Dr. Lily Neo vs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan

Parliament No:	11
Session No:	1
Volume No:	82
Sitting No:	20
Sitting Date:	2007-03-09
Section Name:	BUDGET
Title:	HEAD I - MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, YOUTH AND SPORTS

 <<< below is an extracted record from parliamentary debate >>>

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar):
Mr Chairman, the Minister yesterday announced that PA allowance would be increased by $30 a month, from $260 to $290. The Minister did not answer my two questions on whether PA allowance commensurates with inflation and whether there has been a study done to ascertain whether PA allowance serves the needs of the recipients.

Sir, my single constituents told me that they needed to skip one meal a day to live on the $260 per month. And now, MCYS is going to give them $1 more a day. But, Sir, $1 a day will not be able to buy them one meal a day in any hawker centre.


Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
When we did this review of the Public Assistance rates, we took into account both the impact of inflation since the last review as well as the impact of the GST increase. There will always be arguments about whether a sum that we have decided is enough or not. As I said yesterday, frankly, one limiting factor must be that the sum that we give through Public Assistance cannot be so generous as to erode the work ethic. As I said again yesterday, if you take a family with three children, the amount they can receive from Public Assistance - I do not have the exact figure now - I think exceeds $900. At that level, you are getting dangerously close to the earnings of a low-wage worker.

Having said that, I think there will always be unique circumstances when some families find that that sum is not enough. And that is where the community and grassroots organisations have to come in and look for those mitigating or exceptional circumstances and more help is necessary. So the key point is that as far as the entitlement portion is concerned, I will admit that that is set low. But have flexibility, have organisations and individuals who are able to assess special needs of special families and then respond accordingly. That is the system which we have.


The alternative is to set the entitlement at a very high level. But once you do that, I think you would not have only 3,000 families on Public Assistance, you will see many multiples of families.


Dr Lily Neo:
Sir, the Minister said that the increment was done in such a way so as not to take away the work ethic. Surely, this argument cannot be applied to PA allowance recipients because this is a group of people that can never work either due to poor health, old age or disability. Therefore, this work ethic concept does not work. The other point is that the Minister said that this group of people can depend on grassroots organisations and others. Am I to understand that MCYS cannot provide adequately for the most vulnerable group of our society and that PA recipients must go and seek help from others? He said yesterday that in this globalisation, he would ensure that increasing number of Singaporeans would not feel left out and that he would provide more assistance to the poor to cope with the higher cost of living. May I ask him: should providing three meals a day not be a priority of his promise?


Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
I take the Member's point that for Public Assistance, we have fairly strict criteria. But having said that, I am still not willing to go to the other extreme and say that since we have got strict criteria, we can afford to be generous. This is the same point that Mr Seah Kian Peng raised yesterday. I have sympathy for that point, but I would still appeal to Members of this House to exercise caution.


Her second question was: why must they go and seek help? Why must they ask for it? I would like to remind her again of my speech yesterday when I said that if it is going to be low on entitlement and high on flexibility, then we do want some effort to be exerted on the part of the recipients. Yes, we do want them to go and ask for help. But I also said yesterday that, let us not get too carried away and reach a stage where if someone does not know or does not want to ask for help, we ignore that person. I have also asked the community organisations, neighbours, voluntary welfare organisations and the rest of us, if we see someone who needs more help, enquire about that person and organise the help.

Let us talk about meals since the Member has phrased her question specifically about three square meals. You and I, in fact, all of us, know that there are programmes for meals at home. There are organisations which specifically bring bread and rations, many of which are bought from FairPrice, gratitude to Mr Seah as well. But there are schemes like this. That allows me to say with a clear conscience to both the PAP and the Opposition MPs that nobody in Singapore needs to starve, nobody needs to be deprived of healthcare, and nobody needs to be deprived of a roof over his or her head. If someone indeed is so destitute and is starving, we have other means and other safety nets for them. We can bring them to the Pelangi Home, and I would invite all of you to come to Pelangi Home and see the standard of care, the facilities, the food and the way we look after them.


So, please do not run away with the misconception that Singapore is a cold, heartless place where, because we are so strict on criteria and entitlements, people are starving, freezing and denied the dignities of life. All I am asking Members is just to bear these principles in mind. Entitlements will always be low, ie, the person has to ask you for help and not bang on your table for help. We will always need the many- helping-hands model, not because the Government is broke. We can always do more and we can always raise GST further. But that is not the tone of the society that we are trying to create. We are saying that, yes, there will always be problems in society and it cannot be only the Government to do it because, if you want the Government to do it all, it means higher taxes and a large bureaucracy. As we can see in many other countries who have created elaborate welfare-states based on the best of intentions and the softest of hearts, such systems ultimately failed, they are not efficient and they are going to run out of money. We will see that happen in our lifetime, but we will make sure that that does not happen in Singapore.

As the Minister for MCYS, those are the dilemmas and the trade-offs that I have to make.


2.30 pm


Dr Lily Neo:
Sir, I want to check with the Minister again on the strict criteria on the entitlement for PA recipients. May I ask him what is his definition of "subsistence living"? Am I correct to say that, out of $260 per month for PA recipients, $100 goes to rental, power supply and S&C, and leaving them with only $5 a day to live on? Am I correct to say that any basic meal in any hawker centre is already $2.50 to $3.00 per meal? Therefore, is it too much to ask for just three meals a day as an entitlement for the PA recipients?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?

Dr Lily Neo: It is cheaper to cook for one person.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
It is cheaper to cook for one person.
The point I was trying to make is that every family will have different needs and preferences. I am not by any stretch of the imagination claiming that what we are offering as public assistance is a generous package. I am not saying that. But what I am saying is that it is enough, by and large, for most families to get by and, for those who have needs over and beyond that, there are other means to do so. If every one was starving on this amount that we are giving and is totally devoid of any other sources of help, Pelangi Home would be overcrowded, and I would be building many, many more Pelangi Homes. So, in the end, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Yes, any one of us, if we search hard enough, may be able to find a family or people who need additional help. But I would also say that any one of us, if we really put our minds to it, is capable of finding those additional sources of help. What I am designing is a system in which public assistance can and should be complemented by other sources of help. I think we can continue arguing this and we can continue finetuning the exact amount that is needed. But let us just bear in mind the fact that the system is set up with a certain amount of tension, and it is a healthy tension.

In fact, I cannot resist saying that I am very disappointed that in the whole debate on MCYS, the Opposition MPs have not participated in this, and I have actually faced real probing questions more from the PAP MPs and the Nominated MPs. Perhaps, they totally agree with my policies, philosophy and programmes.

Next Likely Presidency Candidate -Ms Chan Heng Chee

She is very eloquent but is Singapore ready for a woman president?

How to secure our future — Ngiam Tong Dow - dated 29th Jan 2011

* Ngiam Tong Dow is the former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance and the Prime Minister’s Office. He recently published Dynamics of the Singapore Success Story, a collection of his speeches, interviews, and articles delivered and written between 2004 and 2010.

How to secure our future — Ngiam Tong Dow January 29, 2011JAN 29 — It amuses me whenever well-meaning friends declare that Singapore, a little red dot on the world map, punches above its weight. Though I hail from St Andrew’s School, where boxing is almost a religion, I fail to figure out how a lightweight boxer, even if he were a Muhammad Ali, can floor a heavyweight.

As someone born and bred in Singapore, I often ask myself these two
questions: How do we secure our economic future? How do we secure our political future?

To me, the road ahead to secure our economic future is reasonably clear.
Since the 1960s, we have moved from a labour-intensive to a skill-based economy. Unemployment dropped from over 10 per cent to the full employment frictional unemployment rate of 3 per cent currently. So why do we worry about our economic future?

The great challenge is that we will soon be reaching the limits of our skill-based model of growth, and the only way is up. Mountaineers will tell you that when climbing a rock face, you cannot lose your nerve. If you look down, you will fall off the cliff. We have to move rapidly from a skill- to a knowledge-based economy.

Nothing stands still. China and India are rapidly catching up with the United States, Japan and Europe in the automotive industry. The manufacture of motor cars is basically skill-based. Japan and China are embarking on the design and production of commercial passenger aircraft. But it will take them considerably more time to succeed and compete with Boeing and Airbus. In particular, the design and production of the aircraft engine requires very much higher degrees of knowledge than the car engine.

In the last 10 years, I have heard more and more arguments from earnest young economists that Singapore should revert to being a pure service economy as we were a hundred years ago. We should just forget about manufacturing because it is too much hard work and we seek to be a wealth management centre.

I beg to disagree. First, I would like to point out that world scale wealth management centres like London, New York, Tokyo, and soon Shanghai, have taken over a century to become what they are today. More critically, they serve continental-size economies.

Singapore as an aspiring regional financial centre serves at best South-east Asia. In unstable times, Asian tycoons may migrate to the safe haven of Singapore where the rule of law applies more rigorously than in their home countries. But can we count on this narrow slice of international finance to secure our economic future?

We should not lose our nerve and revert to the old low-wage, low-skill industrial structure. The knowledge-based Jurong Petrochemical Complex continues to grow. Pharmaceutical companies continue to expand. They do so because Singapore offers not only skills but also knowledge-rich analytical minds.

To sum up, Singapore will secure its economic future if we persevere in the acquisition of knowledge. Knowledge is multifaceted. We need to remember that competition in a global knowledge-based world is all about knowledge not just skills and definitely not brawn. I have elaborated on different kinds of knowledge in my recent book Dynamics of the Singapore Success Story.

DANGEROUS SOCIO-POLITICAL FUTURE

I hope I am wrong but the rapid increase of permanent residents (PRs) over the last three years seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to our falling birth rates. Our population planners need to remember our failed experiments in social engineering, namely “the stop at two” and the “graduate mother”

population policies.

I hope that they are not unwittingly embarking on what I term political re-engineering. Social engineering is fraught with risk. Political re-engineering is positively dangerous.

If we continue to admit permanent residents at the average annual rate of 50,000 as we have done over the last three years, it must surely change our political landscape. Most of the PRs who come from China and India will soon be pressing for citizenship and the vote. The recent rapid intake of PRs is disruptive and, to say the least, distracts us from our quest to be “One People, One Nation, One Singapore”.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew in his epochal book Hard Truths has said that Singapore is a nation in the making. I cannot agree with him more. It may take us a hundred years to be “One People”. This is infinitely better than being diminished to being a stranger in our own land.

As a Singapore born and bred Singaporean, I hope that the pre-1965 generation like mine who urge caution will not be dismissed as born losers.
— Today

THINK!
LHL need to;
(1) step out of the shadow of LKY and recreate Singapore

(2) revamp his cabinet of YES men. Sack all the grassroots leaders that had been giving all the wrong info of the ground.........however, the faults still with the ministers for not walking the ground but enjoying on their laurel.
(3) LHL must start to surround himself with eagles not YES men(chickens). If he surround himself with chickens, he only hear chicken talks.......then EAGLES are all on the opposing side. PAP will surely fail. LHL most important job is to manage EAGLES not play with chickens!

Lastly, through this GE2011, I'd learned that many of my polytechnics, army and university buddies are also supporting the oppositions (eagles) because we could all see very clearly the mistakes, arrogance, non-accountability and the greed of blind pursuit of GDP growth for personal gain (8 months bonus=S$2.5m for LHL alone). And all my friends are well educated, well traveled, successful in their careers and staying in private housing. We just felt the nationalistic responsibility to stand up for the less fortunate and most important for Singapore, the country that we love.

PAP -Perfectly Arrogant Party

Just received a very interesting poem dedicated to MM Lee by an unknown writer.  

============================================

Hey, buddy!

Let me tell you truly

I realized lately

That I also dislike PAP

It is really a Perfectly Arrogant Party

They have turned our country

Into their company

Everything is about money

COE, COV, GST, ERP

Extraordinary charges aplenty 

A tiny dot with 30 ministers drawing the world's highest political salary

Paid millions of dollars annually

Yet they are still greedy

Always chasing after GDP

Making S’poreans live miserably

People say, S’poreans are lucky

For our country is corruption free

But when it is ruled by only one party

Can we really trust there is total honesty?

Remember, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”

Kiasu and kiasi, PAP came up with the GRC

So that more MIW can enter by the back door to become MP

Mistakes after mistakes due to incompetency and complacency

Yet there is no accountability

All because they need not answer to anybody

Only a small country but foreigners there are so many

Government welcomes any Tom, Dick or Harry

And proudly call all of them FT

Giving away PR papers so freely

Hoping they will become citizens and vote for the PAP

Companies happily tell S’poreans to accept low salary

For they have cheap foreigners available readily

FT also took away S’poreans places in the universities

Even in sports we are represented by FT

To win glory for our country shamelessly

Exploiting the government stupidity

Many foreigners become PR just to buy flats by HDB

Resale flats have sky-rocketed due to pro-foreigners policy

So high is the value of COV

That young ordinary S’poreans have delayed starting up a family

S’pore uniquely

A paradise it will be

If you have ‘guan xi’ with the PAP

Never mind you and me or how many are unhappy

Someone already told us we can always go and die in JB

Very sadly, this is no longer my once beloved country

It is now no more than just a money making company

Written in dedication to MM LKY

================================================

Interview with Mr Ngiam Tong Dow in 2003

See how Mr Ngiam's earlier analysis (in 2003) of the PAP and Singapore that resonates with what is happening now. Do share this very good article with your friends.

===============================================

Interview with Mr Ngiam Tong Dow, former Civil Service Head, in 2003

"I suspect we have started to believe our own propaganda. There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in. Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews."

Interview with Mr Ngiam Tong Dow, former head of the civil service, in 2003.

Q. With all this pessimism surrounding Singapore's prospects today, what's your personal prognosis? Will Singapore survive Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew?

A. Unequivocally yes, Singapore will survive SM Lee but provided he leaves the right legacy. What sort of legacy he wants to leave is for him to say, but I, a blooming upstart, dare to suggest to him that we should open up politically and allow talent to be spread throughout our society so that an alternative leadership can emerge. So far, the People's Action Party's tactic is to put all the scholars into the civil service because it believes the way to retain political power forever is to have a monopoly on talent. But in my view, that's a very short term view. It is the law of nature that all things must atrophy. Unless SM allows serious political challenges to emerge from the alternative elite out there, the incumbent elite will just coast along. At the first sign of a grassroots revolt, they will probably collapse just like the incumbent Progressive Party to the left-wing PAP onslaught in the late 1950s. I think our leaders have to accept that Singapore is larger than the PAP.

Q. What would be a useful first step in opening up?

A. For Singapore to survive, we should release half our talent – our President and Overseas Merit scholars - to the private sector. When ten scholars come home, five should turn to the right and join the public sector or the civil service; the other five should turn to the left and join the private sector. These scholars should serve their bond to Singapore - not to the Government - by working in or for Singapore overseas. As matters stand, those who wish to strike out have to break their bonds, pay a financial penalty and worse, be condemned as quitters. But it takes a certain temperament and mindset to be a civil servant. The former head of the civil service, Sim Kee Boon, once said that joining the administrative service is like entering a royal priesthood. Not all of us have the temperament to be priests. However upright a person is, the mandarin will in time begin to live a gilded life in a gilded cage. As a
Permanent Secretary, I never had to worry whether I could pay my staff their wages. It was all provided for in the Budget. As chairman of DBS Bank, I worried about wages only 20 per cent of the time. I now face my greatest business challenge as chairman of HDB Corp, a new start-up spun off from HDB. I spend 90 per cent of my time worrying whether I have enough to pay my staff at the end of the month. It's a mental switch.

Q. What is your biggest worry about the civil service?

A. The greatest danger is we are flying on auto-pilot. What was once a great policy, we just carry on with more of the same, until reality intervenes. Take our industrial policy. At the beginning, it was the right thing for us to attract multinationals to Singapore. For some years now, I've been trying to tell everybody: 'Look, for God's sake, grow our own timber.' If we really want knowledge to be rooted in Singaporeans and based in Singapore, we have to support our SMEs. I'm not a supporter of SMEs just for the sake of more SMEs, but we must grow our own roots. Creative Technology's Sim Wong Hoo is one and Hyflux's Olivia Lum is another but that's too few. We have been flying on auto-pilot for too long. The MNCs have contributed a lot to Singapore but they are totally unsentimental people. The moment you're uncompetitive, they just relocate.

Q. Why has this come about?

A. I suspect we have started to believe our own propaganda. There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in. Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews. SM Lee has earned his spurs, with his fine intellect and international standing. But even Lee Kuan Yew sometimes doesn't behave like Lee Kuan Yew. There is also a trend of intellectualisation for its own sake, which loses a sense of the pragmatic concerns of the larger world. The Chinese, for example, keep good archives of the Imperial examinations which used to be held at the Temple of Heaven. At the beginning, the scholars were tested on very practical subjects, such as how to control floods in their province. But over time, they were examined on the Confucian Analects and Chinese poetry composition. Hence, they became emasculated by the system, a worrying fate which could befall Singapore.

Q. But aren't you an exception to the norm of the gilded mandarin with zero bottomline consciousness?

A. That's because I started out with Economic Development Board in the 1959. Investment promotion then was all about hard foot slogging and personal persuasion, which teaches you to be very humble and patient. I learnt to be a supplicant and a professional beggar, instead of a dispenser of favours. These days, most civil servants start out administering the law. If I had my way, every administrative officer would start his or her career in the EDB. Hard foot slogging.

Q. YOUR idea of creating an alternate elite is not new. What do you think of the oft-mooted suggestion of achieving that splitting ranks within the
People's Action Party?

A. Quite honestly, if you ask me, Team A-and-Team B is a synthetic and infantile idea. If you want to challenge the Government, it must be spontaneous. You have to allow some of your best and brightest to remain outside your reach and let them grow spontaneously. How do you know their leadership will not be as good as yours? But if you monopolise all the talent, there will never be an alternative leadership. And alternatives are good for Singapore.

Q. In your calculation, what are the odds of this alternative replacing the incumbent?

A. Of course there's a political risk. Some of these chaps may turn out to be your real opposition, but that is the risk the PAP has to take if it really wants Singapore to endure. A model we should work towards is the French model of the elite administration. The very brightest of France all go to university or college. Some emerge Socialists, others Conservative, some work in industries, some work in government. Yet, at the end of the day, when the chips are down, they are all Frenchmen. No member of the French elite will ever think of betraying his country, never. That is the sort of Singapore elite we want. It doesn't mean that all of us must belong to the PAP. That is very important.

Q. What do bad times mean for the PAP, which has based its legitimacy on providing the economic goods and asset enhancement? Is its social compact with the people in need of an update?

A. Oh yes. And my advice is: Go back to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's old credo, where nobody owes us a living. After I had just taken over as the Housing Board's chairman in 2000, an astute academic asked me: 'Tong Dow, what's your greatest problem at HDB?' Then he diagnosed it himself: 'Initially, you gave peanuts to monkeys so they would dance to your tune. Now you've given them so much by way of peanuts that the monkey has become a gorilla and you have to dance to its tune. That's your greatest problem.' Our people have become over-fed and today's economic realities mean we have to put them on a crash diet. We cannot starve them because there will be a political explosion. So the art of government today is to wean everyone off the dispensable items. We should just concentrate on helping the poorest 5 to 10 per cent of the population, instead of handing out a general largesse. Forget about asset enhancement, Singapore shares and utility rebates. You're dancing to the tune of the gorilla. I don't understand the urgency of raising the Goods and Services Tax. Why tax the lower-income, then return it to them in an aid package? It demeans human dignity and creates a growing supplicant class who habitually hold out their palms. Despite the fact that we say we are not a welfare state, we act like one of the most 'welfarish' states in the world. We should appeal instead to people's sense of pride and self-reliance. I think political courage is needed here. And my instinct is that the Singaporean will respect you for that.

Q. So what should this new compact consist of?

A. It should go back to what was originally promised: 'That you shall be given the best education, whether it be academic or vocational, according
to your maximum potential.' And there will be no judgment whether an engineer is better than a doctor or a chef. My late mother was a great woman. Although illiterate, she single-handedly brought up four boys and a girl. She used to say in Hainanese: 'If you have one talent which you excel in, you will never starve.' I think the best legacy to leave is education and equal opportunity for all. When the Hainanese community came to Singapore, they were the latest arrivals and the smallest in number. So they had no choice but to become humble houseboys, waiters and cooks. But they always wanted their sons to have a better life than themselves. The great thing about Singapore was that we could get an education, which gave us mobility, despite coming from the poorest families. Today, the Hainanese, as a dialect group, form proportionately the highest number of professionals in Singapore.

Q. You say focus on education. What is top of your wish list for re-making Singapore's education system?

A. Each year, the PSLE creams off all the top boys and girls and dispatches them to only two schools, Raffles Institution and Raffles Girls' School.
However good these schools are, the problem is you are educating your elite in only two institutions, with only two sets of mentors, and casting them
in more or less the same mould. It worries me that Singapore is only about 'one brand' because you never know what challenges lie ahead and where they
will come from. I think we should spread out our best and brightest to at least a dozen schools.

Q. You advocate a more inclusive mindset all around?

A. Yes, intellectually, everyone has to accept that the country of Singapore is larger than the PAP. But even larger than the country of Singapore, which is limited by size and population, is the nation of Singapore, which includes a diaspora. My view is that we should have a more inclusive approach to nation-building. We have started the Majulah Connection, an international network where every Singaporean - whether he is a citizen or not, so long as he feels for Singapore - is included as part of our diaspora. Similarly, we should include foreigners who have worked and thrived here as friends of Singapore. That's the only way to survive. Otherwise, its just four million people on a little red dot of 600 sq km. If you exclude people, you become smaller and smaller, and in the end, you'll disappear.

Q. What is the kind of Singapore you hope your grandchildren will inherit?

A. Let's look at Sparta and Athens, two city states in Greek history. Singapore is like Sparta, where the top students are taken away from their parents as children and educated. Cohort by cohort, they each select their own leadership, ultimately electing their own Philosopher King. When I first read Plato's Republic, I was totally dazzled by the great logic of this organizational model where the best selects the best. But when I reached the end of the book, it dawned on me that though the starting point was meritocracy, the end result was dictatorship and elitism. In the end, that was how Sparta crumbled. Yet, Athens, a city of philosophers known for its different schools of thought, survived. What does this tell us about out-of-bounds markers? So SM Lee has to think very hard what legacy he wants to leave for Singapore and the type of society he wants to leave behind. Is it to be a Sparta, a well-organised martial society, but in the end, very brittle; or an untidy Athens which survived because of its diversity of thinking? Personally, I believe that Singaporeans are not so kuai (Hokkien for obedient) as to become a Sparta. This is our saving grace. As a young senior citizen, I very much hope that Singapore will survive for a long time, but as an Athens. It is more interesting and worth living and dying for.

=================================================

Yaw Shin Leong Victory Speech For Hougang SMC

Workers' Party Victory Speech

Vote Against Fear -Star War

"Dear Leaders, Hear" -by Michelle Poh

 

Please listen to the very touching lyrics and Michelle's passionate inner voice crying out for help!

WP 5th May Rally & Singapore Pledge

Your Vote Is Secret

PAP let Aljunied GRC down

By: baldeagle

The mood is sombre.... dark in this GRC...

Singaporeans are fed-up with the rising prices. Noodle at the
neighbour-hood coffee shop cost 50 cents more a bowl now... Hawkers
cannot afford the high rents ($5,000 to 7500 a month) have to stop
selling...leaving most the stalls in the coffee shop empty. Sitting
in the coffee shop is like attending a wake.

The retired old folks who gather here daily after their morning walk
around the reservoir....are not smiling anymore. Their favourite
minister, George Yeo is now a taboo subject... 7 of the 9 old folks
would get angry whenever his name is mentioned...fuck words in Hokkien
would be heard. These old folks had been behind PAP winning in past
elections.

Why the change ?
PAP has let them down...BADLY. Their retirement fund has been eaten up
by the rising cost...rising food cost,(meat, veg, fish, and hawker
meals)... cost of electricity and water,... higher transport
cost...many have lost their temporary jobs to Bangladeshi.... They
asked Minister Yeo for help...he promised to do something. After
months of waiting...nothing was done...instead the prices gone even
higher....two who have to work at 70 years old lost their table
cleaning jobs to foreigners!!! The old folks are worried about how to
live...now their money can buy less and less. When their retirement
are exhausted, they may be forced to go before their time.
No body talk about the election goodies and upgrading anymore..instead
they curse PAP for letting them down...To them PAP is no longer a good
government.

These old folks who have voted for PAP all their lives....They will
certainly not support PAP anymore.
This scene is repeated in many the coffee shops around the Aljunied
GRC.

If the election is held next month, PAP will surely lose thousands
more votes. The slim majority PAP won in the 2006 election will be
gone. If worker's party could field a strong team including Chan Show
Moa...We will see a new Foreign minister.

The wind of change is becoming stronger...and stronger...in Aljunied
GRC.

Re-gain Your Dignity, Rights & Hope!

Fear PAP No More!

Video posted by Rossie Mossie.

PAP Is Morally BANKRUPT

THINK!

(1) PAP actually ferried aunties & uncles from Redhill (which is under Tanjong Pagar) all the way to Yio Chu Kang Stadium for PAP rally and even buy dinner for them.........using taxpayer money to further PAP's own agendas.........again this is morally wrong!!

(2) Chan Chun Sing (ex-chief of army) behave like a CLOWN..............again, what kind of talent is this and he is a DISGRACE to all soldiers of Singapore old & young...........pay him $15,000 a month?? With this money Singaporean could hire many clowns to make us laugh for releasing some stress!

Archbishop : Use Your Vote For The Common Good

<<< TODAY Newspaper >>>

Use your vote for the common good: Archbishop Chia

04:47 AM May 02, 2011

SINGAPORE - The head of the Catholic Church in Singapore has urged

his flock here to take an "active role in the political process" and vote for 

the common good. Archbishop Nicholas Chia said that they must not 

forget the poor, elderly and the marginalize in society.

In a letter published in the May 8 edition of the Catholic News, the Archbishop 

wrote: "As we approach the 2011 General Election, I wanted to share with you 

my thoughts on the relationship between Church and State and highlight to 

you the importance of taking an active role in the political process.

"When considering the issues and the candidate that will represent us in 

the upcoming election, we as Catholics must reflect on our duty to use 

our free vote to further the common good, while remaining true to the 

Christian values Jesus has taught us.

"Human rights and the dignity of the human person must be respected.

"We must also ensure that the poor, the elderly and the marginalised 

in our society are cared for."

He also called on Catholics here to care for the environment.

"We must protect the beautiful world that God has given us 

by addressing the impact that our actions have on the environment," he said. 

"The right to vote is one of the founding principles of a democracy. 

Each one of us has a voice and can make a difference in the world we 

live through our choices and the election process.

"Each vote is significant."

2nd May Rally

1st May Rally Speeches

PAP Lui Tuck Yew's Arrogance

This fellow is just one of the arrogant minister that runs in the PAP family!! The problem start from the HEAD.
See below link with Lui's personal reply from iPAD!!

http://singaporeelection.blogspot.com/2011/04/paps-lui-tuck-yew-not-connecting-with.html

Hougang Higher Price than Aljunied HDB!! What is MM talking about???

 See below link.

http://singaporeelection.blogspot.com/2011/05/wp-hougang-smc-hdb-prices-not-much.html

30th Apr Rally at Bedok Stadium