The New Media, Politics & Our Youths

SPEECH BY YAW SHIN LEONG, AT NUS DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST CLUB’S FORUM “ IMPACT OF NEW MEDIA ON POLITICS AND THE YOUTHS” ON 31ST OCTOBER 2011, AT 8.15PM, IN LT18, SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

INTRODUCTION

1) I would like to thank DSC for this invitation to speak. It feels really good to be back in NUS again. It always reminds me of the good old days when I was a student activist of the Democratic Socialist Club from 1997 to 1999.

2) In mid-1999, after I had stepped down as President of the DSC, the then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong in a display of political openness, welcomed tertiary students to organize themselves and align themselves to political parties. That year I penned a concept paper, titled 'Opposition 21', which proposed for the formation of a student club that allow pro-opposition NUS undergraduates to organize ourselves. Our NUS Student Liaison Office was horrified by the idea. One particular liaison officer was so worried that she strongly advised me 'not to do something like this'. As a result, Opposition 21 failed to take off. I wonder aloud what if New Media was available then?

3) In comparison, let me quote another example, this took place in 2008. My party colleague, Mr Bernard Chen (currently the Secretary of the Workers’ Party Youth Wing Executive Committee and an NUS Undergraduate from the Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences) alongside some friends, organized a ‘National Petition for Fairer Transportation Fares for Polytechnic/ Tertiary Students’. He made use of new media, and managed to garner 5,200 signatures! This suggests the political mobilization potential of the new media.

4) Perhaps we may even compare how student forums are being organized now. Let’s compare how a DSC forum was being organized in 1997 with that of this forum in 2011. The fundamental differences that leveraged upon New Media platforms, include:

- Facebook Events page Vs Actual paper ticketing
- Email invitation Vs Formal letter invitation
- Email coordination Vs Telephone calls coordination
- Paper Posters Vs E-posters

5) My purpose is not to compare which platform is better. This is because new platforms aside (the New Media), the cause (Politics) and the people (our Youth) remain pretty much the same. Of course each generation will have different causes to champion and different battles to fight. Each generation will rise up new sets of leaders and I see many of you in the LT today, who will rise up to the call of our nation in time to come.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF MODERN POLITICS IN SINGAPORE

6) To help us better appreciate politics in Singapore, allow me to briefly go through the milestones of modern politics in Singapore.

1955 to 1959: Labour Front in power. PAP in opposition (3 out of 25)
1959 to 1968: PAP enjoyed parliamentary majority.
1968 to 1980, PAP enjoyed political hegemony in Parliament.
1981: PAP Hegemony broken, Anson By-Elections won by WP’s JBJ,
1984: Potong Pasir won by CST.
1988: Group Representation Constituencies were introduced
1991: Opposition won 4 parliamentary seats.
1997: PAP regained 2 seats
2001: PAP secured 75.3%, best results in nearly 2 decades.
2006: PAP popular vote dipped to 66.6%
2011: WP won 6 parliamentary seats.

So is GE2011 really the start of the ‘New Normal’? I say ‘No’. Citing the famous words of Professor Chua Beng Huat, he said “ We are not so much moving to a new normal but re-normalising after a long period of the abnormal” and “we even accepted that abnormality to be the only way things should be.”

IMPACT OF MASS MEDIA ON POLITICS

7) Now I will share about the impact of mass media on politics in general. The mass media performs six major functions:

- providing entertainment,
- reporting news,
- identifying public problems,
- socializing new generations,
- creating discussion platforms, &
- making profits

8) The mass media are more effective with those who have not formed a stable political opinion, whether it is on issues or candidates. Studies in the United States show that commercials and debates aired just before polling day have the most effect on undecided viewers. Voters who have already formed their opinions are less influenced by the media to change their minds.

9) Needless to say, the mass media in Singapore has a great impact on politics here. So significant was the impact that Mr. Low Thia Khiang once quipped that he won Hougang SMC in GE1991 due to the lack of mass media coverage! During GE2001, the repeated replay TV imageries of Dr Chee Soon Juan’s robust verbal encounter with the then-PM Goh Chok Tong remained fresh in the minds of many Singaporeans.

IMPACT OF NEW MEDIA ON POLITICS

10) In a report from the United States Institute of Peace’s Centers of Innovation for Science, Technology, Media, Conflict, and Peace Building, a team of scholars critically assesses the impact of new media on political movements. It is said that new media, such as blogs, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, have played a major role in episodes of contentious political action. They are often described as important tools for activists seeking to replace authoritarian regimes to promote freedom and democracy, and they have been lauded for their democratizing potential.

11) In New Media speak - the most well liked politician in Singapore is arguably Miss Nicole Seah, with 106,640 Facebook ‘likes’ on her public page. The second most ‘liked’ politician is Mr. Lee Kuan Yew with 96,031 Facebook ‘likes’ in his public page. Interestingly, Emeritus Senior Minister Mr Goh Chok Tong of Marine Parade GRC with just 2541 Facebook ‘likes’ on his public page, yet his team actually managed to win Miss Nicole Seah’s team with a majority of 18,300 votes during the recent GE2011. So what does this tell us?

12) A recent post GE2011 survey by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) has shown that those between the age of 21 and 35 spent more time getting their political news from traditional mass media. Among 447 respondents within that age bracket - who were polled between Polling Day on May 7 and July - television remained the top platform they turned to during the election period, spending an average of more than 28 minutes daily getting their political news. According to the survey results, those who voted for the Opposition (55 per cent) considered new media more important and more credible compared to those who voted for the ruling party (40 per cent).

13) In The Sunday Times’ Lifestyle yesterday (30th October 2011), the headline was ‘Getting to know you: Informal gatherings called meet ups arranged via the Internet, are increasingly popular with people’. From the article, examples of such informal group meet ups include:

- Story sharing & playdate meet up (for mums & kids)
- Speakers in Progress meet up
- The Singapore board games meet up
- Japanese meet up @ Singapore
- Sidewalk shutterbugs photography, and
- Singapore Friends Club

So is it possible for Singaporean ground up Political Meet up groups to emerge? My gut feel is ‘Yes’.

14) Also in the amazing world of YouTube, it is now possible for one to watch an event, say a Workers’ Party election rally in the comfort of one’s home, many months after the actual rally. This has revolutionized the way our politics can evolve over time. A speech, a remark or action captured and posted via YouTube, can be retrieved, reviewed and resurface on the new media like Facebook many months or even years later. Take for example, Ms Sylvia Lim’s speech on ministerial salary spoken in Parliament in 2007, the Youtube video resurfaced and went viral with over 79,000 views pre GE2011.

IMPACT OF NEW MEDIA ON YOUTH

15) Now I will touch upon the impact of New Media on Youth.

16) I refer to a joint research on digital youth project done by the University of Southern California and the University of California, Berkeley. Over a three years period, more than 800 youth and young adults were interviewed after 5000 hours of online observations. This was the most extensive U.S. study of youth media usage. They found that social network and video-sharing sites, online games, and gadgets such as iPods and mobile phones are now fixtures of youth culture. The research showed that today’s youth might be coming of age and they struggled for autonomy and identity amid new worlds for communication, friendship, play, and self-expression.

17) The new media has transformed how our youth interact and share their ideas. The ease of accessibility to new media tools, such as the ability to access Facebook via personal computers, iPhones, iPads, Android phones etc, also meant that youth nowadays can easily share their hobbies, thoughts, their personal photographs, and even their location with their friends online anytime.


18) With a ready audience of ‘friends’ and ‘friends of friends’ (when messages and quotes get reposted) online, our youth today find themselves drawn quickly and easily into new media platforms. Messages are spread easily. The ease of the sharing of messages and ideas, without restriction, also means that some popular ideas/ messages can get viral easily. For example, an article written by Onesingaporean during the GE period titled, ‘Tin Pei Ling vs Chen Show Mao – a very scary thought’ was posted and reposted on Facebook. This article went viral during the pre GE2011 campaign period. The same happened for Ms Sylvia Lim’s 2007 parliamentary speech mentioned earlier.

19) While popular messages may be spread easily via the new media, however, this does not mean that our youth will accept everything that had been shared over the new media. Take the latest ‘Occupy Raffles Place’ movement. (This was also been raised by TOC editor’s Mr Ravi Philemon during the CNA’s Talking Point last night) While the event was been publicized over Facebook, there was no turnout. The Facebook page had 844 ‘likes’. There were also many online critics about the movement. This merely shows that there is a spirit of discernment in our youth today, and this is encouraging.

CONCLUSION

20) In conclusion, during an IPS forum titled ‘What Youth Want’ held in June this year, I noted in my speech that youth in Singapore want to be heard, to be respected, to find meaning in their life and in the things they do. This suggests that our youth want engagement on the issues that matter to them. They want to express themselves differently, and they want to be heard. In this vein, I strongly believe that the new media can play a critical role in allowing our youth to be heard, to be respected and to find meaning in their lives.

21) The new media had become part and parcel of youth’s lifestyle today. ‘Facebooking’ is now ‘the’ activity. Popular sentiments and messages can now spread easily via the Internet that had became the platform for youth to express themselves. It forms an important part of the lives of our youth, and it is the platform to express themselves, to showcase their creativity, to share life experiences through photos, thoughts and ideas, comments and likes. The new media has a definite impact on youth today. But it is still a platform, a means to an end. And our youth, have to decide that they define the ‘end’ themselves.

22) Thank you.

REFERENCES:

01) http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/ips-post-ge2011-survey-part-2/
02) http://www.helium.com/items/745081-media-influence-on-politics-and-government
03) http://www.usip.org/publications/blogs-and-bullets-new-media-in-contentious-politics
04) http://www.facebook.com/nicoleseahnsp (accurate as of 1300hrs, 31st Oct 2011)
05) http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lee-Kuan-Yew/21930037394 (accurate as of 1300hrs, 31st Oct 2011)
06) http://www.facebook.com/pages/Goh-Chok-Tong/103113093061961 (accurate as of 1300hrs, 31st Oct 2011)
07) http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC111005-0000207/Youths-relied-on-traditional-mass-media
08) The Sunday Times’ Lifestyle (30th October 2011), Page 4 & 5
09) http://digitalyouth.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/report/digitalyouth-TwoPageSummary.pdf
10) http://yawshinleong.blogspot.com/2011/06/what-youth-want.html

Informal Dialogue With Estate Agents

The Estate Agent’s Bill was passed in Parliament on 15 September in 2010. The Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) a statutory board oversees the measures put forward in the bill. The bill was passed after an increasing number of complaints about industry practices and estate agents’ behavior.

One year on, to better understand the current issues & challenges faced by Estate Agents, the MP of Hougang will be hosting an informal dialogue with estate agents across agencies. Below are the details of the dialogue:

Date: 14th November 2011 (Monday)
Time: 4 to 6pm
Venue: To Be Confirmed

If you are keen to part of the informal dialogue, please email Ms Koh Wee Leng at kohweeleng@gmail.com to indicate attendance. Thank you.

Best Regards

Shin Leong

A Sad Account By Mr A

Below is an account by Mr A, a widower whose wife committed suicide while he was in prison. Mr A is in the midst of rebuilding his life but found that many obstacles are staked against him. I read his account with a very heavy heart. Especially it pained me to know that the prisons didn’t grant him compassionate leave to send off his wife (account highlighted in bold). With his permission, I am reproducing his email for our reading, so that we are in the know that there are fellow Singaporeans in our society who need compassionate policies and societal assistance.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mr A
Date: Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Amended 2nd letter to Mp
To: "yawsl@wp.sg"


Re: Seeking Kind Assistance From Your Office

Dear Sir,

This is the 2nd letter we have written to your office for assistance and we would like to seek your assistance to have an understanding from the HDB SALE DEPARTMENT. We had applied for the Sep 2011 Sale of Balance as we waited for more than a year to just have our HLE approved. Therefore this Sep 2011 Sale of Balance means a lot to our family, our HLE will expired on the 19th Dec 2011.

There are only 71 units available for the Punggol 3 room flat and we are shocked when we realized that our Q number is 215 whereby the units available were only 71. The most important factor is that my friend had also applied for this sale of balance under the same town and 3 rooms. He is first timer and he got himself a Q number at 60. Based on my friend Q number, we realized that HDB only release at the most 11 units for the 2nd timer to ballot for a flat. We feel like a fool, even thou with 8,000 units under the sale of balance but the application can only choose a single town and we could only afford this 3 room flat with the minimum price range at $169,000. We had already followed all the instruction given by HDB, we are citizens, we still go back for reservist, we contribute medi-save, pay our relevant taxes. But when it comes to housing, we are nothing.

We had been visiting and helping every friend of ours to shift new house. We had recently helped a friend to paint his house at Blk XXX #XX, we went to the management office to report defect but had given the wrong address and the officer immediately mentioned that the unit address we mentioned was vacant. Thru out the conversation we realized that Blk XXX had so many 3 rooms that are not taken. This is not the first time we see units not taken, even in Sengkang we had saw so many vacant units till date.

HDB always replied that vacant units are meant for SERS, we can understand if is in mature town. However in Punggol whereby 90% of the HDB flat is still under construction, why the SERS in Punggol 21 town?

We are not greedy people, we personally feel that HDB trying to make it difficult for us. My friend applied as first timer (Sep 2011 Sale of Balance at Punggol) – Got a Q number 60. Which means only 11 units available for 2nd timer? The mother applied as 2nd timer (Sep 2011 Sale of Balance at Tampines) – Got a Q number 25

The total units available are only 38 units. Which means only 13 units available for 1st timer?
From the figure stated on top, HDB mentioned that the percentage for the first timer and second timer is not accurate at all. We are homeless for nearly a year now. Even though both my brother and I both were once ex convict and we are not highly educated person. We are just merely common citizens earning a decent living and hoping able to look after our old aged mother whom was been forced to be homeless just due to our wrong planning and irresponsible acts in the past. We are not here to complain against anyone but just hoped to have your office or any kind soul to lend a helping hand.

Please kindly give us a chance to select a small little 3 room flat within our reach. Our funds are running low and so is our morale and trust. After year of attempts, we still cannot even get a decent rooftop. Despite all the letters and visits to the MP are of no use. The next BTO will be in Nov 2011, the result will be in Jan 2012? Can we still afford? Our HLE expired in Dec 2011, will we need another one year to get our HLE? Will we get to have a decent Q number? When is the flat ready, will my mother still live to see? If we cannot get a decent Q number again, have to wait for another year? How many years must we wander on the streets? We are not big time criminals, must we faced so much issues just for a rooftop.


Meanwhile we hoped that we would get the authority to allow us to publish our situation to the public. We wished to know how many people are facing such situation like us. At least we know we are not the only family facing such situation and will be able to balance our emotions if not we are really going to be under depression. Please kindly advise which authority should we seek from in order to publish our situation in the papers. We do not wished to go against the law just in case the authority is to claim against us.

In 2004 – My mother sold off her flat at Blk 4XX Bedok North #XX-XX (3room) to raise fund for my up coming wedding and a joint business venture with my fiancee. Therefore we shifted to stay with my fiancee after selling our Blk 4XX Bedok North flat. Everything seems well planned and wonderful.

In 2005 – My finacee and I was finally wed. Thus we had used all the sales proceed from the sale of my mother flat to finance our wedding and business venture. I suppose to jointly owned the flat at Blk 1XX Serangoon North Ave X with my spouse which I later realized that my newly wed spouse actually owned this flat along with her ex spouse. Therefore my mother and I do not have tenancy in this flat.

In 2005 – I was detained under Criminal Law Detainee. Everything seems well was crushed. My mother was chased out of the Blk 1XX Serangoon North Ave X flat not long after my imprisonment. My mother tried to apply for rental flat with me but HDB informed her that due to the fact that I was in the prison and there was no release date therefore she could not apply any rental flat. Therefore she had to shift from one place to another.

In 2008 – My spouse suddenly committed suicide while I was still in the prison. I was told that my family member had passed away by the prison officer in the late evening and I will be going on compassionate leave the next morning on the very day my mother went to the prison to request for compassionate leave to send my deceased spouse. I spent the most terrible night of my life wondering, whom in my family had passed away. In the next morning, I was informed that my spouse was the deceased but I was not given compassionate leave to send her off. I was shattered and I had sought for reason but no reason was given to me till I was released. I was told that at that point of time, the MND minister did not granted my compassionate leave.

In 2009 – I was released with no rooftop over my head. Even though all the sales proceeds was spent on the business venture, renovation and wedding but everything were gone when I was released. I was not even granted entry to Blk 1XX Serangoon North Ave X flat. My deceased spouse family feel that I was the one whom caused her to be depress and thus commit suicide and I was known as heartless cause I did not even want to attend her funeral to see her off. The prison authority actually caused a big miss communication for these matter, which I did not even seek for justice after my release. Even though I had tried to explain but was too late.

In 2009 – The same month I released, I had promised my mother that I would change over a new leaf. I found myself a job as dish cleaner the same month I released from prison. With my basic $900 payroll, I went to HDB with my mother to apply for the rental flat. But HDB ruling had changed, HDB rejected again but not because I am still in prison but because of my mother sales proceed even though we tried to explain and seek appeal from the MP back then. None of our appeal went thru.

In 2009 – I tried to apply for direct purchase HDB flat but was told that with my income no HLE will be granted to me for any purchase. I took up another job, which I worked for more than 15 hours a day. Both jobs will let me have a total payroll of $1,900 and I was given a loan of $157,000. I tried apply for the BTO flat but was rejected due to the Q number over 300% and then I apply for the Sale of balance launch but was rejected due to the Q number over 300% and then I tried again for the BTO flat, I was so happy that I was given a Q number to select flat. But then, I realized that my total CPF is not enough for the down payment and I was not entitled to any grant even though I was once married and I had never own any HDB rental or purchase flat but there are no grant available for people like me. I had to cancel my selection due to such reason and also the amount of loan granted to me was not even enough to purchase half of the unit to be selected. I realized that unless I applied with my immediate family member, which is my only brother for a decent loan but my brother already married and has his own family at this point of time.

In 2009 – I went to my ex MP again to seek assistance. I was told to join purchase with my family members but I had only 1 brother and my old aged mother. My brother came back from China after leaving my sister in law half year ago. He just got himself a new job and was supposed to prove to my sister in law he will be a changed man. Therefore we did not mentioned to my sister in law to allow me to join in the tenancy for their flat as my sister in law already very mad that my brother has been depending on her for the past years and now with my mother and I went to rely on her further.

In 2010 – My brother and sister in law relationship improved and she had agreed to join us to apply for a loan and purchase a bigger flat to accommodate each of us. But the application was rejected due to my brother and sister in law had an outstanding of $4000. Even though I had appeal to HDB branch office that I had savings and I willing to pay the sum could we had a higher loan amount to purchase, our application and appeal was turned down.

In 2010 – My sister in law demand that my mother and I find a lodging on our own. Thus my brother relationship with her fall apart as my sister in law hoped to fetch her mother whom was chased out of the house by her son to stay with her therefore cannot accommodate my mother and I.

In 2010 – My employer was not happy that I hold two jobs since both my jobs required me to operate machinery and my employer felt that it was too dangerous for me therefore I was told to select a full time job and not overworked myself. I happen to found a supplier for fresh chicken thru friend relative. I was given an opportunity by the company to run a wet market stall at Marine Parade, I gladly took up the offer since there are no overheads and set up cost for me.

In 2010 – I appeal to HDB and my ex MP to grant my brother and I a loan but was rejected as my brother divorce was under proceeding only.

In 2011 – My brother flat was sold off with my sister in law having the two children custody and she had requested for lump sum maintenance fees. The divorce was filed without chances for reconcile partially due to the MP session and I was advised that even my brother sold off his flat, he should used his sales proceed to maintain my mother and I even though we explain to the Ex MP of ours that he needs to support his two children whom is just 4 and 1 years old. That was why we need to seek our Ex MP assistance to assist us to appeal to HDB for loan while pending for divorce proceeding. But such remarks was taken serious by my sister in law that, we are trying to rob her and her children well being therefore we seek a lump sum maintenance fees.

In 2011 – I had to shift from a place to another till we finally found a place which can accommodate us for few months while waiting for the divorce papers to be finalize so that we could apply for the HDB loan again. Meanwhile we still tried to appeal to HDB based on our situation but was rejected again and again.

August 2011-My brother’s divorce final judgment was out. With the up coming sales launch by HDB, which mentioned that this is the largest numbers of flats put up by HDB. We sincerely hoped that our letter could reach any kind soul whom can help us appeal to HDB again to assist us in our application, please help to ask HDB do not keep reject our applications. Based on criteria, we had match. We also tried using the HDB website to qualify ourselves but the status only mentioned that we could only apply as 2nd timer. But with so many units launch, we could not have exceeded by 300% again. We are really worry and depressed now, would there any hidden ruling that we failed in our application again?

September 2011 – We applied for the Sale of Balance in September. We waited for the result with sleepless nights and my mother could not even rest well after the operation till now. We need to shift her every two months to stay with a friend.

October 2011 – Our lease expired again and we have to start moving from a place to another. We found out that there are so many 3-room units left on the shelves at Blk 6XX series at Punggol drive. Units left on the shelves for mature estate are meant for SERS but for a town, which is still 90% under construction, still need to left units for SERS? We thought maybe civil servants has more priority than ex convicts like us therefore units release are selected whereby units left on the shelves are not release.

The Sep 2011 Sale of Balance units release, include all the units under construction for the 3 room and below. Is this exercise just a show, people like us whom need a flat urgently and our income cannot afford bigger unit and was unable to match the market rental yet we could not even afford to get ourselves a decent Q number. I am Q number 215 which means there are at least 20 more 2nd timer behind me in Q number. We might not share the same plight. There are 3-room units and below for immediate occupancy at other town but the price range is way beyond for people like us to afford.
HDB favors the rich than the poor?

We have no ideal whether is it due to the fact that we are been pushed to the corner of the wall therefore we were so disappointed in this letter. Nevertheless, thank you for the time taken to read this letter and also we will appreciate if your office could reply us. We need to make our situation known in the papers so that we could get to know more people in the same situation like us. We could at least lend a shoulder for each other since there is nothing can be done on the end. We strongly think that it will help us to balance our emotions and mindset or else soon we might really under depression and we really find it a harsh to just have a decent life, the difference between the rich and poor is so clear. Please advise.

Thank you
Have a nice day ahead

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mr A
Date: Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: HDB Ref no: 401-06-03-0001
To: Yaw Shin Leong


Dear Mr Yaw,

Thank you for your prompt reply.
As pertaining to my last my two emails sent to HDB, I've not gotten any reply yet.

Sir, I am grateful for your kindness shown in regards to our case. Even we are not resident of Hougang but yet you still take time to read our email.

We had met so many whom brush us aside, meantime we also met voice of citizen like you whom take us serious. Two thumbs up and you have shown us a different picture.

We sincerely appreciate all the kind assistance from your office and you personally. If there's chance, we would hoped to have you as our MP too.

Shin Leong's Interview with BlogTV

Shin Leong's Interview With Dr Kieren James

The following is an interview with Dr Kieren James’ (University of Southern Queensland):

Kieren James (KJ): Was the party happy with the results of the May general election?

Yaw Shin Leong (YSL): Before every single election the party sets out political objectives and I’m glad to say we achieved all the objectives set for this GE. If you examine from another perspective, SPP [Singapore People’s Party] deployed somewhat similar strategy [as WP] but the execution is different. (Both incumbent MPs stepped out of their respective SMCs). Uncle Chiam See Tong announced his intention to leave Potong Pasir two to three years before the GE but LTK [Low Thia Khiang] said nothing until the Nomination Day itself. The preparations took a long time though. The SG [Secretary-General LTK] had his own internal view.

KJ: When do you think the SG first had the intention to contest a GRC?

YSL: Preparations may be traceable as early as 2001 or 2002. He cannot just leave Hougang like that or we will see disastrous results, we need to build up mechanisms and grassroots.

KJ: This is a history question. Explain to me how and why you became politicised on the opposition side of the fence.

YSL: My late father used to share with me stories about Soong dynasty and Three Kingdoms so it led me to think about what it means serving your country, loving your country, [and] what does it mean to come forward to serve your country. As a young child I didn’t know how to serve my country. I realized later there are ways to serve your country. As a result of seeing a lack of political balance in Singapore I decided I must do something for my country. In 1997 I remember when Mr JBJ [Jeyaretnam] was at Cheng San Stadium. He said: ‘Here is the police report I made against Goh Chok Tong and his people’. For this sentence he got a legal suit. It made me wonder: What sort of system do we want to live in? [KJ: The 1997 GE was also a strong motivator for Goh Meng Seng of NSP.] This incident led me to decide which side camp I wanted to be in. In ’91, when (Low Thia Khiang) LTK won [Hougang SMC], I remember LTK said ‘this is the beginning of the next lap’. I was a 16-year-old boy, the warm and fuzzy feeling was I wanted to be part of that next lap although that was an abstract concept for me. In 2001 I was helping Mr JBJ (J B Jeyaretnam). JBJ offered me to join the WP. I declined at that time. I joined after JBJ handed the leadership over to LTK. He is a moderate. I can identify with his vision. I joined 24 June 2001. Aljunied GRC, my team was disqualified unfortunately [01 GE].

KJ: Can you give me some further comments on the 2011 election?

YSL: The results have met the Workers’ Party’s internal political objectives. The results are not even as important as what we can do now to strengthen the foundation of what is already built, to strengthen the democratization process beyond what has already been done. A seed has been sown; a break has been arrived at. For the first time in Singapore’s short political history we broke the PAP’s GRC hegemony. Those people involved need to be diligent and focused and serve with all our efforts for the betterment of the country.

KJ: The percentage increase in the vote in Hougang indicates the community there has a high opinion of you.

YSL: I attribute the percentage increase not so much to myself but to the very foundations which LTK has laid down for Singapore’s democratization process and all the things he has been doing all these years. The people in Hougang understand the importance of what the Workers’ Party is doing. They put the full support behind the candidate.

KJ: What are the Workers’ Party’s plans for the next five years?

YSL: It’s about deepening the connections between the people and the party; understanding local issues and national issues; entrenching the Workers’ Party’s particular gain this year; and leveraging the party for further gains next time. Within that there are detailed plans. The nation must address policies which are unjust. We have [seen] the HDB form a commercial entity with Keppel Land forming EM Services. With EM Services they took over management of some pre-booked housing and let out to foreigners and Singaporeans. I’m concerned about local Singaporeans. Workers’ Party must speak out against unjust policies. I spoke out on my blog. A journalist followed up on my blog piece with a well written news piece and HDB promised to review the rental model; this is progress before parliament even begins. I hope something good will come out of this. My concern is with Singaporeans needing to pay so much more for renting from EM Services not from HDB. My heart beat is for my local countrymen and women. The Government must put the interests of Singaporeans first following the slogan of Dr Tan Cheng Bock ‘Think Singaporeans First’!

KJ: Why was the Workers’ Party silent during the presidential election in August of this year?

YSL: In the first place the institutionalization of the elected presidency is to protect the incumbent Government if they lose power; they have a friendly force to check on the new government, that was the political intent. It should not be the case. The presidential system should revert back to its former ceremonial one. The party’s stand is not for an elected president. It seems Workers’ Party supporters voted either for Tan Cheng Bock, Tan Jee Say or Tan Kin Lian [KJ smiles at this statement], that is the sensitive thing to say.

KJ: Is Workers’ Party only interested to contest in its heartland in the north-east?

YSL: There is never a strong geographical area without decades of cultivation of the ground. In 1961 [by-election] David Marshall won Anson, that [effect] manifest again in 1981, we recaptured Anson. [Regarding] the geographical area for Workers’ Party there is a Hougang spill over effect as people understand the branding of the Workers’ Party vis a vis LTK’s strong showing as a parliamentarian. Heartlanders can identify with the style of Mr LTK and Workers’ Party.
Before we can learn how to fly we must learn how to run. From a natural strategic perspective it’s always good to have adjoining boundaries to our heartland. I stay in the west. My standard reply to my neighbours who ask ‘When will WP come to the west?’ is: ‘WP will not come soon to the west as we need time to build up infrastructure and support’. It will not happen overnight. In the east the people are familiar with the Workers’ Party over decades. If Anson had been kept there might have been an Anson spill over, call it Hougang effect and Anson effect rather than Hougang and Anson spill over. Let the people decide which seats can be won next time. It’s not for the Workers’ Party to say.

KJ: Why has LTK been so successful?

YSL: Mr LTK has been in politics for some 30 years, he was election agent of JBJ. Some might say his greatest achievement was Aljunied [GRC]. I think his greatest achievement is continuing to survive for 30 years in politics. People know the brand name of his style of politics. He is rational; he speaks when it is necessary to do so. His cautious style of building up Workers’ Party bit by bit and member by member has contributed to what he has built up. He survived the Government putting down his points, sometimes in condescending manners.

KJ: Did the Workers’ Party suffer from the loss of three key members Chia Ti Lik, Goh Meng Seng and James Gomez?

YSL: People come and go; organizations always have their forms of renewal. No individual is indispensable for any organization. An organization must be able to withstand loss of individuals due to different political aspirations. It is a fact that JG, GMS and CTL left Workers’ Party before 2011. In 2011 Aljunied [GRC] still gave ringing endorsement to the candidates, [this fact] speaks volumes.

KJ: Has the Workers’ Party restricted your online activities as GMS and JG claim this was the reason for them leaving the party?

YSL: It’s always easy to attribute reasons to courses of action but… I’m very active online with blog, Facebook and Twitter. There is no party regulation stopping me posting or engaging with people who post on my blog. I had no issues or problems with that. I consider myself an activist/ partisan activist rather than a politician. It’s important for every single movement to have a group of activists having a similar purpose who can galvanize the ground and attract volunteers who are not activists. The role of activists in any societal transformation is crucial.

KJ: Thank you very much for your time.

YSL: Thank you

Walkabout In Hougang SMC

Shin Leong conducted his regular walkabout in Hougang SMC this morning. It was an interesting walkabout that saw him watching and learning the basics of cricket batting from foreign Indian workers.

Perhaps the most elated moment for the Hougang MP was when a resident (Mr. H) agreed to Shin Leong’s request for his memories & old photographs to be incorporated into the ‘Hougang Memories – Our Singapore Story’ oral history book project.

Mr. H gladly shared old photographs that captured precious memories and visual imageries of 6th milestone Hougang. He revealed to Shin Leong the reason why he has so many photographs of old Hougang was because his father was working for Kodak then!

This resident also showed Shin Leong a very rare group photograph taken together with Japanese military officers, (probably with his father within) outside the old Supreme Court. Do refer to the photos here :)

The Hougang MP also took time to enjoy a cup of aromatic coffee with residents, listening to their stories, hopes and aspirations for their families. He also shared with residents his experience in Parliament and shared with them about the progress of HDB’s LUP (Lift Upgrading Programme) that has finally arrived in Hougang.

Shin Leong's Maiden Speech In Parliament

Mr Speaker Sir, I would like to begin with my heart-felt thanks to the voters of Hougang, for allowing me this opportunity to serve our country in Parliament. I also wish to express my gratitude towards Mr Low Thia Khiang for his guidance and having faith in me to carry on his work in Hougang. I aspire to and will work with great diligence to meet the high bar set by my predecessor.

Mr Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity today to address two main issues affecting Singaporean workers: First, we need to always put Singaporeans first when formulating our manpower policy. Second, we need to look at international best practices in addressing unemployment and retirement needs. I will conclude by sharing my vision how I will serve Singapore as a WP parliamentarian.

Putting Singaporeans First

Mr Speaker, I would first like to address the concerns many working Singaporeans have about our foreign manpower policy.

I read in the Straits Times on Saturday that there is -- quote -- a rare show of disagreement -- unquote -- between NTUC and the SNEF. We have noted this “new development” from the NTUC and are pleased that the NTUC is now in line with the Workers’ Party’s position on manpower policy, which we described in our Labour Day Message in 2008 as “Putting Singaporeans First”.

The WP is pro-Singaporean and recognises that immigrants and foreign workers have an important role to play in our country’s progress. We do not see this as a contradiction. Our goal should be to strike the right balance between an efficient system of manpower supply and to achieve the best outcome for employers, employees, and above all, Singaporeans.

I would like to discuss three areas we need to work on to achieve this balance.

First, we need more transparency and accountability in our employment and S-pass system.

Second, we need further tightening of the work pass system by adjusting the inflow of foreign manpower by industry.

Third, we need to enhance current workforce training in order to increase productivity.

The Employment and S-Pass system needs to be more transparent. Figures showing a breakdown of the different categories of passes issued, and across different industries are not released to the public. Why this secrecy? We need regular reports showing the relative standing of Singaporeans and Passholders. Singaporeans have expressed their concerns about losing their jobs to foreign workers. With the release of such detailed figures, it will help us better understand the need for foreign manpower across various industries. Analysis of these figures would help us calibrate foreign manpower recruitment across employment segments. Transparency will also go far in removing insecurity on the part of Singaporean workers and cool unwarranted anti-immigration sentiments. Transparency begets accountability.

Although the circumstances of labour supply are not made clear to us, it is evident that Singaporeans are at a disadvantage under the current system. Because Singaporean workers cost more to employ. The need for Singaporean males to serve National Service aside, employers are also required to make CPF contributions for Singaporeans and Permanent Residents but not for Passholders. In the recent move to tighten the Q1 pass criteria, the Ministry of Manpower estimated that it will increase the wage cost for about 20% of current Employment Pass holders or 30,000 foreign professionals by 1 to 2%.[1] This tiny amount does not level the playing field for Singaporeans as employers do not make CPF contributions for foreign employees while the CPF component of the wage cost of Singaporean workers amounts up to 16% of gross wages.

There needs to be measures in place to enable Singaporean workers to compete equally with foreign skilled workers. Already, letting in lower cost foreign skilled workers without consideration for different demand across industry sectors are putting our workers at a great disadvantage. The WP believes that the inflow of foreign workers should therefore be calibrated for each industry, considering FIRST the suitability and availability of Singaporean workers for these industries.

Mr President in his speech mentioned our shared goal is for every Singaporean worker to have a skilled, well-paid job. In order to achieve that, we must start from our formative years, and continue to ensure that there are effective training programmes to allow each worker to maximise his ability and to keep his skills up-to-date throughout the course of his working life.

The setting up of Continuing Education and Training Centres and big employment institutes is well and fine. But instead of waiting for employers and employees to flock to the classrooms, we should also be proactive and bring more training programmes to workplaces to encourage employers to retrain Singaporean workers. Existing and new training programmes should be enhanced to ensure that they would target increasing actual productivity in the workplace, and not just abstract ideas of improving productivity in the classroom.

WDA’s move in 2007 to focus on worker-based and outcome-based programmes has not made much progress lately. It is time we reconsider the principle guiding the operation of the Skills Development Fund. Right now the Fund operates on the principle that assistance is given as incentives and not as subsidies. It is time to move towards both subsidies and incentives. Payroll subsidies should be provided to help workers bear the costs of training. This is especially important for a worker-based approach since workers will not have their employers’ sponsorship and employers will naturally be reluctant to let workers select their own training programmes and take leave to complete them. All government-funded training programmes should have an outcome-based effectiveness measuring system tailored to industry requirements. Given that increasing productivity is our topmost concern, we need to develop quantitative performance indicators that evaluate the contribution of training programmes to increasing productivity over an appropriate time-frame. Monetary incentives pegged to the performance indicators should be awarded to top up the payroll subsidies and pay for course fees.

On this note, I urge the government to think twice before accepting Member for Ang Mo Kio GRC, Mr Yeo Guat Kwang’s proposal for a compulsory training framework for work permit and S Pass employees. As things stand, Singaporeans do not compete with foreign workers on a level playing field because foreign workers cost less. Let us make sure that the odds are not further stacked against Singaporean workers by subsidising foreigner workers' training using our tax payers' monies to increase their effectiveness and employability. This, I believe, would contradict WDA's chief objective to help Singaporean workers to improve our employability.

Unemployment and CPF: Learning from the World

Mr Speaker, I would like to now turn my attention to unemployment and the inadequacy of retirement provision.

The global financial crisis has highlighted problems in these areas. We need to be able to analyse these shortcomings, study international best practices, and learn from how other countries have dealt with such issues. We can then take these valuable lessons and apply them to ourselves, with the aim of recalibrating our own system always with our people’s interests at heart.

Our workers need better protection from involuntary unemployment. Singapore has a small open economy, susceptible to external forces of globalisation. The current sovereign debt crisis in the US and Europe, the problems faced by the Eurozone -- these affect us too. Our economy is maturing and growth is moderating in the context of the current prolonged global economic crisis. Cyclical and structural unemployment is a reality and our people are facing increasing risks of retrenchment.

Already, the resident unemployment rate for the second quarter of 2011 has crept back up to 3.9%, very close to 2010 levels.[2] Since the height of the financial crisis in 2008, only 50 and 58 percent of residents have been re-employed within six months of having been made redundant, compared with 66 to 78% before the crisis.[3] Yet, the government let in more Employment and S Pass professionals, increasing the number from 188,000 foreign skilled workers in 2008 to 240,000 in 2010. This is a 27% increase as half of our laid-off resident workers struggled to find work.[4]

Under these circumstances, the combined weight of financial commitments for laid-off workers -- be it rent, mortgage re-payments, utility bills, medical bills and educational expenses -- can be considerable. There must be some level of support for the unemployed to continue to live a decent and dignified life. It is also important that the involuntarily unemployed be provided with peace of mind to retrain, upskill and look for employment. We do not want unemployment to push our workers into the vicious circle of poverty. We note that there are Comcare Work Support and Transition programmes for the unemployed to tide them over periods of unemployment. The stringent criteria for these programmes include a household income of not more than $1,500. This will not help the unemployed from the sandwiched middle class with a household income that exceeds this ceiling; they too have many bills as well as mouths to feed and elderly to take care of.

For a long term solution to temporary and involuntary unemployment, we should very carefully study the feasibility of an unemployment insurance scheme. The Prime Minister dismissed this idea in 2006 on the basis of affordability. He said it will reduce a worker’s take-home pay or add to wage costs and reduce competitiveness.[5]

Five years on, global economic conditions have changed and the risk of unemployment faced by our workers has risen considerably. However, we now have the benefit of seeing mixed results from many unemployment insurance schemes around the world, particularly after they have been put through the crucible of the global financial crisis. Some schemes are costly and cannot be sustained, but there are also schemes that appear to have been successfully implemented.

Not all unemployment insurance schemes provide income without work. Unemployment insurance can encourage the unemployed to find work or even to retrain, for example by simply tying payouts to participation in WDA job placement and training programmes. We must therefore seriously study international best practices and consider whether they could be adapted to our context. We cannot dismiss it out of hand without due consideration and research, especially now that we are facing challenging economic conditions ahead.

Finally, I would like to address the adequacy of our CPF in providing for Singaporeans’ retirement needs. The Australian Centre for Financial Studies and Mercer have just released their Mercer Melbourne Global Pension Index report for 2011. Among 16 countries (which include developed countries and fast developing countries such as Brazil, India, China and Chile), Singapore is ranked 11 and received a ‘C’ grade. In terms of the three dimensions of the index, our CPF is doing well in terms of sustainability and integrity, but we fared badly for adequacy. In other words, our CPF is at risk of not delivering adequate retirement benefits for Singaporeans. We ranked second from the bottom for the adequacy index, scoring only 41.9 points when the average is 63 points. We scored 51.7 points in 2009 and have dropped nearly 10 points in just two years. This is very worrying.

The Melbourne Mercer report suggests six ways for us to improve our CPF system. I want to highlight three of them which echo what the WP has proposed.

Firstly, our CPF should raise -- quote -- the minimum level of support available to the poorest pensioners -- unquote. We have a duty to protect our senior citizens who have spent the better part of their lives contributing to Singapore’s growth. Not everyone turning 55 in 2013 will be covered by CPF Life, as only those with $40,000 or more in their Retirement Account will be automatically included in the scheme. The CPF board estimates that 70% of the cohort will be auto-included, while the rest with less than $40,000 in their Retirement Accounts would have to opt in. Ironically, the bottom 30% are the ones who need better support.[6]

Furthermore, we understand that the CPF Minimum Sum or CPF Life monthly payouts can be less than the prevailing Public Assistance allowance of $400 per month for a one-person household.[7] Those who are receiving less can therefore apply for Public Assistance. Even so, is $400 a month enough, in the words of MCYS to -- quote -- sustain basic living? -- unquote. I note too that CPF Life is not inflation indexed. If core inflation continues above 2% each year, and headline inflation above 5%, the purchasing power of each monthly payout will erode rapidly, at a rate of between 25% to 50% in 15 years. How is that insurance for longevity? The government should consider setting up a Longevity Fund to supplement the income of our senior citizens inadequately covered by the CPF Minimum Sum or CPF Life schemes.[8] The Fund could be built up through transfers from budget surpluses. This small but significant step by the government will go a long way in our goal to ensure that all our senior citizens will have adequate means to enjoy their golden years after spending their prime years contributing towards nation building.

I would deal with the second and third points together. The report states that our CPF should -- quote -- invest a portion of the CPF in growth assets and reduce the barrier to establishing tax-approved group corporate retirement plans -- unquote. We welcome the recent announcement that the SMRA interest rate will continue to be fixed at 4%. The extension of the 4% rate is only a temporary solution. In the first place, the aim of the 10-year SGS floating rate policy is to improve returns for Singaporeans beyond the 4% rate. It is cold comfort when the Minister of State for Manpower recently boasted that the 10-year average real rate of return is 2.6% for the Special Account in 2010, when the 10-year average real GDP growth is 5.6%.[9] Singaporeans deserve fair returns for what we work for. It has also been said that this portfolio is largely risk-free. It is only risk-free insofar as the government will pay out the amounts that have flown into the fund. The Minister should be reminded that risk includes present and future inflation risk, past real returns notwithstanding, and inflation risk has grown significantly in the past few years. Past performances are not indicative of future ones. The time has come for a comprehensive study drawing on international best practices to assess the feasibility of a pension fund model tailored to Singapore’s own circumstances to enhance CPF returns.

I would like to conclude by saying that the issues I have highlighted above are very real and pressing problems for my constituents and also for the people of Singapore, as we fight to find our footing in an ever-volatile and challenging environment.

It is my hope that in carrying out the business of this House, we will work together towards a better life for each and every single Singaporean.

On the cusp of what we are constantly told is a new era in our young country’s political development, I am energised by what I have seen in the past decade: the development and the gradual maturity of our political landscape. I look forward with much anticipation to my part in ensuring that reasoned, alternative voices continue to make ourselves heard in this honourable institution.

It is an honour and a privilege that I will preserve while serving the people of Hougang constituency and the Republic of Singapore. Thank you.

[1] Business Times, 17 Aug 2011.

[2] MOM Labour Market Report 2Q 2011, p. 4 (http://www.mom.gov.sg/Publications/mrsd_qtlmr112.pdf)

[3] MOM Labour Market Report 2Q 2011, pp. 8, 11.

[4] Straits Times, 19 July 2011.

[5] http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2006/roundup_speech/subsection8.3.htm

[6] Point 11, http://mycpf.cpf.gov.sg/NR/rdonlyres/F540570D-A107-488F-A295-67E128643210/0/CPFLIFE_FAQ.pdf.

[7] http://app1.mcys.gov.sg/Assistance/PublicAssistancePAScheme.aspx

[8] 18 Sep 2007 Speech by Low Thia Khiang in Parliament: WP statement on CPF changes: http://wp.sg/2008/01/cpf-changes-for-better-or-for-worse/

[9] http://mycpf.cpf.gov.sg/CPF/News/News-Release/N_9Oct2011_MF4.htm

Photo Source: http://news.xin.msn.com/en/singapore/article.aspx?cp-documentid=5422289

Discussions With Canine Activists (IV)

In a follow up meeting with a group of canine activists this evening (14th October 2011), representatives from the informal canine activists’ network ‘Save Our Street Dogs’ (SOSD) joined in the discussions.

One of the SOSD activists, Mrs Sim shared her recent experience with 5 AVA officials on 11th October 2011 while feeding street dogs along Lor Halus.

According to her, a particular AVA official ‘TTW’ without official identification was very rude and demanded her to produce her identity card and said that she had broken the law for feeding street dogs.

Mrs Sim refused to produce her identity card because to her knowledge there isn’t a ‘No feeding of street dogs’ law in the first place.

Her resistance resulted in the 5 AVA officials surrounding her and eventually calling in of the Police, which Mrs Sim complied and handed over her identity card over to the Police

According to her, the entire experience of dealing with the AVA officials traumatized her greatly.

She also shared that AVA officials told her to get her dog activists contacts to gather all Lorong Halus street dogs and re-home/ place them in dog shelters by next week. Failing so, the street dogs will be caught and culled.

Shin Leong encouraged the SOSD activists to use the points raised in ‘Community Dogs Management Programme’ (draft II) and to freely fuse them into SOSD’s existing papers, namely ‘Factors to the Stray Population’ & ‘The Contradictory Role of AVA’.

A K9 welfare symposium/ gathering is likely to be in the cards too.

The lively discussion ended at 9.45pm and the three major issues are:

1) Is it unlawful to feed street dogs in Singapore?
2) Existing AVA’s SOP to manage street dogs feeders
3) Urgent appeal for time extension for Lorong Halus streets dogs

Shin Leong will be writing to the AVA on the above to clarify (for No. 1 & 2) & to appeal (for No. 3). Details will be shared once there are updates.

The next canine activists’ discussion will take place on 25th November 2011 (Friday). Kindly email shinleong.yaw@wp.sg if you are keen to attend.

An Account By A HIV Ex-Inmate (II) Singapore Prisons' Reply

Yesterday, I received a reply from the Singapre Prisons. Below is the content of Prisons' reply. I will be discussing with some HIV activists to formulate a way forward. Just for our information.

Best Regards

Shin Leong

------
Dear Mr Yaw,

I refer to your letter dated 8th September 2011.

1) The MOH susbsized 90% of the total volume of drugs dispensed at public hospitals and polyclinics. Prison is guided by prevailing MOH policy on drugs subsidies. The HIV drugs are not on the standard drug list and hence HIV medication is not subsidized. This is no different from all other non-standard drugs used to treat other diseases which are also not subsidized.

2) Notwithstanding the above, Prisons works with charitable oranizations to offer financial help for the purchase of HIV drugs to inmates who need financial support. We would like to clarify that all inmates who require financial or other assistance may make a request through their Personal Supervisors. These requests will be referred to the relevant agencies for the necessary assistance.

3) Pertaining to your question on separate housing and limited interactions for inmates with HIV. Prisons would like to clarify that inmates with HIV, like all other inmates are given out-of-cell activities to interact with one another. Given the Prisons is a closed environment with a high population density, inmates with HIV are housed separately from other inmates to ensure safety of all parties. Housing inmates with HIV together also allows Prisons to better manage their access to medical services.

4) Apart of the above, inmates with HIV are treated no differently from other inmates. They have access to recreation and reading materials, as well as to counseling and rehabilitation programmes

5) On the allegation of discriminatory remarks , we would like to assure you that our officers are trained to be firm and fair when interacting with inmates. Please provide us with more information so that we can look into the matter and address your concerns.

6) Thank you.

--

Do refer to: An Account by a HIV Ex-Inmate
https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=165410583539572

Tour to Yunnan Province

Aljunied Constituency Committee (AJCC) & Hougang Constituency Committee (HGCC) are co-organizing for their constituents a tour to Yunnan Province, China.

The tour will be held from 1st to 8th November 2011. MP Low Thia Khiang & MP Yaw Shin Leong will be participating in the tour.

Do register early as there are limited seats available :)

Photo 1: Itinerary of Tour
Photo 2: Shin Min Daily News (7th Oct 2011)

Conversations With Dr Kieran James

I have the opportunity to meet Dr Kieran James over an interview earlier this afternoon.

He is a Senior Lecturer with the University of Southern Queensland.

Dr Kieran is doing primary research for his new book on Singapore's Opposition to be published next year.