Just days before the 2011 election, PM Lee said: “If we didn’t get it right, I’m sorry. But we will try better the next time.” Notice PM Lee said ‘if’ which is never used in a sincere apology.
Shortly after the election, PAP’s actions have only confirmed PM Lee is likely to repeat his ‘apology’ for another opportunity to earn his $2.2 million pay. If PAP was sincere, the first thing it should have done was to get rid of all those overpaid deadweights in the civil service who “didn’t get it right”. Instead, these deadweights were promoted and continued to be recycled within the government.
We should have known all along that PM Lee was joking when he said ‘sorry’ because he had equated monumental policy errors to “side effects”. PM Lee said that if the government had known there would be a “sudden surge for HDB flats in mid-2009… foreigners would have created such congestion on the roads..”, the government would have constructed more infrastructures. But how could PM Lee not have known when the government itself had approved a mind-boggling 202,254 PRs from 2007 to 2009, excluding other foreign workers? Did PM Lee expect them to camp at the beach or Hong Lim Park and walk to work daily?
How could PM Lee simply claimed it was a sudden surge when our permanent secretaries had planned years ahead to bring in record numbers of cheaper foreign labour? Can citizens trust a leader who keeps telling half truths and assumes intelligence is monopolised by only the PAP?
In the corporate world, such a ‘forgetful’ CEO would have automatically stepped down but PAP has proven to be flame-proofed, not pai seh to beg for more tax dollars despite big time screw ups.
With all the same deadweights helming the housing, transport, health and education ministries, it will take a miracle to resolve our issues.
In his National Day Rally speech last year, PM Lee already confirmed CPF members would have the option of making a 20% lump sum withdrawal at retirement. This was ‘coincidentally’ echoed by NTUC 5 months later. Being a PAP-appointed echo chamber, the CPF Advisory Panel was not expected to have different recommendations. It did not disappoint.
PAP is not bothered about its broken promises and it has no intention of returning ALL our CPF at 55. It’s an insult to treat our savings as belonging to the PAP by retaining 80% of the MS at 65 to provide cheap investment funds to GIC. From the CPFAP recommendations, it appears the PAP has pretended the issue of retirement shortfall did not even exist! What the PAP has done is to continue to shift its responsibility for a flawed CPF scheme onto CPF members and increase the amount withheld by the government. No wonder more Singaporeans have started to see the resemblance to a Ponzi scheme’s final stages in our CPF scheme.
PM Lee has said the PAP exists to “serve Singaporeans and not lord it over the people”. Care to explain why PAP is forcing its CPF ‘solution’ down our throat?
PM Lee makes a fool of himself by claiming our CPF is a good scheme despite nearly 75% members not having $77,500 (half of the MS) in our CPF. His solution:
– depend on children who have their own high cost of living issues
– retirees could work in menial jobs
– sell our homes and downgrade.
Without providing supporting statistics, he then claims that “quite a number of people leave their money in their CPF instead of withdrawing ..”. PM Lee was obviously referring to wealthy Singaporeans, like Ass T reporter Loh Keng Fatt, who stand to benefit from CPF interest rates which are much higher than fixed deposit rates. The wealthy do not need their CPF and can afford to leave their entire CPF balance with the CPF Board to earn a higher interest.
PM Lee seems to possess a special mind-reading ability by claiming that CPF members “quietly know that this (CPF) is a good deal”. All my friends are actually upset with the CPF scheme and what we quietly know is we need to boot the PAP out to resolve this issue once and for all. If PM Lee was not totally disconnected with our issues, he would also not have claimed that “people support CPF cuts because there are no protest outside parliament”.
Since there was also no protest outside parliament after the ministerial pay cut, are we to assume that PAP members must also have supported it? Going by his logic, it’s about time citizens reduce PAP’s salary further after the next election until we see ministers protesting outside parliament.
If PM Lee was sincere in his apology, the civil service and grassroots organisations should not be affiliated to the PAP. Till today, the mainstream media are still the PAP’s mouthpiece. How does the PAP serve citizens by pitting taxpayer-funded civil service (NParks, NEA, etc) and grassroots organisations against citizens?
PAP only pays lip service to ‘engagement’ because what it really wants is total control. Notice the civil service is not allowed any online engagement without approval from the highest authority?
Despite the reputation of our statutory boards going down the drain, our leader is not bothered one bit. PM Lee’s lawsuit against an ordinary citizen has proven just how small minded a leader he is – only his ‘reputation’ matters.
Singaporeans have also witnessed how the HDB and URA almost conned Sengkang’s Fernvale residents into accepting a next-door columbarium which was not stated on HDB’s brochure. Fortunately, Fernvale residents stood their ground and indicated they would not accept any nonsense from the big-bully PAP.
Sensing the issue could cost the PAP heavily and has been mishandled, the PAP flipped-flopped, did a U-turn and put the columbarium construction on the backburner with MND minister Khaw’s ‘sold out performance’ in parliament. So was it HDB’s or URA’s mistake? MP Lam’s? It sounds impossible but from PAP’s perspective, nobody made a mistake.
Whatever was going on in Khaw’s mind, he must have probably thought that entertaining citizens to a Chinese love story in parliament would suffice. Being the boss of HDB and URA, Khaw should have apologised but has refused to. Rest assured, ‘sorry’ will find its way into the PAP dictionary nearer the election. There’s no reason for citizens to continue trusting politicians who do not believe in accountability or apologise after repeated blunders.
To sum up this circus act:
– HDB/URA assigned blame to HDB buyers (EVERY buyer was not literate?)
– Lam (MP, political appointee) sided with the government
– Minister Khaw (big boss of HDB/URA) blames ‘assumption’
Case closed and all should just move on? Singaporeans must decide if this is the sort of circus performance we want to watch in future.
What about Singapore history? Apparently there’s only one version – PAP’s which students in secondary schools are forced to learn. Any alternative will be deemed a threat to national security. As has been proven, PAP will only listen to the people when its hold on power is threatened. Shouldn’t citizens then consign the PAP to history?
The PAP was right to worry about Aljuneid GRC’s impending fall last election when it allowed its ‘heaviest artillery’ Lee Kuan Yew to insult Aljuneid voters with his “live and repent for the next five years” threat. Would a leader’s father in any democratic country be allowed to insult the electorate in the same manner as Lee Kuan Yew?
Sorry seems to be the hardest word for the PAP, especially Lee Kuan Yew. Worse, chip-of-the-old-block PM Lee simply brushed off the disparaging remarks as “MM’s style”. Although “MM’s style” would have cost PAP dearly, Lee Kuan Yew was above the PAP. By his self-subordination to his father, PM Lee has displayed his total lack of leadership.
One issue which has been highlighted for quite some time is the use of tax dollars to pay Lee Kuan Yew his MP allowance as he has not been serving his constituents due to ill health. Paying close to $1 million tax dollars for 5 years has to be debated in parliament. Tax dollars do not belong to the PAP government and there should be no exception, Lee Kuan Yew included.
Where our transport infrastructure is concerned, the PAP should have hit the pause button on immigration because our roads were not designed for the current vehicular population. The simultaneous increase in the number of immigrants and foreign workers, road infrastructures and train frequency, only addresses the problem we are facing today. Any bus commuter knows the PAP cannot resolve peak hour overcrowding because it has no solution to bus bunching. In certain parts of Singapore, traffic jams have started to appear after peak hours.
When we sit down and think about it, there are just too many other instances of the PAP clowning around with our lives by perpetually tweaking an already unstable system. Since PAP is preoccupied with its profit making objective as well as these issues don’t affect them, we should not expect the PAP to provide a solution.
Singaporeans should not continue to hope for a miracle from the PAP but rely on ourselves to resolve chronic issues which has been greeted with indifference by the PAP for decades.
PM Lee was not sincere when he said ‘sorry’ before the election. After the election, PAP went about its old ways and treated citizens as pushovers, bullying some citizens with legal threats and an actual lawsuit by PM Lee. It has also abused taxpayer-funded statutory boards such as NEA, NParks, MDA, etc to gain political mileage.
The retention of our highest-paid civil servants, such as perm secs, who were clearly sleeping on the job is confirmation that PAP only wants them to serve the PAP, not citizens.
Notice that none of the PAP MPs, such as Intan, Alvin Yeo and Lam have apologised for their ‘honest’ mistakes. For every blunder, Singaporeans are expected to accept incredible excuses with no one held accountable. Worse, for Minister Khaw, we are treated to some parliamentary entertainment with the case closed when the storytelling ended.
It should be clear PAP’s apology was never sincere and our lives will continue to be ruined. What about the overdue apology to political opponents who were jailed without charges? Without a doubt, the PAP will have to say sorry again at the next election. It’s about time voters be frank with the PAP by also telling them “sorry … but it’s now time for you to go”.