who are members of political parties, and I will then further disregard those from the Singapore Democratic Alliance [SDA] and Reform Party [RP].

Why do I disregard the SDA candidate? If I recalled correctly, there was what I perceived to be a “power struggle” within the Singapore People’s Party [SPP] and the SDA when Mr Chiam tried to bring the Reform Party [RP] into the fold. Even though it may not necessarily be a power struggle, the news reports of Desmond Lim’s actions – which may not necessarily portray what has truly transpired – brought back bitter memories of Mr Chiam ouster from the Singapore Democratic Party [SDP]. If there was any redeeming outcome to that little shit-storm, it would be that there will be no merger with RP. But it still left me with a not-so-sparkling impression of Desmond Lim.

The SDA also has two member parties – the Singapore Justice Party [SJP] and Singapore Malay National Organization [UMNO PKMS], but it is unlikely they could offer another candidate. In short, it is nothing more but an “alliance” in name but ‘one-man party’ in truth. A one many party is usually a bad thing, since the candidate basically do not need to worry about political continuity and I’ll elaborate a little more on that later, after I talk about Lim’s election strategy in 2011 and also why I would disregard the RP candidate.

In that election, Lim had slogans printed on his election posters which is basically an attempt to ride on the wave of resentment against the PAP. It obviously didn’t work out, because being upset with the PAP alone is never a good enough reason for most middle / swing voters to vote for an alternative candidate. Those who would typically vote anything but PAP may have voted for him, but only when there is no better candidate to consider. When I told my friend I was shocked at how badly Lim lost, my friend pointed out that Lim’s election slogans gave him the impression of Mao China during the Cultural Revolution. Non-Chinese voters will obviously feel neglected and I wondered why the PKMS did not protest (probably because it didn’t really understand those slogans anyway, and too busy with its own internal struggles). Lim can argue that the WP has been encroaching on his territory, and that he has been “walking the ground” and “serving the people” there, but most would interpret the voters’ rejection in the last contest as how they really felt about his work. It is rather surprising Lim still insist on contesting, since I was under the impression that he would have known how badly he did last round down to the polling station level.

Next, the RP. It is yet another one-man party. I had originally thought that Kenneth Jeyaretnam had over-estimated himself when he said he offered himself as the best candidate for the WP to back. I was wrong. The RP simply didn’t have any other candidate to offer as it has effectively ran itself into the ground. One only need to look at the party’s short history to come to the same conclusion. When Kenneth Jeyaretnam took over the Reform Party in April 2010, former party chairman Ng Teck Siong had called it an unconstitutional coup. Ng’s account detailing his departure, was posted on The Online Citizen. It would have been nothing more than a bitter old man’s parting shot had the party not suffered a mass resignation in February 2011. When former members like Jeannette Aruldoss, Tony Tan Lay Thiam, Hazel Poa, and Nicole Seah left and joined (and subsequently took over) the National Solidarity Party [NSP], the RP is effectively gutted. Is there any other notable person which the RP can offer now?

Even when I looked beyond the mess RP is in, I do not really know what to make of Kenneth Jeyaretnam. After the General Elections in May 2011, I recalled that he said he would look for a place in West Coast GRC to stay. I have no idea whether he kept up with that promise but if he did I could at least respect his conviction to try and eke out a niche for himself. But he has recently said he will move to Punggol East if he was elected. So whatever happened to his commitments to West Coast GRC? When he said he will not go “missing in action” in his nomination speech, did he feel a little tug at his conscience and remember the voters of West Coast GRC? It is ironical that his campaign in Punggol East is about “broken promises”. Even Desmond Lim wins hands down in terms of determination and commitment.

Furthermore, one of the “reasons” Kenneth Jeyaretnam gave for contesting in Punngol East is also one of the lamest I have ever heard – i.e. it was part of Cheng San which his father has contested. If anyone should support him because of his father, then by that very same argument, they should also resolutely support the Prime Minister not because of his own merit, but because he is Lee Kuan Yew’s son! Laying claim to another person’s legacy is no way of showing one’s own merit. What would we have thought of WP, if it had claimed to be the successor of JB Jeyaretnam’s mantle even if it no longer practice his brand of politics? Even the Prime Minister has the courage to stand up and say, “I am not my father” when we consider how long a shadow his father has cast.

For Kenneth Jeyaretnam to once again invoke the memories of his father showed that he has no grasp of election strategy, because the first few HDB blocks of Sengkang New Town which made up a large part of Punggol East were only just completed when his father was campaigning in Cheng San. Demographically, Punggol East today is a very different one from that of 1997. Even if it was the same, there is no reason to believe some of his father’s former supporters would remain loyal to him but not the WP which J.B. Jeyaretnam was Secretary-General in 1997. Kenneth Jeyaretnam may want to point out that the transfer of party leadership from his father to Low Thia Khiang took place in bitter acrimony, but why should anyone be interested in his family, or personal feuds with other individuals?

So, let me get back to the point on why any ‘one-man party’ is bad. That is because one-man parties are really not any better than an independent candidate even though there are party members to call upon which give the candidates a seemingly greater presence. As I mentioned earlier, there is also the matter of political continuity, or as some would put it – political “succession”. The lack of political continuity in the Singapore People’s Party is one of the reasons why Mr Chiam’s foray into Toa Payoh-Bishan GRC did not turn out as well as that of Low Thia Khiang’s into Aljunied. Political continuity in a party also means that a candidate would be less likely to be self-serving. While it can be argued that Desmond Lim and Kenneth Jeyaretnam may still be able attract new talents if they are elected, an election victory will only compliment a leader’s charisma and leadership qualities but not replace it. To put it into perspective, even Dr Chee Soon Juan has been more capable in attracting talents into the SDP in spite of the fact that he has not been able to contest in two General Elections for half a decade. Meanwhile, the SDA and RP have not been able to make the same progress in that aspect. The SDP’s recent dramatic and yet bold withdrawal from this by-election, may perhaps explain why the SDP is doing doing way better in terms of talent recruitment even when I may consider that its ‘branding’ may have perhaps been poisoned beyond redemption. Above which, the SDP may have ‘lost face’ here, but it had earned the grudging respect of some for its courage.

Lee Lilian of WP thus stands out among the rest of the alternative party candidates even before we consider her own merits. I am not saying that the eligible voters of Punggol East who are considering an alternative party candidate must definitely vote for her because that choice has always been theirs to made. I am only presenting my view why she is the best candidate to vote for, if voters would like to prevent a decisively PAP win. That’s not forgetting that voters must also put their feet down and put an end to the aspirations of willful, myopic and egoistic politicians.


Advertisement:



Commentary – Opposition “Disarray”

After having gone around to look for my friends at all the three McDonald’s near Chinatown MRT Station last evening(the result of a horrible 3G network not delivering my Whatsapp messages on time to my friends for them to inform me of their exact location), I was extremely hungry and also seething with anger when I finally arrived around 8pm at the correct McDonald’s restaurant. While I was chewing miserably on my Big Mac, I saw this on the Facebook app on my Xiaomi MI-2 phone:

The Singapore Democratic Party has called for a joint campaign with the Workers’ Party, where both parties field one SDP candidate. If victorious, the SDP candidate will enter Parliament and WP will run Punggol East Town Council.

I was suddenly laughing myself silly. After showing it to my friends, one of them gave this analogy (and I paraphrase):

It is like you have been wooing a girl, and when you are about to succeed some chap came around and say, “Hey, you let me have the girl. Support me while I woo her. If I marry her, I’ll specifically perform one husbandly duty – the sex, and you will bear all the rest of the husbandly responsibilities – like working to support her, love her, raise the children, take care of the in-laws etc. Consider this a combine effort to get ourselves a wife. On bo, BrooooOOOoooo?!”

If I was the Workers’ Party Secretary General, I would be laughing my ass off because this has got to be the dumbest proposal I have heard in my life. It not only insults my intelligence, it is simply political suicide! Just who will be so dumb to put in effort to run the town council for the SDP, and when things go wrong takes the blame for it? The proposal shows that the SDP is incapable of managing and running a town council just like the independent candidates. Running the town council is one of the yardstick in which an Member of Parliament is measured, and also one of the ways an MP can serve the voters who elected him. The SDP has basically told the voters of Punggol East that it is not interested in doing that, and they expect the voters to elect their candidate? Only the so-called “lunatic fringe” could have accepted and backed such an arrangement. This proposal is so outlandish and silly that Chee Soon Juan might as well also suggest to the Reform Party to back down and support the SDP’s so-called “Unity Candidate”, and whoever will be the Reform Party candidate can do the ‘Meet the People’ session and perhaps share half of the MP allowance if the SDP is elected. I wondered whether the SDP might actually get a favorable response, since Kenneth Jeyaratnam Jeyaretnam actually claimed credit for making a similar silly proposal to the WP even before the SDP did!

Someone had even suggested the SDP is determined to contest in Punggol East to block the WP from growing even stronger, because the WP has been growing at the expense of the other opposition parties. Well, that might explain why the SDP and RP are desperate to make a splash, or they risked marginalisation. But in their desperation, their stupidity has caused even the WP to lose credibility because the PAP Internet Brigade [IB] will now have a field day painting the entire opposition with the same brush. If this person’s assertion is true, the fact that the SDP and RP actually turned on the WP when they can’t eke out their own niche shows they are more interested in their own agenda, and not that of Singaporeans. Their attempt to keep all political parties equally matched and feeble will only help the PAP. On the other hand, some middle voters may even decide that it isn’t worth the time to listen to the opposition anymore. If this is some kind of grand melee, the PAP is awarded points for achieving a technical K.O. because the SDP and RP laid down on the canvas merely after the bell rung for Round 1. I am not upset because the SDP and RP (and a whole lot of other people) intends to contest the by-election in Punggol East as that is their right, and also that of any other eligible citizen to do so. But I am clearly upset now because these two opposition parties are insulting my intelligence!

While I am not against the SDP or anyone else contesting in Punggol East, I must point out that the SDP clearly over-estimates itself as it often does. Though that’s not as bad as Kenneth Jeyaratnam Jeyaretnam who clearly over-estimates himself when he offered himself as a candidate for the WP to back. First of all, the SDP says that if the WP would stand behind it, and it will field a candidate that will be able to defeat the PAP. It has got to be dreaming because in the 2011 General Elections, Michael Palmer of the PAP polled 54.54% (16,994 votes) of the votes. That’s not only more than half of the eligible votes polled but more than half of Punggol East’s 33,281 voters. Both opposition candidates polled a collective amount of 45.46% of the votes. The victory margin of the PAP was 9.08% (2830 votes). Assuming the PAP suffered a 10% vote loss from their supporters due to Palmer-Laura Ong affair, at best that would add 1,700 votes to the opposition and make the contest evenly matched when we must also consider that some of the opposition voters might also swing in the PAP’s favor. In comparison, for the WP victory in Aljunied to happen, the PAP suffered almost a 20% vote loss in Aljunied compared to their votes polled in 2006 and that include a reduction in voters in Aljunied as a whole. In other words, the SDP wants us to believe it will not only outperform the opposition showing in the previous contest, it can actually defeat the PAP when there is no conclusive evidence that there will be a definite opposition victory. That’s not forgetting that regardless of the credentials of the SDP candidates, the SDP name has been so poisoned that it actually gives some middle voters pause when making their decision, which might add to the vote loss the opposition is also expected to suffer. Furthermore, if the WP backed another party and not participate, voters who previously voted for the WP in GE2011 may also be pissed about being “abandoned” after they have offered their support just slightly less than 2 years ago. Perhaps the SDP leadership has some crystal ball that we do not know of to be so confident in their assertion.

The only hope for a opposition victory would be opposition voters voting defensively and sensibly so we can see the ‘Anson Spirit’. If the RP thinks this is my endorsement of their bid to contest in Punggol East, I must say whether there is a Jeyaratnam Jeyaretnam in this contest doesn’t matter at all. In fact, the Jeyaratnam Jeyaretnam name would be further sullied if the votes it obtained paled in comparison even to that of Harbans Singh in 1981. I wonder if the old man would be rolling in his grave. Personally, I hope the RP Secretary General would stop invoking the name and memories of his father, because he has drawn down on that account so often that it is now perhaps into overdraft.

It is my wish that the SDP and RP end their childish behavior, and just concentrate on the upcoming campaign. At the very present, they seem to be doing more to destroy their campaign than to win it. If all these talks will win anyone the seat in Punggol East, there is only one party they should be talking to, the PAP. Because whoever who can talk the PAP out of the contest really deserved the seat hands down and the other parties should just abstain.

Regardless whether the opposition gained the seat in Punggol East, it doesn’t really matter because it doesn’t really tip the balance in Parliament in anyway. However, it would have the effect of a mid-term election for the ruling party, because it will be a signal to the PAP whether the people are accepting what it has been doing since GE2011. In any case, the star of some parties will rise higher while some would fall. No matter how the SDP and RP perform in this coming election, they will most likely only sink deeper back into the cesspool they are already in. There might not be any effect for the already dismal Singapore Democratic Alliance [SDA] overall, but many voters do expect the non-WP opposition parties to do what they felt is sensible. Surprisingly, by virtue of doing almost absolutely nothing (except announcing that it would not contest in Punggol East), one party has elevated itself to a position right after the WP – the National Solidarity Party [NSP]. Some might think that the NSP must be regretting its decision not to contest, but by staying clear of the controversy, it would gain some respect for its resolve. By seemingly doing nothing, the NSP has done the most for opposition unity!

Even the Singapore People’s Party [SPP] also somewhat elevated itself up the ranks, though one would say Mrs Chiam maybe no less a maniac than Chee Soon Juan. But Lina Chiam was a nurse, and is Mr Chiam’s wife. In my considered opinion, Lina Chiam is fiercely loyal to her husband and may not necessarily be a power hungry person out to seize power. Whatever she has been doing may simply be a faithful wife doing everything necessary to protect her husband from further harm, considering Mr Chiam’s physical condition after his stroke. I am not surprised if everything she does is what she perceived to be in the best interest of Mr Chiam, considering his experience with the other party he founded – the SDP – and also the SDA. Sadly, Mrs Chiam may not be aware that her actions is doing far more to destroy Mr Chiam’s legacy while she protects him from further harm.


Advertisement:



Commentary – Legality vs Being right

After I read the 26-paragraph statement from Teo Ho Pin, this immediately came to mind: “If being right is standing on your own two feet, resorting to legality and claiming that everything is procedurally in order and thus being right, would be like crutches to the legless. It is their only way to stay upright. And there’s only one outcome to that, that they will need to expend large amount of energies holding on to those crutches even if they want to go anywhere, or else they will be crawling like worms on the ground.”

I understand describing the PAP this way would be insulting to handicapped people without legs, and I apologise for all the offense I have caused to this courageous and determined group of people because I can’t think of a better analogy as yet. I meant no offense, because their will to live on is admirable and a beacon for able-bodied people who lost hope.

But why did I think of such an analogy? That’s because what Teo Ho Pin wants us to know is that everything is according to procedure and above all, legal. The logic is that as long as everything is prim and proper, then it has to be right. Indeed, Teo Ho Pin wants us to believe that it is right, and everything leading to the decision to do it was logical. But there is a difference between being right, compared to being logical, legal and according to procedure. Even though it may not be illegal because it is all according to procedure and proper reasoning, it still doesn’t make it right. So, I won’t waste time rebutting his entire statement point by point like some have done ever so resolutely, nor will I go again into the matter of alleged conflicted of interests. I am putting all that aside not because they are not important, but I simply prefer not to join everyone else in flogging a dead dog. On top of which, I reject his statement because it doesn’t make any sense. Let me explain why.


Click for Original Size

Teo Ho Pin may imagine his statement to be perfect, but there is a chink in that armor and I had to point it out. First of all, the closing date of the tender is 14th July 2010. But according to Teo Ho Pin’s statement, AIM only submitted its bid on the 20th July 2010. Why is the bid even accepted 6 days after the tender has closed? A few of my friends who do sales told me that this doesn’t make sense because they often had to rush down to submit bids before the closing date. At times, even when the office may close at 5pm, the bidding would have ended at 4pm because the officer in charge of the tender process has collected the documents and he has the discretion to reject further bids even though the day is not yet out. The question here is, was there a hitherto unknown new tender called after the end date on 14th July which allowed AIM to submit this bid? Had Teo Ho Pin missed out this important detail in his long winded statement? (This had been the kind of effort I expected of Teo Ho Pin when he was asked whether someone has received a 8-month bonus in the Northwest Community Development Council back in March 2009. Instead, all he said was he had no knowledge of the staff’s salary details, and that it may not be unwarranted and was all according to National Wage Council Guidelines. That response clearly paled in comparison to what he has done here. Perhaps, these self-styled “elites” will only start putting in an effort to do what is necessary when backed into a corner.)

Anyway it was reported on The New Paper that Mr Oliver Tian, the Chief Executive of Hutcabb Consulting, one of the companies which collected the tender document said, “It was very hard to make a decision based on what was provided. After paying more than $200, we simply got a thin stack of documents and the town councils were unable to provide us with more information.”

This give us the perception that none of the other 4 companies were actually given sufficient information to be able to put in a bid. So, as part of my wish to understand and accept that everything is according to procedure (and thus legal), the anomalies above has poked an even bigger hole in Teo Ho Pin’s statement. Will Teo Ho Pin please further elaborate on all these matters so we can be clear once and for all? How about revealing the tender documents so we can see for ourselves?

I was also told that it is very commonly done for entities that wishes to be asset light to do a ‘sell and lease back’for e.g. a company selling all the desktops and servers to a system integrator and then leasing them – but doing so with a $2-company is completely unheard of. It further boggles the mind when AIM is not even listed on common directories like the Yellow Pages and the Green Book, and it’s physical address is that of the PAP Community Fund cum PAP HQ. It also has no company website, and thus it begs the question on how it satisfy the eligibility criteria as an ‘experienced and reputable company with relevant track record’ as stated on the advertisement (see inset above). Teo Ho Pin said nothing about AIM’s capabilities nor its relevant experience but instead talked about how AIM’s offer of $140,000 for the software “earned” 14 town councils just a meager amount of $8000 nett, and also its affiliation to the PAP. It would require a lot of faith – the religious kind – to accept that such a secretive and virtually unknown $2-company had met the requirements of the tender on “its own merits”. That’s about as good as I telling you that my favorite plumber can perform an operation on your mother.

“Last night, Mr Chandra Das declined to give details of AIM’s track record and business dealings…” – Straits Times, 3 Jan 2013.

To make matters worse, Chandra Das, an ex-PAP MP, was reluctant to give any details on AIM’s track record and business dealings. That in itself is strange since many IT companies would be happy to reveal such information which often projects confidence and competence, while their success with other customers would serve as case studies for consideration. Coupled with Teo Ho Pin’s assertions that AIM is backed by the PAP and will thus honor its commitments, business might actually come rolling into AIM and it might actually turn into another success story like NTUC Fairprice supermarkets.

But without AIM’s portfolio to back up, it doesn’t matter at all Teo Ho Pin tells us that the AIM transaction had served public interest. This did nothing at all to assert AIM had the merits in the first place even though it may vindicate the decision to approve AIM’s bid. Teo Ho Pin may assert that there is no basis to suggest that the AIM transaction disadvantaged residents of Town Councils, but he could perhaps only speak for the PAP ones. There is no denying that Aljunied-Hougang Town Council [AHTC] was subjected to terms and conditions negotiated not by it’s current management but the PAP one, and the outcome of that certainly created a mess for AHTC. To put things back into proper perspective, I am not making any allegations that AIM – fully owned by the PAP – has not acted in good faith, or that it is motivated by political agenda in how it subsequently handled its business relationship with AHTC. I am simply pointing out that this is the general perception and so far all these statements and clarifications etc has not changed that perception a single bit. Hopefully, Singaporeans are still entitled to think, and feel a certain way about certain matters.

Even if there is any blogger who wanted to help the PAP change that perception, they have nothing solid to stand on. It would be entirely foolhardy for anyone to even try to write what Grace Fu wrote in a recent Facebook status – that focusing on AIM was irrelevant, and suggest that this is nothing more than politicking by the Workers’ Party to divert attention from the alleged mismanagement of its own town council. Has none of the PAP grassroots even informed her that the Town Council Management Report is perceived as nothing more than an attempt to make the Workers’ Party look bad? Assuming that perception is true, then it has badly backfired. It makes us wonder how someone like Grace Fu, who is purported to be some of the most elite people in this country, had her head in the fog and apparently does not understand the crux of the matter. I guess, it’s really hard to be politically sensitive when one is high up in the ivory tower. Above which, why is the minister herself speaking up for AIM? If AIM has been such a reputable and experienced company that we are made to believe, why can’t it speak for itself? I have to say, AIM would have been quite an inspiration to budding entrepreneurs, had AIM not been affiliated with the PAP. Where else can we find $2-company which can win tenders, and even have ministers defend it and 14 clients at one go?!

It has been about 3 weeks after this matter come to light, and there has been nothing concrete enough to fight the perception of this being nothing more than a lame and underhanded attempt to fix the Workers’ Party. In fact, I am getting really confused on where to draw the line between the PAP, the PAP Town Councils and AIM, even though they have different names, and are different legal entities. Teo Ho Pin maybe able to show everything to be legal and procedurally correct, but that will never made it right. Just like the Mas Selamat issue, the PAP may think it can talk its way out, but this matter will not come to a happy conclusion until someone takes the fall. Perhaps there is only one option left for Teo Ho Pin, that is to do what is proper and resign as co-ordinating chairman and even as Member of Parliament. That might actually act like a salve for public anger over this matter and do his party some good even though no one could really say this is his fault.

But if he wants to stay put and hope we forget this whole AIM matter like a bad fart, he might want to remember Mr Wong Kan Seng and the case of Mas Selamat’s escape. Singaporeans didn’t really forget that one even though few people seems to be still talking about it after some time.


Advertisement: