My vote counts: 10 reasons why I cannot vote for the PAP in the next election

[This note on Facebook here.]

That so many Singaporeans behave like sheep and recite the prescribed mantra all the time about our government (namely, that we owe it all to them) really only reveals the plight of our people. Not only are Singaporeans amongst the lowest earners in the developed world in monetary terms, they are also almost definitely the poorest in the faculty to think for themselves, as a result of the education system.

Now that I am 21 and of age to vote, I am unable to vote for the PAP in the coming election because there is such an urgent need to send across a strong signal through their very thick skulls that there is a problem in the way it’s running this country. I am not a member of the Opposition, and I do not want the Opposition to take over this country, but because there will always be too many sheep in Singapore anyway, we need every vote FOR the Opposition, just to manage to produce a dent in the PAP’s smugly expected results. There will always be the apathetic, the boot-lickers, the cowardly, and the ignorant to ensure they win eventually anyway.

The difference we can make, however, is how much it wins by. Perhaps if it loses a GRC or two (and the GRC is a PAP invention to secure its hold on power, the only justification for which is minority representation – and that justification fails on its face when one recalls how minorities like JBJ and David Marshall never used the sly GRC scheme to enter Parliament, securing the votes of the majority Chinese electorates through their true substance and capability), they will shake off their slumber and start ruling Singapore as a Republic, that is, for the public, for the People (rather than for personal interests).

Remember how LKY said he will send in the army if there ever is a “freak election” and the PAP is voted out of Parliament? In every other country, when the people vote out the ruling party, it is called a mandate. It is only in Singapore that such a vote is called a “freak election”. Also, whose Army is it anyway? Is it the Army of the people of Singapore – who have just voted out the PAP? Or is it the Army of the PAP?

I list here ten out of the many other reasons why I am unable to vote for the PAP:

.

1. I will not render unto Caesar what is not Caesar’s

Given that Singapore’s poor are amongst the Developed World’s poorest, while living costs are amongst the highest in the world, it is not difficult to see why the Government’s ridiculous salaries are distastefully inflated.

The President earns $3.9 million, the PM $3.8 million, the MM and SM $3.5 million each, all other ministers between $2 to $3.2 million and all ministers of state between $1.5 to $1.8 million. These salaries do not include MP allowances, pensions and other sources of income such as Directorship, Chairmanship, Advisory, Consultancy, etc to government-linked and government-related organisations or foreign MNCs, etc. And why are they allowed to work for foreign corporations in the first place? Weren’t their ridiculously-high salaries justified with the excuse that it’ll be THIS excessive precisely so that they will focus on doing their ministerial jobs? Where is the check and balance in this government?

How much do you earn in a year?

In contrast, President Obama earns a more reasonable US$400,000, with US$50,000 expenses. Our most junior ministers are paid more than twice of what the most powerful man in the world gets! Hong Kong, with the same scarcity of resources as Singapore, half the developable land area, but with double the economic success, only pays its Chief Executive Donald Tsang HK$371,885 (US$47, 678). No other nation in the world, no matter how rich or corruption-free, pays it leaders anywhere near ours. That is good enough to show that the PAP rhetoric about their paycheques is plain rubbish (incidentally, “rubbish” seems to be one of LKY’s favourite words).

Adding to that, it had the cheek to raise its own salary right before a GST hike in 2003 and 2004. GST was raised again in 2007 to 7% from the original 3%. And of course, the PAP salaries have been rising accordingly as well.

It claims it needs to be paid similar to the private sector, but this is the public sector for a reason – you choose to work in the government to serve the country, not your pockets. Arguing that “talents” need this monetary incentive to join the government only goes to show what kind of people are being attracted – greedy, selfish, money-minded elites who see the Civil Service as nothing but a more glamorous avenue to the big bucks since their main reason for serving is not for the good of the country, but for money.

I cannot vote for a government that decides its own ridiculous salaries DESPITE a very strong public opinion against it.

.

2. Incompetence

Despite paying astronomic salaries to these patron saints of Singapore, there is much to be desired from their performance. Surely, if we are paying the highest government salaries in the world, it is not unreasonable to simply expect these people to do their job. The recent Bukit Timah Floodings, however, is a case in point showing why this expectation may be misplaced.

Environment Minister Yaacob Ibrahim said that the government knew the diversion canal was not big enough to take the rainwaters. He claimed that because this sort of “freak events” occur only once every 50 years, there was nothing the government could do about it. The Bukit Timah Canal was constructed in 1972, almost 40 years ago – about time something that happens “once every 50 years” would occur. Additionally, meteorologists reported that ‘this flood comes three years after one of Singapore’s worst floodings in recent history, in December 2006‘. 50 years indeed. But alas, our $2.8 million/year Minister was unable to foresee such a simple thing – even while knowing the canal was not big enough! Well, the PUB is planning to work on expanding it now – pretty late or early (depending on where in Singapore you live), since the next time we really need it will be 50 years from now, according to the Minister.

.

3. Double standards

It is a well-known fact that GIC and Temasek Holdings, Singapore’s two sovereign wealth funds, are both headed by members of the Lee family. Both have reported a ridiculous loss of $41.6 Billion and$39.91 Billion respective and have yet to answer to the real stakeholders – Singaporeans – on how this could have happened. No one has taken responsibility or issued explanations or anythingat all. In fact, the state media has been glaringly silent on the issue. Why aren’t we Singaporeans hearing anything about ourmoney?

“When we invest, we invest for the long-term”, Lee Kuan Yew, who heads GIC, said when Temasek Holdings purchased Bank of America shares and then sold it off a few months later, losingbetween US$2.3 to US$4.6 billion just like that.

That is more than $80 Billion in total from the blood and sweat of Singaporeans, down the drain because of bad decisions made by individuals whose multi-million dollar paycheques remain secure no matter how many mistakes they make. In contrast, the Resilience Package tapped into Singapore’s official reserves to withdraw $4.9 billion, and that effort to help Singaporeans in genuine need required hours and hours of debate.

While we should rightfully acknowledge the good that the PAP has done for Singapore, it is often taken for granted that Singaporeans believe a blatant lie that the country’s affluence is owed to the PAP and Lee Kuan Yew’s efforts. No, it came from the efforts of allSingaporeans. Hong Kong did not have a strongman like Lee Kuan Yew to dictate their lives from toilet habits to whether they could hear their own dialect on TV, and yet they have achieved double of what we have – and their people are involved in the political process, not dead and apathetic like our population. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Singapore, already at the time of Independence the richest state in Asia after Japan, with its strategic location and hardworking population, would not have reached its present affluence with a mix of good moral and social balance under a less money-minded David Marshall or someone else.

Moreover, the oft-used justification for the lofty salaries of the government is that the private sector pays its leaders similar salaries. Well, in the private sector, there is such a thing asaccountability. Where is Temasek Holdings’ accountability? Where is GIC’s accountability? Where was Wong Kan Seng’s accountability when his Ministry slipped up time and time again? Where is Yaacob Ibrahim’s accountability? What exactly happens when a minister makes a mistake in Singapore? Where is the Fourth Estate to play its role as a watchdog?

.

4. Blatant lies

We are probably the only country in the world that has had its MPs possibly blatantly lie in Parliament and yet achieve high rankings on corruptibility. Anyone remember the mention of White Horses in Parliament? Practically every NSF believes that there is such a thing as White Horses, yet right there in Parliament, an affront to the ideals of democracy, transparency and integrity in this country, our leaders possibly lied to its people (I am not sure if they really did lie, but that so many people believe that White Horses still exist begs the question). If it could do that once, it could have done it before, and it can do it again. What is the point of wearing white, trying to look pure, if you are a liar? If they did lie, I cannot vote for such blatant liars to be my leaders – especially when they lie about such things NOT for the good of the country, but for their own interests, for the unfairly selective comfort of their own children at the very expense of the equality this country was founded upon.

The media in Singapore is entirely controlled via Singapore Press Holdings, headed by a former PAP minister, Dr Tony Tan. Masquerading as an independent paper, the Straits Times, while not necessarily fabricating facts on its own (at least I hope not), blatantly twists them. For example (extracted from here), the media was full of praise of Temasek CEO Ho Ching for earning a few million dollars on paper, but failed to highlight her disastrous investment decisions such as buying the shares of Barclays bank at a high and selling them at a low a few months later.

The Straits Times credited the Singapore Internal Security Department for providing the crucial “intelligence” which led to the capture of escaped terrorist Mas Selamat Kasteri by the Malaysian Special Branch. It turned out that the operation was part of a joint collaboration by the Malaysian, Singapore and Indonesian police and the Singapore ISD actually played only a minor role in the capture of Mas Selamat, but the Straits Times did not mention this to give the public the full picture, choosing rather to mislead Singaporeans into believing that ISD had indeed “redeemed” itself.

Without a free press in Singapore, Singaporeans are robbed of access to real and accurate news that does not include propaganda and spins that mislead. They are robbed of a crucial check and balance in the form of the Fourth Estate that acts as a watchdog to ensure the government is doing its job. Afterall, government corruptibility has more often than once been revealed solely because of a free press, an example of which is the Watergate Scandal – I dread to think what would happen had Watergate occured in Singapore instead.. A free press will act as a check on corruptibility, not sky-high salaries. In the end, if media content is regulated by the government, it is Singaporeans who stand to lose.

.

5. Operation Coldstore and the 1963 General Elections

The 1963 Singapore General Elections was the toughest and most critical the PAP ever faced. It had already suffered two by-election defeats and the number of seats it held was 26 – holding a majority by just one seat.

On 2 February 1963, just a few months before the elections, Operation Coldstore was launched and more than a hundred people were arrested and detained without trial, including the Secretary-General and other key members of the Barisan Sosialis, the PAP’s biggest threat.

Despite the heavy blow, which was obviously undermined the Barisan Sosialis’ success at the Elections, they won 33.2% of the popular vote and the PAP took 46.9%. What do you think the PAP would have gotten if it hadn’t carried out Operation Coldstore?

And why do Singaporeans not know about such an important aspect of their national history?

.

6. Lim Chin Siong

Lim Chin Siong was recruited into the PAP by Lee Kuan Yew in 1954, and his immense popularity amongst the Chinese won a large amount of support for the PAP. When Lim Chin Siong was arrested by the British in 1955 for anti-colonial activities, the PAP promised the electorate to release him if they were elected, in order to gain votes.

At the age of 22, Lim Chin Siong was elected into the Legislative Assembly, and he was so popular among the people that Lee Kuan Yew was prompted to promise that he would be ‘our future Prime Minister‘ (guess who became PM instead?).

However, he soon grew disillusioned with the PAP and left to form the Barisan Sosialis in 1961. Under the pretext of being a communist, he was detained without trial under Operation Coldstore for SIX YEARS until he was forced to renounce politics and went into exile in 1969. Up till today, there is hardly any concrete evidence at all that he was ever a communist. Yet, it was the reason he was eliminated from the precarious 1963 General Elections. Imagine being removed from your family, being locked up for 6 years, NEVER given a trial, and then thrown out of the country, all because you are popular and the government fears you?

Lee Kuan Yew himself said of him “I liked and respected him for his simple lifestyle and his selflessness. He did not seek financial gain or political glory. He was totally committed to the advancement of his cause“. This was the kind of men who sincerely fought with their lives for the good of the country. And they were persecuted and crushed by the PAP in order to snatch power. Contrast the lives of such men with the kind of PAP MPs we have today.

[13th Dec '09 - Edit: Click here to read about Operation Spectrum, launched in 1987 under that terrible ISA again. Over 20 people were detained without trial under the accusation of a Marxist conspiracy. After being released a few months later, they repudiated their earlier confessions, alleged ill-treatment by ISD officers while in detention, and were arrested the very next day(how come this sort of efficiency is lacking with real threats like Mas Selamat?). Ten days later, the government announced that a proposed commission of inquiry into the allegations made by the detainees was no longer necessary as the signatories have since recanted their statement while in detention. Hmm, I wonder why.

Excerpt from their statement:

"...we were subjected to harsh and intensive interrogation, deprived of sleep and rest, some of us for as long as 70 hours insides freezing cold rooms. All of us were stripped of our personal clothing, including spectacles, footwear and underwear and made to change into prisoners' uniforms.

Most of us were made to stand continually during interrogation, some of us for over 20 hours and under the full blast of air-conditioning turned to a very low temperature.

Under these conditions, one of us was repeatedly doused with cold water during interrogation.

Most of us were hit hard in the face, some of us for not less than 50 times, while others were assaulted on other parts of the body, during the first three days of interrogation.

We were threatened with more physical abuse during interrogation.

We were threatened with arrests, assault and battery of our spouses, loved ones and friends. We were threatened with INDEFINITE detention without trial. Chia Thye Poh, who is still in detention after twenty years, was cited as an example. We were told that no one could help us unless we "cooperated" with the ISD.

These threats were constantly on our minds during the time we wrote our respective "statements" in detention.

We were actively discouraged from engaging legal counsel and advised to discharge our lawyers and against taking legal action (including making representations to the ISA Advisory Board) so as not to jeopardise our chances of release.

We were compelled to appear on television and warned that our release would depend on our performances on tv. We were coerced to make statements such as "I am Marxist-inclined..."; "My ideal society is a classless society..." ; " so-and-so is my mentor..."; "I was made use of by so-and-so..." in order to incriminate ourselves and other detainees."

This is another reason why I will not be able to vote for the PAP. I cannot bring myself to support such a brutal and callous government which treats its people as such. And I cannot support its continued use of the ISA in Singapore, in spite of its usefulness in handling terrorists (who is the real terrorist here?), because time and again, history has shown that it is innocent Singaporeans who will suffer most from such a law that allows the government to conveniently eliminate all threats to itself - not the nation - without trial, without evidence, without accountability of any kind.]

[Edit: 15th Dec '09 - Click here for yet another forced confession account.]

.

7. Singaporean students need to learn a fair and accurate history in school

The fact that practically no young Singaporean knows about important people like Lim Chin Siong, or even David Marshall, our first Chief Minister, is testament to the spectacular failure of our education system (a young lady in the Gifted Programme recently asked me, who is Ong Teng Cheong? The Opposition leader?). All they ever learn about our country’s history is LKY and Raffles, LKY and Raffles, LKY and Raffles, and maybe a bit about the War. No wonder our students find history boring. No wonder our students do not feel attached to this country because their knowledge of its history is so shallow.

Why has MOE removed the important bits of Singapore’s history from schoolbooks? The bits about Operation Coldstore (and the realities behind it), the historic Anson by-election, the real founder of the PAP (who, by the way, is not surnamed Lee), our ex-President Devan Nair, Ong Teng Cheong’s request – which was never granted to the day he died – to be given a list of Singapore’s reserves (because as President he needed to know what he is protecting, since the President’s role is to be Protector of the Reserves – and did you know that the President’s role is that, by the way?), etc. Why are Singaporeans being robbed of their history and then accused of being apathetic?

.

8. Traumatic MP-experiences and MPs who fear death by The Chair

The kind of PAP MPs that Singapore is ruled by today is a worthy cause for Trauma.

In short, a married couple went to see their MP because their eldest son recently passed away from a naval accident while serving NS. They explained that their younger son will be serving his NS soon and requested for an exemption because of what had just happened. They said that it’s been a traumatic time for them. And the MP replied “What traumatic? After two months, you won’t be traumatic”.

As if insensitive MPs are not enough, the PAP is fielding hyper-sensitive wimps behind the shadows with their GRC Trick. Tell me who on earth has ever been afraid of being killed by an aluminium chair slammed against a door? And where is the sympathy? Where is the waving it off as “an honest mistake” especially when there was no harm done?

The GRC, by the way, was invented by the PAP. The fact that it seems to engage in gerrymandering (drawing up election borders in its favour) goes to show the extent it is willing to go just to stay in power. The GRC is also unfair because constituents are forced to vote into Parliament men and women they do not really want to have. This whole system, however, was implemented without asking Singaporeans, of course. The PAP decided it wanted to have the GRCs, and it passed the law to have the GRCs. No say from the people at all. Is this democracy? Is gerrymandering for the good of the people?

With such people ruling the country, it is honestly difficult to believe we are in good hands. Contrasted against the lives of men such as Lim Chin Siong, it is hard to rule out the severe suspicion that the MPs we have today are joining the Government for personal interest, not the nation’s.

.

9. Money. Of course it’s all about money.

Singapore claims it pays its ministers astronomical salaries because “talents” need to be attracted from the private sector – this is simply saying that our ministers serve the country just for money.

Also, their pay is pegged to GDP growth – which is why it is no wonder that everything in this country seems to be focused on the economy. The government is so caught up in money-making because its salaries are pegged to it! Moreover, if Singaporeans are attuned to the mentality that money is all there is to life (and many, many Singaporeans are), then they will be less bothered about the other compromises to their civil rights, and less likely to be concerned about what their government is really doing, so long as the money keeps flowing in. What a cheap people we have become.

.

10. What Singapore needs is change

Lastly, by voting for a significant change to the status quo, Singaporean youths will become less apathetic, seeing that, for the first time in their lives, CHANGE is really possible in this country, and that they can make a difference in deciding for the future of Singapore.

The PAP will also be less complacent if it meets with a stunning defeat. Its cold Point 8-type ministers will also learn that it is Singaporeans they are supposed to be serving, not themselves. They will learn to treasure their constituents, to sincerely listen their opinions and to truly help them – all these are SUPPOSED to be their job in the first place.

People will also start to dare to join the Opposition. The only reason why I do not wish for the Opposition to take over the government is because it is incompetent, and it is incompetent because talented men and women who are concerned about the aforementioned issues, do not have the courage or faith in the system to step forward and join the Opposition (hell no, not with a law like the ISA in place). But if the PAP faces a defeat that is significant enough, trust in the democratic system of Singapore will finally be restored and the politics of Singapore can be revived to more than just dead rhetoric.

Of course we are grateful for the many, many good things the PAP has done for Singapore. It has been an excellent government in many ways (especially economically – I wonder why). However, it has also been found lacking in many aspects. Politics is not a charity, as they would themselves say with regard to the Opposition, and we cannot vote for a government simply because it used to serve the people well. If it has lost its focus, then support for the Opposition is the only way to make them regain this focus. No one ever says “I have a good salary already, please donot give me a pay rise”. Everyone wants improvements to their lives, and if we care about this country, we should seek improvements to the way it is run as well, even if we are satisfied with this country to start with.

My vote counts. So will yours. Vote wisely.

[See my follow-up post here.]

[This note on Facebook here.]

[Some comments here on the debate which this post has generated.]

.

Advertisement

Tags: PAP, politics, Singapore