Thursday, March 31, 2011

The Battle For East Coast GRC

This photo was taken last week, of my fellow activists in action over at WP’s eastern front.

Standing (Left to Right): Eric Tan, Png Eng Huat, Gerald Giam & Mohamed Fazli Bin Talip. Sitting (Left to Right): Brandon Siow, Pak Abdul Rahim & Perry Tong.

At that very first moment upon viewing this photo, the song ‘Battle Cry’ by Shontelle Layne (American Singer and Songwriter) interestingly came to my mind.

‘Battle Cry’ was released as a promo single in October 2008, in support of Barack Obama compilation album. A very inspirational song.

Click here to view ‘Battle Cry’ youtube MTV. Below are the lyrics. Enjoy!


Yeah
Hey Hey Hey
Hey Hey Hey
Hey Hey Hey

We've been deep in the trenches
Aint that friendship
Its not always roses (But)
Everybody knows this
We stuck in this battle field
I know just how you feel
Standin up for us (Yeah)
Ima be a soldier

You give me hope (hope)
You give me strength (strength)
I'd give you better than I could ever give myself
Always know that (that)
I got your back (your back)
Dont matter wherever
As long as were together (we've been through too much)

We've been through too much
Time for us to group up
Come on and lets stand up now for us
This is our battle cry
Promise you that im certified
All we gotta do is stand up now for us
This is our battle cry

Hey Hey Hey-ey
Hey Hey Hey-ey
Hey Hey Hey-ey
This is our battle cry

It's so hard when the night falls
And i don't get your phone calls
Your everything to me
You heal me when these bullets go through me
And if i had to retreat
I know you'll fall back with me
And if you got problems
You already know whose going to solve 'em

You give me hope (hope)
You give me strength (strength)
I'd give you better than i could ever give myself
Always know that (that)
I got your back (your back)
Dont matter wherever
Because we'll always be together

We've been through too much
Time for us to group up
Come on and lets stand up now for us
Standing Up For Us)
This is our battle cry
Promise you that im certified
All we gotta do is stand up now for us
This is our battle cry

(Hey)

Now its time to get focused
I aint saying nothing man
You already know this
So when called flow, then flow this
And if you need to swim
I'ma bring a boatless floatless

Now i dont need to sound so manotnis
If you need something from me
Call me i got this
And i dont give you what you need from me
And Ima be right there when I need to be

We've been through too much
Time for us to group up (C'mon)
Come on and lets stand up now for us
(As long as were together we've been through too much)

This is our battle cry
Promise you that im certified
All we gotta do is stand up now for us (Standing up for us-uss)
We've been through too much
Time for us to group up
Come on and lets stand up now for us
(Standin up for us)

This is our battle cry
Promise you that im certified
All we gotta do is stand up now for us
This is our battle cry

Hey Hey Hey (This is our battle cry)
hey Hey Hey
hey Hey Hey (This is our battle cry

Lyrics are from azlyrics.com

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

WP Electoral Bid For Alternative Government?

At a recent National University of Singapore (NUS) forum, WP Chairman Sylvia Lim shared that the Workers’ Party is not in a position to form the alternative government at this point in time. I agree with Sylvia’s candid assessment.

More importantly, Sylvia’s comments must be seen in context of just GE2011 itself. In 2007, during WP's 50th anniversary, WP Secretary General Low Thia Khiang laid the strategic vision, which calls for WP to be ready, in a position to mount an electoral bid for Singapore's alternative government in 20 years.

In 2011, the Workers’ Party has approximately 16 more years to get there. The above works out to about 3 more General Elections, which include this crucial GE2011. This means WP must break through at least 1 GRC if not 2, for WP to stay on track to be in a position to mount an electoral bid to form Singapore's next government.

An alternative government cannot be formed just overnight without intra-party capacity building. In a parliament of 87 seats, the WP needs to win at least 44 seats to form the next government. This means even if WP is to win ALL 23 seats we are to contest in GE2011, we will still be 21 seats short of a simple majority.

Also Intra-party capacity cannot be built overnight, seeking out committed, capable and sincere candidates aside, imagine the massive numbers of strategic back-end party activists, campaign workers, helpers, volunteers behind each WP candidate, to make his/ her successful electoral battle possible.

To all WP activists/ supporters, it is crucial for us to continue to play our respective parts, as WP builds up our intra-party capacity. For instance, there is a need for more WP MPs gaining parliamentary experience, so that more elected WP individuals can better understand the nuts & bolts of governance.

This really means SO MUCH more work has to be done, prior to WP announcing our electoral bid to form Singapore's alternative government.

My fellow WP leaders, activists & I are fully committed to achieve Secretary General Low Thia Khiang’s vision of WP being in a position to mount an electoral bid for Singapore's alternative government in 16 years and an eventual WP government for Singapore.

Meanwhile the Workers’ Party must continue to expand our core, widen our base and deepen our constituencies’ roots.

Will you join us in this journey?

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Conversations With Ex-Unionists

This morning WP's Northern area activists conducted a public outreach in Nee Soon GRC.

In the course of the outreach, I met up with two ex-unionists. Over drinks, we exchanged candid viewpoints, held tactical discussions and came up with forward strategies.

I have tremendous respect for ex-unionists who were the pillars of strength, organizing backbone and community mobilizers during Singapore’s anti-colonial struggles back in the 1950s & 60s. If not because of their selfless sacrifices, Singapore’s history will have been very different.

If you do know of any of your uncles or aunties who were ex-unionists, ex-student activists or ex-political activists and are willing to battle the PAP once more, but this round via the Workers’ Party. If so, I would like to speak to them.

Kindly share with them that the Workers’ Party is in need of more campaign workers, polling agents, counting agents & backend operations helpers. If they are agreeable, please email me their contacts at yawsl@wp.sg. Thank you!

Photo 1: Conversations With Ex-Unionists

Photo 2: Sharing a light moment, somewhere in Nee Soon GRC

Friday, March 18, 2011

Comrade Moments With Mr. Lordes Leo

While going about in my rounds, I chanced upon a veteran WP activist, Mr. Lordes Leo, 52 years of age and constituent of Moulmein-Kallang GRC. Leo was having drinks with his buddies near his block.

When Leo saw me, he immediately proclaimed, ‘We welcome the Workers’ Party!’ He revealed that he was an activist in WP’s Anson Constituency Committee (1981 – 1986) and shared fondly of his WP’s Anson Constituency’s WP flags committee days.

Personally, it is always very heartening and highly encouraging for me whenever I meet veteran WP activists. Their fond recollection of their active days in WP is a testimony of kindred spirits that will bring about an instant bond across WP generations. I always believe that it is because of their sacrifices that will eventually lead to the making of a politically balanced and better Singapore.

I asked Leo why he joined WP in the first place. Leo replied that he joined the WP because the Workers’ Party ideology is very close to his heart. For that reason alone, he will continue to support The Workers’ Party!

I smiled and extended Leo an invitation to enlist his help to mobilize old WP comrades and friends for the electoral battle ahead. A sparkle came to Leo’s eyes and he readily agreed.

Yeah! Another WP comrade is now on operational stand-by mode :)

So what about you? Will you join us?

Photo: Sharing comrade moments with Mr. Lordes Leo

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Heartland Conversations With Mr Mo

Earlier this evening, while doing my rounds at Beach Road, I bumped into Ms Denise Phua with her entourage. Ms Denise & I exchanged pleasantries and we continued with our respective work. I presume she was doing her house visits.

Later part of the evening, as I was doing house visits, a constituent invited me into his house for a chat. Due to a specific request by this constituent to remain anonymous, we shall name this constituent, Mimi’s Owner (M.O) (aka) Mr Mo. Mimi is the name of his pet cat.

Mr Mo is 54 years of age, a business person and is married with two grown children. Mr Mo lamented about the poor state of the opposition in Singapore. Mr Mo said, “就算我们要支持,看到你们这么乱,不攻却自破,要我们 怎么去支持你们?”[Translation: Even if we wish to support the opposition but upon seeing the mess within your camp, where opposition parties crumble even before battle, so how do you expect us to support you?]

Switching to English, Mr Mo said that ‘Opposition must come together, although I know that unity is not quite possible! Yet, the least you can do is not to fight each other’.

I replied Mr Mo that, ‘Given the multiple obstacles hampering oppositional unity, the least each serious opposition party can do is to establish itself, via means of intra-party capacity building.’ Mr Mo retorted me gamely, “Of course lah! Isn’t that’s the aim of all political parties?’

What was meant to be a just a 5 minutes chit chat, extended into a 25 minutes interesting exchanges of ideas. Suddenly Mr Mo urged me, “Don’t contest here lah. Ask your Party leadership to send you elsewhere. Here is very difficult for your opposition to win one, they (the PAP) got 做工 (via hokkien) [work] here one.”

I replied politely that I will go wherever the WP leadership is to send me. As I was about to leave, Mr Mo looked at me, paused and said, "If WP is to send you here, you will not win." Cheekily he added, 'I stand corrected' and I am willing to give you my vote.’

On behalf of The Workers’ Party, I thank Mr Mo for his pledge of support to The Workers' Party. More importantly Mr Mo & I truly enjoyed our heartland conversations!

Photo: With Mimi, isn’t she beautiful?!

Monday, March 14, 2011

Heartland Conversations With Uncle Francis

Earlier this evening, after house visits, I was at Upper Boon Keng Road Food Centre when I met some constituents who invited me to join them for a beer. However I shared that I will be driving and they nodded understandingly.

Nonetheless I sat down and joined them for a chat. Amongst the constituents there was Uncle Francis Manickan, 76 years of age. Francis is full of energy and humor. He quipped that his name was meant to be ‘Francis Money Come’ but it could also mean ‘Francis Money Can’t’!

Uncle Francis is married with 3 children and 5 grand children. He shared that he was working as a Senior Electrician (Special Grade) at the British Naval Base’s Sembawang shipyard for 30 years until 1968, and joined the private sector after the withdrawal of the British.

He then revealed that he was a former trade unionist with Naval Base Labor Union. Intrigued, I asked Uncle Francis if I could have his permission to mention about his life experiences, alongside with his photo in my blog, so that younger Singaporeans can also learn about his story.

Uncle Francis smiled and replied, ‘Of course you may.’ I asked Uncle Francis about what was the one thing he had learnt as a trade unionist. He humbly replied, ‘During my time, it was simple, just some organizing and nothing much’.

He then added, “You are from The Workers’ Party. Actually I ought to have become a candidate myself too.” Francis’ declaration led to approving smiles and nods from his beer buddies.

Uncle Francis then shared that he used to live at Waterloo Street at a time where Tosai cost only 5 cents. He then lamented about the rising cost of living, citing that Tosai now cost 20 times more. He said, "Things, such as 5 cents Tosai, you can never understand, because you were not born during my time!"

Interestingly our conversations seamlessly switched from life, cost of living and soccer. Uncle Franics declared that Manchester United Football club is and is meant to be the best football club in the world.

Despite sharing different views on which football club is the ‘best’ in the world, Uncle Francis & I enjoyed our heartland conversations tremendously.

Photo: Sharing a light moment with Uncle Francis.

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Heartland Conversations With Mr Lin

Earlier today at approximately 10.45pm, after a day of grassroots work, I was at Geylang Bahru Hawker Centre having a cup of coffee, when a constituent came up to me, sat down and started chatting. Apparently he just knocked off from work too.

The surname of this constituent is Mr Lin who looked kind of tired. I commented ‘林先生, 您看起来很累呀.’ (Mr Lin, you look tired). He smiled and quipped, ‘要赚新币,就要累呀!’ (If you want to earn Singapore Dollar, you have to be tired!)

Mr Lin, 62 years of age works in the construction industry. He shared about the physical challenges of working in the industry, especially for someone his age. He also shared with me about the types of potential dangers that construction workers have to face across a variety of projects.

In a pensive mood over drinks, he shared that someone like him, who had barely completed primary school education, can hardly do anything else. Still a sparkle of pride came to Mr Lin’s eyes as he shared about his undergraduate son, though he lamented about hefty tuition fees and high cost of living.

We then talked about his growing up years and his experiences of witnessing the birth of Singapore. Soon we were talking about politics. Mr Lin is of the view that whichever political party that is in charge must uplift the livelihood of the people.

Mr Lin & I continued to chat heartily for over 20 minutes before parting ways. It was a really a very pleasant conversation with a fellow heartlander.

Photo: Presenting Mr Lin an autographed copy of my Chinese book.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

Dr Poh Lee Guan & Team For Parliament

I joined my fellow WP northern area activists for a public outreach this morning. As WP Northern Area Committee(NAC) Chairman Dr John Yam is away on a business trip, both Dr Poh Lee Guan & I led the outreach.

Dr Poh Lee Guan & I came a long way. I met Dr Poh approximately around the same time when I met Eric (WP Treasurer) in 1998. Subsequently Dr Poh & I joined WP in June 2001 and we are close comrades since.

I always consider and respect Dr Poh Lee Guan as my ‘Dai Kor’ (Big Brother). Over the years, despite Dr Poh’s regular insistence that I call him ‘Ah-Poh’ instead of Dr Poh, yet I feel more comfortable calling him Dr Poh instead of Ah-Poh.

In GE 2001, Dr Poh Lee Guan represented WP as the candidate for Nee Soon East, which became the hottest contested seat at the election. The issue on the ground was the temple organizers' grievances over the process of obtaining the necessary permits to host the 7th Month activities and temple functions.

At one stage during the elections, PAP, based on sources of illegal bookies, placed the odds of Dr. Poh Lee Guan winning at 50% - 50%. To prevent Dr Poh Lee Guan from being elected into Parliament and the formation of an opposition enclave in the northern part of Singapore at all costs, the then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, his two Deputies and the then Senior Minister entered the fray directly in Nee Soon East SMC.

The then Senior Minster, our current Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, personally went down to Nee Soon East for a closed-door meeting with the seventh month organizers and temple committee members.

Our current Senior Minister, Goh Chok Tong even blatantly promoted another non-PAP candidate to ensure that Dr Poh Lee Guan would not even get into Parliament as a Non-Constituency MP. Dr Poh Lee Guan obtained 26.3% of the valid votes in Nee Soon East.
The result was quite commendable in the light of the "bookie politics" and the aggressive campaigning by PAP big guns in Nee Soon East.

Despite his electoral defeat, Dr Poh Lee Guan showed his fighting spirit and never gave up. He pressed on and has been diligently and consistently walking the Nee Soon East ground since 2002. The Nee Soon Area Committee (NAC), chaired by Dr Poh Lee Guan was conceptualized in 2002 & formed in early 2003.

By GE2006 Dr Poh had personally visited each Nee Soon East household twice. Naturally Dr Poh Lee Guan improved his results and obtained 31.28% of the valid votes in Nee Soon East in GE2006.

Having work alongside Dr Poh Lee Guan, as NAC’s Co-Secretary since 2003, I have witnessed for myself firsthand how Dr Poh Lee Guan led by example, in getting things done, his ability to focus, his passion for people & politics and how he cares for his volunteers & supporters.

The NAC is the Workers’ Party’s constituents outreach body for the electoral division of Nee Soon East. Subsequently the Nee Soon Area Committee was expanded to become the Northern Area Committee, which included Sembawang GRC, Nee Soon Central SMC & of course Nee Soon East SMC. Dr Poh led NAC as Chairman until June 2010 and was immediately appointed NAC Advisor, hence passing NAC Chairmanship baton to Dr John Yam.

With the formation of Nee Soon GRC, *I am of the view that Dr Poh Lee Guan is a natural WP candidate of choice for Nee Soon GRC. Dr Poh is definitely good for Singapore and I am very confident that he will make an excellent Member of Parliament.

*This is my personal view as only WP’s Elections Committee can make the final decisions on WP candidatures.

Photo: Dr Poh chatting with a Nee Soon GRC resident (12 March 2011)

Sunday, March 06, 2011

Eric Tan & Team for Parliament

I joined my fellow WP eastern area activists for house visits earlier this evening. The steady leader of WP’s eastern front is none other than Mr. Eric Tan Heng Chong, who is concurrently WP’s treasurer.

Eric and I came a long way. We first met at an informal social-political discussion group that organized regular discussions at NUS Guild House in 1998. I was an active member of DSC (Democratic Socialist Club) then and was introduced to Eric by Dr Wong Wee Nam (an ex-DSCian).

Eric came across to me as someone who is very analytical and very good with numbers. He is a highly systematic thinker who enjoys coming up with solutions to challenging issues. He is a firm believer that it only takes a spark, and groups of like-minded individuals to collectively make a positive difference to our society.

Throughout the years, Eric has shown his steadfastness to Singapore’s political cause. He was a campaign team member of ex-NCMP Chia Shi Teck’s GE1997 electoral bid for Choa Chu Kang SMC. In GE2001, when I was a campaign team member of Dr Poh Lee Guan’s electoral bid for Nee Soon East SMC, I witnessed Eric canvassing diligently votes for Dr Poh.

He joined the WP in 2003 and fought in East Coast GRC during GE2006 as a key team member of WP’s East Coast team. Post GE2006, Eric took over the leadership of WP’s eastern front and was appointed Chairman, Eastern Area Committee, a key appointment in WP which he holds till date.

Eric has a MBA (Distinction) from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor and a Bachelor in Engineering (Electrical) from National University of Singapore. He was a navy captain, a former fencer and an experienced banker (custody operations) with HSBC (12 years) & RBC (5 years). Currently Eric manages his own fund. He is blessedly married with three lovely daughters.

What I really like about Eric is that he is a patriot, very sincere and candid person, who speaks plainly (but tactfully) from his heart. It is Eric’s sincerity and candidness that even earns him respect from those who hold differing views.

My bottom line is, Eric Tan is good for Singapore. Let us vote Eric & his to-be-announced team of like-minded WP activists into Parliament!

Photo 1: WP's Eastern Front Warriors!
Photo 2: Shin Min Daily Report of WP activism in East Coast GRC (7th March 2011)

Saturday, March 05, 2011

The Battle For Nee Soon GRC (II)

One WP’s grassroots cell leader in Nee Soon area shared with me his concerns about the possibility of a 3-cornered electoral fight in Nee Soon.

I smiled at his concerns and replied that WP is for democracy and is prepared to face competition from different political fronts, be it from the incumbency or from the opposition camp.

To encourage him further, I cited that Anson Constituency in 1961 was won by WP’s David Saul Marshall in a 5-cornered electoral fight. Again Anson Constituency in 1981 was won by WP’s Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam in a 3-cornered electoral fight.

Naturally historical circumstances would always be different. Still the democratic spirit shown by both WP ex-leaders is inspiring, that the battle rages on, despite multiple fronts challenges. Therefore this very same spirit will be (& must be) the hallmark of all present & future WP leaders.

Meanwhile, some members of WP’s northern area campaign team gathered for a time of fellowship and strategic discussions at Yishun SAFRA club house (Photo 2) yesterday. This morning, WP conducted a public outreach in Nee Soon South (Photo 1).

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

Budget Speech 2011 by Sylvia Lim

One of the aims of this Budget is to foster social cohesion and to build an inclusive society.

The term ‘inclusive society’ has different meanings to different people. One important aspect of an inclusive society is that it should be one that integrates people with different physical and mental abilities into the mainstream. By this yardstick, our society still has some way to go to qualify as inclusive.

This Budget does provide for a continuation of MCYS programmes for the Elderly and Disabled, and gives some support to Special Education (SPED) schools and students. I note that MOE has committed some money for development of 3 SPED schools. However, to be truly inclusive, Singapore needs to commit will and resources towards integrating persons with disabilities in a much more holistic way.

The Government recently submitted a report to the United Nations. The UN Human Rights Council has a process called the Universal Periodic Review, which examines the human rights record of each UN member. This year is our turn, and the Government submitted its National Report as part of that process.

In the National Report, the Government mentioned that it was considering signing four international human rights treaties, including the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). It also said that Singapore is “actively studying the provisions of the CRPD”.

While some may see this as progress, we are actually laggards. We have not yet signed the Convention, when 147 countries have already signed,1 including all our ASEAN neighbours except Myanmar.

As mentioned in the Budget Statement, social cohesion “cannot simply be left to market forces”. All the more with persons with disabilities, who usually have little bargaining power – there is a need for special protection to safeguard their rights and quality of life.

A look at the CRPD will reveal that Singapore falls short in several areas by international benchmarks. I will highlight just a few.
Article 7 of the Convention requires countries to take all necessary measures to ensure that children with disabilities have full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, on an equal basis with other children. Article 24 recognises the right to education and expressly prohibits excluding children from compulsory education on the basis of disability.

Currently, our Compulsory Education Act ensures that every child attends at least six years of primary school. However, the subsidiary legislation specifically exempts children with physical or intellectual disabilities from compulsory education. While this may have been gazetted for practical reasons, seen from the Convention standpoint – it is a form of discrimination. The current situation is that special needs children in Singapore are not enjoying the same legal right to education as other children.

It is largely left to voluntary welfare organizations to educate special needs children. The Government provides some subsidies, but parents of special needs children still bear a much heavier financial burden than other parents. Apart from the additional expenses parents will spend associated with a special needs child, school fees are means-tested, unlike in the mainstream schools.

Early intervention is critical for special needs children to mitigate the effects of their disabilities. But there are waiting lists for schools and therapies, suggesting a resource issue and losing precious time in the child’s formative years.
If Singapore were are to sign up to the Convention, investments would be needed to ensure that children with disabilities enjoyed similar educational rights.

Article 9 of the Convention provides that States shall take measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have access to the physical environment, to transportation, to communications, electronic services and other facilities on an equal basis with others.

We have made significant progress in implementing barrier-free accessibility. However, this does not apply to older buildings, so many remain inaccessible to persons with disabilities. The public transportation system is also not yet completely barrier-free – for example, it is expected that buses will be completely wheelchair-friendly only by 2020.

In addition, disabled persons should have a concessionary travel rate, just like students and seniors. Most importantly, how easily can a person with disabilities access public information – for instance, how many e-government initiatives are disabled-friendly?

The Singapore Institute of International Affairs noted in a recent report that Singapore does not have comprehensive disability legislation aimed at moving away from viewing persons with disabilities as “objects” of charity, and towards viewing them as “subjects” with rights… and capable of being active members of society (SIIA UPR submission 2011).

If we are seriously considering signing up to the CRPD, the appropriate investments will need to be made.

Recently I came across cases of disabled adults being left at home due to lack of further education opportunities after they turn 18 years old, or inability to afford day care activities.

There is still much more that can be done by the government in this area. This aspect must not be forgotten if we are to achieve the vision mentioned in the Budget statement – a truly inclusive society “where everyone can contribute and share in the nation’s progress”.

Tuesday, March 01, 2011

Budget Speech 2011 by Mr Low Thia Khiang

Speaker Sir,

Budget 2011 is seen by many Singaporeans as a pre-election ‘sweetener’ designed to win back the hearts and minds of people disempowered by 46 years of PAP rule. The Growth Policy adopted by the Government in recent years has left a hardworking nation disillusioned with its own identity, values and quality of life.

The global recovery has helped Singapore greatly. The Finance Minister has called 2010 an exceptional year. We ended the year with an exceptionally high GDP growth.
The exceptional year also saw the number of locally born residents dipping to just 57.3 per cent of the population. This has caused some of our young men to lament that they no longer know what they are defending any more.

The year also ended with aspiring home seekers grappling with a 14.1 per cent rise in HDB prices and older Singaporeans worrying about retirement and rising medical costs.
Looking ahead, the new decade did not start off well either. Singaporean students attending our universities in 2011 will have to content with a 4 to 6 per cent rise in tuition fees, all in the name of making the distinction between Singaporeans and PRs sharper.

While the economic outlook for Singapore is positive this year, almost every basic necessity is expected to cost more moving forward. From food to utilities, rental to childcare, lower- and middle-income Singaporeans will bear the brunt of the rising cost of living.

Most Singaporeans are already resigned to paying more for public transport despite the unexpected move by the Public Transport Council to defer the 2011 Fare Review Exercise to the end of the year, after the election is over.

The immediate threat that can derail the momentum of our economic growth is Inflation. Singapore’s inflation has just hit a two-year high in January. Food prices, healthcare and education costs have gone up by 2.8 to 3.8 per cent. With oil prices hovering around the $100 mark, Singaporeans can expect to pay more for many essential items and services this year.

Therefore, I am of the view that the 2011 Budget should do more to tackle inflation from every possible angle as it is going to be a concern for everyone. There is a need for a concerted effort to address the rising cost of living at the fundamental level, which is to control the price increase of essential items like food, transportation, education and healthcare.

Using rebates and subsidies to fight inflation can only ease the hardship in the interim. Permanent programmes like the Public Assistance (PA) scheme take a long time to catch up with inflation. The PA amount took 2 years to finally reach $400 a month in this budget.

At this point, I must state that it is a blessing to Singapore that many charitable organisations like Lions Club and Food from the Heart are willing to help needy residents beyond what the government is doing. However, inflation bites all sectors of the society. Middle-income families are hard-hit too. Many of them suffer in silence under a mountain of levies and price hikes.

Thus, without tackling the rising cost of living at the fundamental level, the election year Growth Dividends would evaporate fast.

The GST is at the centre of everything we consume. I urge the government to seriously consider reducing the GST to help all sectors of the society cope with a projected slower growth and high inflation expected.

The Minister for Finance told this house in 2007 that the government was shifting towards indirect taxation as a source of revenue when it raised GST from 5 to 7 per cent then. When GST was increased in 2003 and 2004, its percentage share of the total tax revenue went up to 14.9 per cent in 2005. In this year’s Budget, GST is projected to contribute 19.5 per cent of the total tax revenue. As you can see, the GST’s share of the tax revenue has gone up 30 per cent since 2005.

If the government is shifting from direct to indirect taxation, we should see the share of direct tax, specifically Personal Income Tax, come down over the years. In 2007, Personal Income Tax constituted 15.5 per cent of the total tax revenue. In the 2011 Budget Estimates, this share is expected to go up to 16.1 per cent. How can the Government justify the increase in GST when there is hardly any shift from direct to indirect taxation as a source of revenue?

Therefore, the Workers’ Party calls upon the Government to reduce the GST rate by 2 percentage point from the current 7 per cent. Although, this will shave $2.4 billion from the estimated receipt for FY2011, if we discount the one-off election year Growth Dividend of $1.55 billion, the shortfall in receipt is $0.85 billion. The shortfall in revenue can be balanced by trimming the budgets of some bloated ministries. The shortfall may also be compensated by an increase in consumption stimulated by a lower GST rate and the expected increase in tourist receipts from the two fully operational IRs.

The Workers’ Party has also called for a waiver of GST on basic necessities for a long time. I hope the Government will consider the proposal seriously.
Next, the Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) Levy, like the Radio and Television Licence Fee, is fast losing its relevance too.

Hiring a domestic helper is no longer a luxury like in the past because of our changing life style. Families with two working parents will need a helper to take care of their young children. Although subsidized infant care is an option, most parents would prefer a domestic helper to look after their babies under the supervision of their aged parents at home.

Furthermore, in our ageing society, domestic helpers can be trained to provide some basic care for our elderly and disabled. These helpers will complement our long-term care objectives and ease the demand for nursing homes.

I am not aware of Singaporeans who want to work as stay-in domestic helpers. Yet, such help is important to many working class families. The FDW levy should be removed permanently. A saving of $170 to $265 a month will ease the financial burden of families with children and aged parents significantly. It will also somewhat mitigate the rising cost of employing a domestic helper since foreign governments supplying such labour are demanding a higher salary for their citizens.

The removal of this levy may even nudge couples to think about having more babies since getting a domestic helper has become more affordable.

The key thrust of this year’s Budget is to strengthen our economy and society for the future. It promises to grow incomes for all Singaporeans by 30 per cent in real terms over this decade.

Out of curiosity, I looked up the salaries in the Budget to estimate how much a 30 per cent increase would work out for all Singaporeans. One group of employees did enjoy a 30 per cent rise in salary last year. The estimated salary for Political
Appointments for FY2010 was $58.3 million. This salary was revised to $75.7 million or about 30 per cent more. This increase took only a year to materialise.

Unfortunately, the incomes of Singaporeans do not grow 30 per cent just like that.
It is a lot harder for the salaries for Singaporeans to grow because foreign workers are always willing to work for less. I really hope to see we succeed in growing the income of low wage workers through the road of productivity growth.

The Workers’ Party recognises the contributions of foreigners to the economic vibrancy of our nation and the need for foreign expertise in certain fields. However, the reason for admitting foreigners into our country should be to enhance the quality of life of Singaporeans.

There must be sufficient opportunities for Singaporeans to earn a decent living and to advance careers in our own country. Employers should give priority to hiring Singaporeans. Foreign workers should primarily be employed in positions Singaporeans are unable to fill. Until that happens, increasing the incomes of all Singaporeans by 30 per cent is going to be a tough thing to do.

I have questioned the effectiveness of the Foreign Workers’ Levy in controlling the number of foreign workers in Singapore. The latest increase in levy may dampen the demand for such workers in the short term but once the increase is priced into the foreign workers’ salaries, the situation is likely to return to status quo.

The strong recovery has brought the unemployment rate down to the levels seen in early 2008, before the crisis, but no one can tell if Singaporeans have benefitted much from the 14.5 per cent GDP growth last year.

Are there more Singaporeans employed now than in the pre-crisis days? Will Singaporeans get the lion’s share of the 21,300 new skilled jobs mentioned by the Finance Minister when the investment projects are fully realized? What about the 35,000 Integrated Resort (IRs) jobs that the Prime Minister mentioned in this House in 2005? How many of these jobs went to Singaporeans now the two IRs are operational?

The PM has announced in 2009 and 2010 that the Government will make the distinction between Singaporeans and PRs sharper. Unfortunately, the Ministry of Manpower does not believe that this distinction is necessary when it comes to reporting employment data. MOM has never made a distinction between Singaporean citizens and Permanent Residents in its labour force report.

Is the distinction important? The answer is ‘Yes’. It tells Singaporeans that more jobs did go to them. It tells Singaporeans that distinction between PRs and them goes beyond a mere difference in fees charged for education and healthcare. It tells Singaporeans that jobs are indeed created and reserved for them.

I am sure this house did not forget that Singaporeans did not even enjoy any significant fee advantage in education and healthcare when compared to PRs as recent as five years ago. So let’s make the distinction clearer. Let Singaporeans know more jobs did go to them in 2010 and more are reserved for them in the next decade. This is the true spirit of Singaporeans first.

In conclusion, sir, the Budget this year has done one thing right. It has prudently put back into Past Reserves the $4.0 billion that the government took in 2009.
The Finance Minister has said no less than 5 times in the budget statement that the government can do and will do more to help our society. Therefore, I urge the government to do more to reduce the rising cost of living and the burden of supporting a family in Singapore.

We also need to start working on reversing our low fertility rate urgently. This Budget has fallen short in encouraging couples to procreate. Increasing our fertility rate has to remain a top priority despite most of the efforts initiated by the government has failed so far. Taking the easy way out to boost our population by importing foreigners is counterproductive.

As this may be one of the last sittings of Parliament before it is dissolved, I wish all Singaporeans well. I also wish to see a first world parliament in the making when we reconvene in this house after the coming General Election.