political commentary

An Open Letter to the Prime Minster

I had thought to keep quiet during this period of political transition while watching events unfold. But what is happening currently has perturbed me enough to want to do another commentary. I have cast it in the form of a direct letter to the PM, to convey a greater sense of urgency.

Dear Mr Prime Minister

We are in the midst of a crisis where the people no longer trust their government, and the government no longer cares about regaining their trust.

There are two clear signs that the present situation has reached crisis proportions, that it is not just an affective divide, not just an emotional estrangement between your PAP leadership and the people.

Firstly, the people are resorting to forms of high-visibility, high-risk protest never seen before, such as graffiti writ large on public buildings, persistent, strident online criticism despite stern government warnings and threats, an increased frequency of mass gatherings held at the Speakers’ Corner, as well as increased hostility shown at these gatherings.

Secondly, the protest is not confined to a small group of young dissidents emboldened by Internet power, but is spreading to involve large segments of the population, as seen in a senior citizen’s active contribution to the angry graffiti, and in a public outpouring of sympathy, in the form of financial help, for the blogger Roy Ngerng who is being sued by you for defamation.

How did this crisis arise in the first place?

With utmost respect, Sir, I must point out that it is ultimately your inability or unwillingness to listen to the people. After your initial show of contrition and your ardent promises of change, following the shock of the General Election of 2011 (a change of heart which must have astonished as well as heartened a lot of Singaporeans like myself), your government now seems to be hardening its position and going back to the old PAP reliance on a climate of fear maintained by the deployment of the famous PAP instruments of control, notably the defamation suit.

Hence while you see yourself as simply going by the rules, Singaporeans see you as the PAP juggernaut ready to mow down the little people in its path.In all fairness to you, Sir, the defamation suit, per se, is a legitimate instrument in any law-governed society, allowing anyone to seek redress and justice. Hence, making use of this means to defend your reputation is entirely within your rights, as indeed, you would be the first to affirm that it is the right of any blogger to sue the government if he or she thinks fit. But in Singapore, alas, it is by no means such a simple, straightforward matter. For Singaporeans have long got used to a certain belief that colours all their perceptions, namely, that here, there is no level playing field but one massively tilted in favour of an all-powerful, vindictive government that will have no qualms about reducing its opponents to bankruptcy. Hence while you see yourself as simply going by the rules, Singaporeans see you as the PAP juggernaut ready to mow down the little people in its path.

Again in fairness to you, Sir, it can clearly be seen that you and your colleagues have, since the debacle of 2011, made great efforts to improve the lot of the people. Indeed, anyone can see the improvements, continuously planned or implemented, in the many areas of jobs, transport, housing, education, recreation. But the hard truth is that the expectations of the people, especially the young, go well beyond material needs, to encompass the long denied need for freedom of expression, open debate and public assembly. Unlike the older generation who were grateful for simple amenities such as modern sanitation and clean streets, the new, better educated, globally-exposed, Internet population demand much more.

The truth, Sir, is more sobering: they are seeing these so-called achievements as no more than what is owing to them from leaders who have chosen to pay themselves handsomely to do their job.Indeed, you probably are tempted to call them the spoilt, blasé, so-what generation that is taking for granted these material achievements which would have been appreciated anywhere else in the world. The truth, Sir, is more sobering: they are seeing these so-called achievements as no more than what is owing to them from leaders who have chosen to pay themselves handsomely to do their job. Moreover, the skepticism bred by distrust has cast all these laudable efforts of your government as just self-serving strategies to advance party interests and stay in power. I have to say that I am somewhat dismayed by the pure vitriol of your more extreme online critics who gleefully twist everything that you say and do to serve their cynicism. It is a sad measure of what can happen when trust is gone.

In short, distrust is something so emotionally charged that it is guided by its own perilous logic and propelled by its own alarming momentum. It has already widened the original disconnect between the PAP and the people into an almost unbridgeable chasm.

What can be done to deal with this unprecedented crisis of trust before it escalates further and reaches a point of no return, something which obviously neither side wants?

For a start, there are some hard truths that have to be faced by the PAP, no matter how unpalatable:

1) For the change to be truly beneficial to the people, it cannot be something merely concessionary, much less cosmetic or superficial, such as the leaders giving up the traditional austere all-white uniform for something a little more colourful, so as to blend in with the crowd; abandoning their usual stern, distant style for greater friendliness and smiling approachability; purging their image of all signs of elitism through a more visible presence at hawker centres or the MRT; peppering their speeches with humorous personal anecdotes and admiring observations about ordinary Singaporeans, such as this young person with little education who made good or that hardworking teacher who went out of her way to help her students, etc.

True change goes well beyond all these surface overtures. It has to be no less than paradigmatic, enacted at a much higher level of sincere purpose backed up by sincere action, no matter how difficult.True change goes well beyond all these surface overtures. It has to be no less than paradigmatic, enacted at a much higher level of sincere purpose backed up by sincere action, no matter how difficult. Only then can there be an overhaul of old mindsets and habits of governance, no matter how valued.

Now I will have the temerity to suggest, Sir, that the PAP leadership had, not too long ago, missed a certain rare and valuable opportunity to show the people its sincerity for this kind of change. Shortly after the watershed 2011 General Election, some ex-political detainees made a request for a commission of inquiry to look into the allegations that the government had made against them, a request which was brusquely dismissed. To accede to the request would of course have shocked PAP diehards and the majority of Singaporeans, simply because it would have been so uncharacteristic of the PAP style.

But if it is true that extraordinary problems call for extraordinary solutions, it would have been precisely this act of unaccustomed humility, courage and sensitivity to the people’s feelings, that would have conveyed unquestioned sincerity and honesty, and provoked positive reaction from the people. And if, additionally, there were gracious acceptance of the verdict of the inquiry, even if it meant an apology and the need to make amends, that would have been a gesture large and empathetic enough, to win over even the most vocal critics. It would certainly have begun the process of creating, for the first time in the history of the PAP government-people relationship, a nexus of understanding and reciprocity. (I have dealt rather lengthily on this example simply because to this day, I fervently wish that it had happened)

2) As long as the crisis of trust persists, Sir, all your words of advice, caution and encouragement to the people, all the statements you are making about the need for good politics and good policies, for constructive debate, for all Singaporeans to work together in harmony and goodwill to build a strong, prosperous, stable society where everyone will be cared for, which everyone can call home, etc, etc, will only fall on deaf ears, or worse, be construed as no more than PR pronouncements of much pretension and little worth.

3) The old era that may be aptly called The Lee Kuan Yew Era, is now over, and for the succeeding PAP leaders to be seen as clinging to it despite their obviously good intentions and efforts to respond to the unstoppable forces of change in the new era, is to be caught in a neither-here-nor-there, politically ill-defined domain that gets pushed and pulled both ways. It gives the unfortunate impression of lack of leadership direction, which is invariably and unfavourably contrasted with the strength, conviction and vision of the first Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew.

Hence, while Singaporeans attribute Singapore’s amazing success in the world to Mr Lee’s purposeful style, they are less ready to do the same for the two succeeding Prime Ministers whose achievements are by no means inconsiderable. While Singaporeans were ready to accord Mr Lee much respect and trust (though with scant affection), they perceive the younger leaders after him as less deserving of these, and therefore not entitled to lecture and scold them as Mr Lee used to do with impunity. If Lee Kuan Yew alone received the famously humongous ministerial salary increase, the people would not have minded, but when the rest also did, they were outraged.

Today, in a twist of supreme irony that would have incensed Mr Lee, Singaporeans see the defamation suit itself, and not the act that has entailed it, as the very cause of the erosion of trust.4) What had worked well in the old era may no longer be relevant today, or worse, may even be damaging. When Mr Lee Kuan Yew liberally used the defamation suit against his critics, one of the reasons he gave (if I remember correctly) was that he wanted to punish them for implying government corruption, and thus eroding the trust of the people, which he said was necessary for the government to do its work.Today, in a twist of supreme irony that would have incensed Mr Lee, Singaporeans see the defamation suit itself, and not the act that has entailed it, as the very cause of the erosion of trust. A few more applications of this once effective instrument of control, even if legally justifiable, would surely damage the PAP cause further, in the highly charged atmosphere of the new Singapore.

5) While Singaporeans appreciate the original PAP principles of hard work, self discipline, responsibility and incorruptibility, they can see that the inflexibility of style based on rationality, reason, head-over-heart logic and letter-of-the-law adherence may be woefully inadequate to deal with a new era where politics is necessarily complex, messy and noisy. This is because human nature, ultimately, cannot be ignored, and has to be factored into any political equation.

So, in terms of practical action, what can be done about the present growing crisis of trust in our midst?

Again, Sir, I will beg to be presumptuous, and make the following suggestions:

1) You, and only you, Sir, can initiate the process leading to the solution of the problem. In theory and ideally, the three forces for major change in any society, namely, the government, the institutions and the people, work together. But in Singapore, unfortunately, the last two are helpless. Only the dominant PAP can initiate change and sustain it. Hence, whether you like it or not, Sir, if you genuinely seek a restoration of trust, you have first to go it alone, signal your new attitude to the institutions and the people, and patiently encourage them to take the cue and play their part. It will be a long, strenuous process.

A less-than-genuine effort would be something like launching a high-profile project such as the great Singapore Conversation, watch it go through the motions and various stages of a set timetable, and then shrug off the indifferent results.

There must be many in your camp who feel the same way but are reluctant to speak up. It may be a good thing to start listening to them in order to start listening to the people.2) There are some voices in your government, Sir, and some staunch PAP loyalists who have bravely, albeit gently, tried to draw your attention to the growing divide between you and the people. Professor Tommy Koh some time back actually commented that the use of the defamation suit was not exactly commendable or useful in the long run, and recently Dr Lily Neo calmly and tactfully suggested during a parliamentary sitting that you ought to be listening more to the people and communicating better with them. There must be many in your camp who feel the same way but are reluctant to speak up. It may be a good thing to start listening to them in order to start listening to the people.

3) In the end, you and your colleagues who have for decades been skilfully solving tough, bread-and-butter problems faced by the nation, will be in the best position to deal with this equally serious problem of trust. It is of course a completely different problem, but with the same application of efficiency, determination and dedication, it will no doubt be one more crisis solved, or at least defused, for the nation to move on.

This is an epochal time in Singapore’s history, when one era is fading into the past, and a new one is being transitioned into. If the present crisis of trust is not resolved, it will become even more intractable for the next Prime Minister and the new generation of leaders, for by then the crisis would have deteriorated into meltdown. In the absence of the people’s trust, effective government is virtually impossible, as every leader knows. To prevent this from happening, only you, Sir, can pave the way for a new understanding and reconciliation. It is a huge, onerous, daunting and certainly unenviable task of damage control, repair and restoration. But it is surely top priority, if only because the alternative would be just too scary.

Yours sincerely
Catherine Lim

June 7th, 2014 — 115 comments

Respond

115 comments below

Jonathan
June 7th, 2014 at 1:21 am

Wow, 7th June, only an hour after the start of the day, I am one lucky person to be first few to read this open letter.

Good things done or not, important thing is people must be happy. Else it is as good as not done…
markus
June 7th, 2014 at 1:27 am

Thank you Catherine for speaking up and sharing your view, for being an eloquent voice and for remaining constructive. Let’s hope it would be heard, and believe together for a better Singapore.
Daniel Yap
June 7th, 2014 at 1:30 am

It would be supreme irony if this letter received, as once before, a shortsighted rebuke about one’s place in society.
Christian
June 7th, 2014 at 1:34 am

unfortunately things have escalated to a level that listening to your people may no longer be a panacea to the increasing divide. you rightly pointed out that listening to the people would have helped, provided it had happened only earlier. Testing times ahead.
Francis
June 7th, 2014 at 1:43 am

Bravo! Well said…. Pity it will probably fall on deaf ears…
Dr. Singapuli
June 7th, 2014 at 1:44 am

Sadly, every government needs to adapt and grow according to the era. LKY is a visionary and built a nation for the future. I hope this would continue in the current and future governments.
Nigel Na
June 7th, 2014 at 1:46 am

An Open Letter to Catherine Lim

Dear Ms Lim,

While your letter struck a chord with me, and surely with many other readers, I can’t help but feel that it is futile, through no fault of yours.

The revealed truth is that the PAP has confused ideology and morality. It is unable to view its own manifesto and values objectively, as one of many positions in a marketplace of ideas. It has planted its feet squarely, and declared that its values are the only Singaporean values. In its eyes, challenges to its ideology aren’t invitations to debate or to think; instead, these challenges are existential, immoral… even to some extent, evil.

There is only one moral code for Singapore and Singaporeans, and that is the code of ‘Asian values’ as mediated by, ad hoc and to their own advantage, the ruling power.

This makes any hope for the paradigmatic change you’ve called for coming from within the party a vain one, I fear.

I await eagerly for the establishment to prove me wrong.

Yours sincerely, Nigel Na
Richard
June 7th, 2014 at 4:06 am

Contrary to what Catherine has said, we are actually NOT in a post LKY scenario. He is still alive and wields influence albeit in a lesser shape and form. His son’s lawsuit is evidence of this. This ruling party knows how to give the people what they need to win elections. In the privacy of the election booth, the noisy dissent of the average Sporean melts into support for LKY.
HO HARRY
June 7th, 2014 at 4:08 am

I seldom like to talk about politics and I really dislike those idiots from Getting Rotten Org misbehaving at public place such as parking their cars all over the public road instead of parking at MSCP.

As a volunteer at MTP-Session . . . the residents end up like a fool for trusting those officials too much and most of the residents effort and time totally wasted because of all those highly irresponsible volunteer’s empty promise.
Mike
June 7th, 2014 at 4:34 am

Thank you writing and kindly come over to HLP.
Mike
June 7th, 2014 at 4:43 am

Has the PAP really been winning at the elections? I beg to differ and so many Singaporeans too, that redrawing the election boundaries 3 times just before each Election Day is an ungracious and unethical way to contest an opponent. 40% Singaporeans’ voices are, in fact, diluted and lost, with an 8% representation in parliament. Is 8% a proportionate representation of the silent majority’s voice which is looming with each year? I shudder to think if this ongoing defamation suit which is ongoing, an attempt to silence the voices of Singaporeans with an arresting blow.
Ken Wong
June 7th, 2014 at 5:02 am

Hi Catherine, I remember in the 90s you were the victim of bully by Goh Chok Tong who was then Prime Minister that couldn’t stomach what you wrote in ST thus force you to apologize. Almost 20 years later who still see the same kind of high handed wrestling. The ruling party is comprise of almost the same crowd with same mentality and I have no faith nothing much will change. They are too ingrained in their power grip and often too much centralized power gives people a sense of entitlement to do what they want to strengthen or consolidate power. Power corrupt a person’s conscientiousness and this is precisely what we are seeing now in PAP. Nothing major will change. A tweak here and there will be on the plate.
Caoda Jilai
June 7th, 2014 at 5:37 am

Cat, you are cruising for a bruising. I foresee you’d be sued , bankrupted, and will end your days in Exile in Melbourne where there is freedom (as opposed to fee-dom) of speech. Repent , Cat, offer apology, compensation which is more than desultory, and retraction, and take down this letter, or hahahahaha or else face BANKRUPTCY!
Ed
June 7th, 2014 at 6:38 am

Dear Catherine, please beseech the minister through your letter. Absolutely no need to SHOW us your your intentions.
Andrew Loh
June 7th, 2014 at 7:35 am

“To prevent this from happening, only you, Sir, can pave the way for a new understanding and reconciliation.”

I have to disagree with you on this, Ms Lim.

Lee Hsien Loong is the last person who would be able to “pave the way” forward. We need a new leader to lead Singaporeans.
David Ong
June 7th, 2014 at 7:41 am

Well Said!:-)
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:45 am

Some people want PM Lee to smile and say, it hurts, it hurts. Pain is good. I like it. I can take it, please send me more. Be submissive. Who is next?
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:46 am

Talking and clarifying the CPF scheme.

Need five teams with different PR sensitivity to speak same lingo to explain CPF to different age groups, 20-30; 30-40; 40-50; 50-60; 60 plus.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:47 am

By all means speak, write whatever.

But watch out for the OB markers, and not be hauled into court.

Many big guns and smarter ones in politics have chosen wisely not to be hauled into court.

They steer themselves to stay far away from the court.

They leave it to others who are gung-ho type to get the hit.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:48 am

The defendant is in the 30-40 age group, skepticism aplenty.

Can someone age 60 plus explain CPF, etc. to him effectively?
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:49 am

Today at Speakers’ Corners and another one on 14th at Thomson CC.

The truth will hurt.
Sam
June 7th, 2014 at 7:50 am

What is actually preventing this government from changing? It is their thinking that there is little that is wrong with their policies and that the real problem is communicating the policies more clearly to the people. Related to this is an inability to be honestly brutal not only to themselves, but more importantly to the public. All their sophistry such as policy shifts instead of flip-flop, makes it seemed that saving their own skin is their top priority. So far, there is not even one instance where they came out unequivocally about their crucial role in causing and contributing to an existing problem. Problems are strenuously re-framed to absolve them of any wrong doing. For example, complaints about overcrowding get re-framed as a problem of xenophobia of Singaporeans. They have missed so many opportunities to change since GE2011, and that is really telling of their inability to change.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:51 am

High salaries will continue to be a bane to the PAP.

I wrote and more at the link below:

“PAYROLL TAX FUND – FOR MINISTERS’ SALARIES

Impose a 1% payroll tax payable by all employers on the total annual remuneration exceeding S$100,000 of each senior executive employee in the private and public sectors.

The 1% payroll tax collected from employers, not from individuals, should be used as sources of funding to pay the salaries of ministers.

This specific payroll tax imposed on the highly-paid executives in both the private and public sectors will help quell the perpetual disquiet and dissatisfaction of the general public on ministers’ pay.”

The link:

http://tankoktim.blog.com/2014/05/27/good-governance-needs-good-policies-my-2015-budget-wishlist/
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:52 am

What is the art of governing? What is divine govt?

What is divine and what is religious?

Sharing:

http://tankoktim.blog.com/2012/04/11/art-of-governing-taxes-inflation-cost-of-living-wage-inequality/
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:53 am

Will Singapore be the first country to have divine govt?

What is divine and what is first-class govt?
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:58 am

Money donated for a cause. $80k and more.

Will the defendant offer it as compensation in an out-of-court amicable settlement on condition that the amount be given to a charity organisation, if such a condition can be agreed?

But if the defendant, emboldened by the donations, were to go all out to raise the ante further, going full steam in court to challenge every evidence and long drawn out legal tussle, the damages will be more severe, aggravated.

The aim to get publicity on the CPF has been attained by the defendant and others.

The MOF has given a statement, and it is on their www, plus in the ST.

To seek more clarification and publicity, best is to get MPs to move a motion in Parliament and review the CPF scheme intensively, leaving no stones unturned, for the sake of future generations.

What are MPs for? Do we need 7, 14 or 21 MPs to table a motion in Parliament? Keeping silent in Parliament is also playing politics for clear intentions.

The way forward is debate the CPF Act in Parliament, tighten the Act and protect the people’s money from any rogue govt in the future from losing it for people and country.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 7:58 am

After five days and $80,000 plus and counting, if the public or a third rich party were to bank-roll to the hilt, it might embolden the defendant to up the ante to the maximum possible knowing nothing for him to lose, not even a cent.

It could be a case of extracting every drop of blood, going for broke, and to challenge every evidence in court aiming for the bitter end and highest level of damage.

Would that be possible?
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 8:00 am

“Roy Ngerng Yi Ling, a government health worker who posts comments on social issues, said 1,104 people had so far contributed more than Sg$72,000 (RM184,900), exceeding his target of Sg$70,000 (RM179,700) when he launched the campaign Friday.”

1,104 people, and not 1,104,000 people. Would it grow to 5,000 or hundreds of thousands?

PR Consultants and experts should study the number of people, and the effect of the ground-swell arising from it.

Would it be considered a number of great significance, politically?
ARIO
June 7th, 2014 at 8:01 am

Good morning everyone. I have read it yesterday afternoon via my fb. Im glad that once again Dr Lim has written a note to PM.

This is not the first or second tine Dr Lim spoke through her words, nemerous tine.

Let’s not just thank her and be a key-board warrior, let’s support and be presence to participate for a start at Hong Lim Park 4pm to 7pm today fir the rally, RETURN OUR CPF.

Let’s also support and participate to vote the Opposition from now onwards.

Let’s play a part in real politics to see that our children have a good future.

Let’s support all writers like Dr Lim.

And let’s thank a big thank you to Dr Lim to off-blind our political will to fight for our politicsl rights from the pap lky.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 8:03 am

Trust is good, but control is better?

Is this true in politics?
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 8:15 am

Constraints in governing Singapore – do Singaporeans know what it is, the limitations and constraints?

Certain constraints could be fixed.

Some are harder to fix no matter who is in control of govt be it PAP or opposition.

Do we know what are all these constraints?

Who dare to ask in Parliament for a list of constraints, to be provided in a list A and list B, and have it discussed and debated?

Who dare to ask this, either PAP MP, non PAP MP, NMP, or NCMP, or is it the belief of silence is golden in Parliament is a smarter approach?
Tracy Tan
June 7th, 2014 at 8:28 am

Thank you, Catherine, for an interesting write-up. I believe LHL is still deaf to criticisms and I believe he thinks he is the only one who has wisdom. To LHL, all views which are contrary to his are nonsense.

I see a very arrogant and unwise LHL who has not grown up. His often silly comments irk Singaporeans and foreign leaders.

I believe that if LHL continues on his confrontational style against Singaporeans in dealing with legitimate concerns, he will face more obstacles and fury from an angry population.

It is time for LHL to acknowledge his failures and start on a new slate
Fook Seng
June 7th, 2014 at 8:30 am

Unfortunately, despite the unmistakable signs of distrust, the attacks on the new media have been so intense and consistent that the PM is like an animal at siege, nothing will go in. What we see is a knee-jerk reaction to this hostility. To have the PM pull himself aside and regard the situation in a calm and quiet manner is asking the impossible.

Of course, for those of us not directly involved or held responsible or, as a leader, answerable to all things being done past as well as present, we can all see the obvious signs of decay which call for drastic corrective action in a total, integrated way, not in small patches. The single issue of the CPF touches on the probable need to review the principle of self reliance and address all components to the cost living – housing, public and private transportation, healthcare, population control and immigration policies, education and human development, asset accumulation and investment policies, the shape and focus of the new economy, etc. No solution is possible without looking at everything in totality. Some things will need several years, perhaps a decade, to change even if there is the political will because of the potential collateral damages. But change we must and it must start from the leader himself. This is no small change which will surely include the removal of several sacred cows, some humongous ones. He will need a lot of guts.
Tracy Tan
June 7th, 2014 at 8:32 am

Can we expect LHL to change? Is LHL beyond redemption? Is a leadership change within the PAP best for Singapore?
Amy Lam
June 7th, 2014 at 8:34 am

Constructively well-written. Thank you for doing so.
Anna Murphy
June 7th, 2014 at 8:35 am

Dear Catherine, what is this scary alternative? An opposition party? With apologies, you were doing rather well until the last line, which could be read as scaremongering in venerable PAP fashion. Say it ain’t so, Cat.
Harry Kek
June 7th, 2014 at 8:39 am

The PAP only listens to itself 99% of the time. The 1% of the time is when they see the votes at the General Elections.

It is already too late for the PAP to change.

It is time for the people to change the PAP.
Harry
June 7th, 2014 at 8:46 am

It’s not just the defamation suit – the high-handed, vague and arbitrary MDA licensing rules for websites is also being wielded like a weapon against our rights to expression and, worse, the access of information.
Zhuangyao
June 7th, 2014 at 8:47 am

Will PM Lee deemed the truth from this article as trolling?
Derek Chua Soon Teck
June 7th, 2014 at 8:47 am

Well said and observed. Thanks for speaking up
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 8:48 am

In the Lee family – is it not true that there is a generation gap between grandpa and the grandchildren?

How to explain govt policies, like the CPF scheme, etc. to a person in the age group of 30-40 by a person in his 60?

There is a need to have people in the same age group to speak to them with PR sensitivity. Is it possible?

Or is it a lost cause?

Will PAP continue to be in power after 2016?

When the coast is clear, many would jump into the political arena to take the gamble with $15,000 hoping to be elected into Parliament.

Who dare to champion shutting down GIC, TH, CPF, COE, ERP, etc at Speakers’ Corner and not in 2016?

Surely, the party championing it will win more votes by giving the assurance that cold-hard cash will be returned to Singaporeans within 12 months after taking over govt.
Zhuangyao
June 7th, 2014 at 8:53 am

One thing is for sure – we have all been brainwashed since we were born in the name of national education.
William
June 7th, 2014 at 8:54 am

It’s always refreshing to read your latest piece on SG politics. That PM has to pursue his latest defamation against a citizen blogger is indicative of his misjudgment….right ir wrong, this suit has changed from LHL vs Roy to LHL vs CPF members. Your advice to PM has come too late to turn the tide of grassroots CPF members to vote out PAP come GE2015/16. PM was given the chance to accept Roy’s apology, the taking down of offending post & his offer of $5k damage payment. He did not accept & proceeded to sue ! Worst – No voters like to be called names. Gorden Brown called one of his voter a bigot & this caused a landslide defeat of Labor Party at the polls.
Edwin Sim
June 7th, 2014 at 8:58 am

Thank you Catherine. A thoughtful piece.
Ging Yang
June 7th, 2014 at 8:59 am

Sadly, I doubt PM will take heed of the content of the open letter.

If he does, I seriously doubt there will be any serious action taken.

Imho, I think it’s too late for the pap juggernaut to change course.
Paul oh
June 7th, 2014 at 9:20 am

I love my country . I love Singapore . But does Singapore love it”s sons and daughters .?

Material wealth and monetary benefits do not equate to Parental love.

What is love ? What is kinsman?

Why must we wait until the last GE and future GE To show that Singaporeans matters?

My love for this land has never faded but does the motherland Cares about Singapore Singaporeans ?
Murthy
June 7th, 2014 at 9:22 am

In a way maybe Singaporeans are politically ‘spoilt’ – by the exceptional quality of the LKY generation of leaders. Those were different times and I doubt Singapore will ever feel such identity with the leaders again. This is because Singapore is now a big city and it seems inevitable that the leaders will be rich and distant. I don’t think the common man ever really trusts leaders who are rich and distant.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 9:23 am

CPF scheme started in the 1950s.

After the British withdrawal, Sembawang, Keppel, etc. were handed over by the British, and the shares of ownership were transferred to TH by the MOF, and later on these companies were floated on the SGX.

It became successful commercially after conversion from military naval bases to industrial use.

JSL and SIA were started more or less brand new. Not forgetting DBS and Singtel. And later, ST Engineering and Capital Land.

NOL started with ship/s given by the British to the Govt in 1970.

TH turned these few companies [the base for expansion] into good investments before it went overseas to invest with the huge sums of money it got from the SGX flotation/listing.

All these are the base start-up local crown-jewel companies of TH for it later to invest overseas when opportunities to have more such companies run out in tiny Singapore.

I believe former MOF’s permanent secretaries, and there are many, for example like Ngiam, Pillay, etc., they know the background of TH very well, and their brains are still functioning today and they would have cried foul if the TH’s letter in the ST Forum 0n 4 June 2014 is crap.

These guys now out of Govt service are not spineless individuals.
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 9:24 am

CPF scheme. The stirring of doubts will continue unabated.

I would like to suggest that CPF money should be kept within Singapore and not be allowed to be invested overseas with the National Reserves by GIC on behalf of MOF. The way forward is to lock the CPF money onshore to quell the loose talks and public disquiet.

The Govt should set up a CPF Trust for CPF members to deposit their net balance [net of amount used by the members to buy residential property in Singapore, equity-linked policies of insurance company, equity shares on SGX, etc] to earn higher interest. All these must be onshore to protect members’ hard-earned savings for old age.

The trust should use the money to give loans to buy MRT trains and buses, build real estates in Singapore, finance govt infrastructures [there are many worth hundreds of millions of dollars], etc. All these facilities must be located in Singapore.

As collateral, the borrowers should mortgage their assets to the Trust to protect the CPF members’ interest.

I hope the Govt will revise the CPF Act to ensure that not a single cent of our CPF money is sent out of Singapore under whatever circumstances, situations or arrangements.
John3.16
June 7th, 2014 at 9:24 am

My mother use to say, “A Leopard never changes it spots” to mean that people do not change
tankoktim
June 7th, 2014 at 9:26 am

Age gap, ….youth enthusiasm…. and some the folly of youth…

Is it a lost cause for red dot?
david
June 7th, 2014 at 9:28 am

Thank you Catherine. Guess it is a bit too late to change the situation. Better late than never.
Lam Lee Fatt
June 7th, 2014 at 9:30 am

You mentioned you are heartened by the change till now. Then in one broad stroke blamed all protest, vandalisms, public show of hatreds on this one law suit. Very contradicting and as expected convenient indeed.
Minerva
June 7th, 2014 at 9:31 am

Trust needs to be earned. Unfortunately.the ” trust Bank ” has more withdrawals than deposits so far……….
Andrew Chen
June 7th, 2014 at 9:36 am

Damn, woman, as sharp as a whip!

I wish you wouldn’t speak up though. The only way the PAP will learn is in defeat, no two ways about it. So let’s give them a chance to be defeated shall we
Sam
June 7th, 2014 at 9:43 am

Well written as usual! Makes me wonder if “change” born out of fear of losing personal power and wealth is real change at all? I really don’t think it is a matter of n
Low Tuck Wah
June 7th, 2014 at 9:52 am

For 50 years PAP just steamrolled to election victories. Even though we live in cages like animals, castrated for two years – National Service where our youth is robbed – our CPF is robbed in the name of minimum sums, yet people still voted them in. The big question is why did they still vote for them ? Well PAP are masters of strategy and masters of psychology.

Let us see how our brain works.

Oxytocin, produced and stored in the pituitary gland of the brain, acts primarily as a neuromodulator in the brain. It is sometimes called the mood or bonding or the trust hormones. Let me explain how oxytocin works.

For example if you cuddle a dog than suddenly the dog bites you, oxytocin in the brain is released to distrust the dog and to be careful with the dog. The dog on the other hand senses that you distrust it, so oxcytocin is produced by the brain in the dog to let the master trust it again by making a sad smile, licking you, wagging its tail.

The PAP understands how our brain works and takes advantage of it, if you look closely most of the PAP candidates are doctors, lawyers and high ranking army officers.

PAP members do not have talent in running the country, their real talent is how to go to war against their own citizens, to make monkeys out of us.

The PAPS treat us like their pets and every one of the males is made to go through obedience school: National Service.

Let us go back to Oxytocin again. People are angry with National Service, GST, conservancy charges, transport cost and the CPF minimum sum, like animals which bite us, but suddenly they reward us with pittance or peanuts, like rebates on PUB and conservancy charges, workfare and GST vouchers. These are all staggered to win our trust back gradually to the government and our oxytocin hormones begin to work, so that in a way we become addicted to the PAP. PAP is our new god and our master.

For businessmen, their Oxytocin is the PIC grants and SME loans to counter the effect of high rental and worker levies. They are treating us like dogs, where they use the punish and reward system by understanding how the hormone Oxytocin works.

Vote buying is illegal. But here the Government changes it to the legal “Bonus”. Well the opposition must find ways to win this coming election as the reward system is a powerful tool or else another big election win beckons for the ruling party.
Merv Soh
June 7th, 2014 at 9:54 am

Catherine, thank you very much for sharing your thoughts….

As Chinese would put it, 冰冻三尺非一曰之寒, it takes more than one cold day for a river to freeze three feet deep…. More and more people are feeling the frustration and disappointment with our current government on some of their policies and especially the way they like to talk down to the people…

Of cos we all know that they have done well in some aspects, but like what you have said on the high salaries that they are paying themselves, they are expected to jolly well do a good job…

Some of their supporters like to say that anyone not happy with our government are ungrateful and should leave the country… IMHO is very sad and pathetic ……
Simon Lau
June 7th, 2014 at 9:56 am

Hi Catherine.

It was a good read voicing out the people’s voice. I just hope for a better Singapore tomorrow.

Majulah Singapura. (Onward Singapore)
Samuel
June 7th, 2014 at 10:01 am

Hey Catherine, don’t need to write grandma story. LHL have no time to read. It is more practical for you to spend your time writing on CPF issues like Roy and gather support for a change in government. The PAP can no longer be trusted. What we need is to convince those 30% swing voters to our side.
peter wang
June 7th, 2014 at 10:09 am

There is an English idiom that I had uncanny subscribe with looking at what life perceives, “every dog has its day”. There is an epoch of a person that will come to an end no matter how much one has contributed when one forgets to listen to another and think that he can say and make it all. For “no man is an island” and one needs to hear and interact to reach out to many voices
Conflating PAP with Singapore
June 7th, 2014 at 10:09 am

Dear Catherine. Respectfully. Your political writings are still rooted in the past. Where PAP is conflated to also mean Singapore, Singaporeans and patriotism.

But what is good for PAP does not mean it is good for Singaporeans.

PM Lee may be the Prime Minister of PAP. But is he also the Prime Minister of Singaporeans representing our best interest?

PM Lee says “I want Singapore to do well, so Singaporeans can do well”. Shouldn’t it be “I want Singaporeans to do well so Singapore can do well” ? - stop conflating PAP’s Singapore with Singaporeans

The law suit against Roy benefits PAP and PM Lee. But how does it benefit Singaporeans?
TM Goh
June 7th, 2014 at 10:10 am

Read this letter with delight. I can relate to personally to the views presented but I could never have written it so beautiful as Catherine Lim just did.

If I am a teacher higher SEC/JC level today, I would like to use your letter for a discussion in class. And maybe ask for a Starbuck session with you in person.

Not that we can change Singapore tomorrow but at least guide our young minds and in return strength our own for a better tomorrow.

I do see and have faith that Singapore one day become a nation where others look upon for a model society where law abiding citizens practices Freedom of Speech responsibility at all level and visible at every street corner. Creativity flows without restrictions. Transparency presented fear and accountability uphold with courage.

Education provides the foundation and students actions determines the progress.

I am a born in Singapore, early 70s and it is the only place on earth that I know and welcomes me home.

Singaporeans, we recites the pledge and as the older one gets those sentences takes on a new meaning.

Thanks for this open letter
Sam
June 7th, 2014 at 10:10 am

Well written as usual. Makes me wonder if “change” born out of fear of losing personal power and wealth is real change at all? Being an elected official is a sacred duty with the opportunity to influence the lives of many. It is one born out of a passion to serve, not one out of personal gain. I really don’t think it is a matter of not hearing ground sentiment but one of not seeing the need to change. Just redraw GRCs, create a sinking fund that other parties cannot tap into, censor naysayers, control via fear and selectively “reward” certain age or ethnic groups via verbal support or financial incentives. These so called rewards come at a price, the money used are the people’s money, not PAP’s so it is really you paying yourself but they look good. Works so far so there seems to be no real incentive to change. PAP still take fat cheques home, only way is to let votes speak for itself, for public opinion to be so overwhelming that it becomes important. When someone doesn’t fight fair, then bring pn the guns! There is no choice.
The Tide Of History
June 7th, 2014 at 10:14 am

“You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.”

Quote from the movie Batman in reference to Julius Caesar - who saved the democratic Roman Republic from the barbarians - but lived on long enough as a dictator to turn the Roman Republic into Imperial Rome … ruled by emperors.
Fook Seng
June 7th, 2014 at 10:17 am

To be honest, I don’t care who makes the change, as long as the appropriate change is made. For the ruling party to make the needed change, it is harder because it has to start from the far right. Don’t know whether the PM is up to it.

But certainly getting involved in a defamation suit, although fully justified legally, is a knee-jerked defensive act. It doesn’t advance the PM’s wish to gain more trust and respect. Even the gain of fear is doubtful, seeing the support his opponent has garnered in the raising of funds. Neither is trying to fix the sole opponent in Parliament a good use of his time. Logically he should devote his effort to rebuilding Singapore, from scratch, if appropriate.
zappy
June 7th, 2014 at 10:19 am

Ideal CATHERINE

She is The LEADER Singaporeans Majority want. When she becomes Singapore’s LEADER, SINGAPORE will be World’s Number One HAPPY Nation!

CATHERINE is still YOUNG! We Look Forward to CATHERINE becoming Singapore’s TRUEST LEADER!
Zhu Geliang
June 7th, 2014 at 10:21 am

Dr Lim, I urge you to stop your trolling. Sincerely, Zhu
Edmund Hoe
June 7th, 2014 at 10:22 am

Thank you for writing this, so much expressing the agony and frustration experienced by many ordinary Singaporeans.

What we want, is for our country to love us, as much as we love it!
Sgcynic
June 7th, 2014 at 10:23 am

Tankoktim, be decent and courteous. STOP SPAMMING. Please…..
Ang Teck Huat
June 7th, 2014 at 10:32 am

Whatever you say, PM is the choice of 60% of the electorate. He may lose the next election. But as it is, he is still the elected choice.

When you say people no longer trust the government, how many people are you talking about? Hundreds, Thousands or Millions. Are these voices representative of the PEOPLE?

Come on, don’t underestimate PEOPLE’s POWER. If PEOPLE (ie. All Singaporeans) no longer trust the government, they would have revolted.

Final Analysis – to some people, Democracy is only democracy when the political party they love is the ruling party.
Are You Writing To The Emperor ?
June 7th, 2014 at 10:32 am

Catherine You sound like you are writing to the Emperor of Singapore. And not the Prime Minister – a public servant sworn to protect Singaporeans’ best interest.
kc
June 7th, 2014 at 10:36 am

THE GOVERNMENT IS DESPERATE! WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT NOT LISTENING? IT’S NOT THAT THEY DON’T WISH TO LISTEN. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE! I ALWAYS FELT IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE CPF MONIES OR THE RESERVES.

JUST LIKE ANY GAMBLERS. ONCE THEY START LOOSING, THEY WILL RESORT TO ANYTHING TO COVER UP OR RECOUP THE LOSES. JUST LOOK AT THE POLICIES THEY IMPLEMENTED. EVERYTHING IS ABOUT GETTING MORE MONIES. THE HDB, COE,ERP,MINIMUM SUM AND MANY MORE….

EVER WONDER WHY THEY DIDN’T COME CLEAN ON CPF ISSUE? YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE!
yee soo bon
June 7th, 2014 at 10:41 am

You are one important person to voice out the people’s feelings, but will PM lesson….????? He had been on the helm and had enjoy highest standard in life to make him felt untouchable. He had his cronies to advise him all along and I don’t trust he will accept your recommendation. Good to see more people comes out to speak against the “sad” issue.
Harry J Cane
June 7th, 2014 at 10:44 am

When a PM has true friends in his cabinet he can lead.

Tick off who were Mr. Lee Kuan Yew’s true cabinet friends in the first Singapore Cabinet. His beloved wife never was a “face” in his cabinet. She was more than a capable wife and wive of a PM

Than do the same, tick, for PM Mr. Lee Hsien Loong’s true friends in his cabinet.Yes who are is TRUE FRIENDS, in his current Cabinet. Plus the PM’s wife is a “shadow” in his cabinet, let alone the decision maker out there that raises a lot of capabilities questions…….like they say behind every successful man is a more successful women and that is one big difference between father and son.

No Title Party Legislative Assembly Also present in Parliament 1 A.P. Rajah Independent Singapore Party Alliance √ 1st 2 A. Rahim Ishak People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 3 Ang Nam Piau People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 4 Bani, S.T. People’s Action Party √ 1st 5 Barker, E.W. People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 6 Bernard Rodrigues People’s Action Party 1st 7 Buang Bin Omar Junid People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd 8 Chan Chee Seng People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 9 Chan Choy Siong People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd 10 Chan Sun Wing People’s Action Party, Barisan Sosialis √ 1st 11 Chew Chin Harn People’s Action Party 1st 12 Chia Thye Poh Barisan Sosialis 1st 13 Chio Cheng Thun Barisan Sosialis 1st 14 Chor Yeok Eng People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 15 Chow Chiok Hock People’s Action Party 1st 16 Coomaraswamy, P. NA 1st, 2nd 17 Devan Nair People’s Action Party 1st 18 Fong Kim Heng People’s Action Party 1st 19 Fong Sip Chee People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 20 Goh Keng Swee People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 21 Gonzales, R.A. People’s Action Party 1st 22 Govindaswamy, P. People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 23 Ho Cheng Choon People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 24 Ho Kah Leong People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th 25 Ho See Beng People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 26 Jek Yeun Thong People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 27 Koo Yong Barisan Sosialis 1st 28 Kow Kee Seng Barisan Sosialis 1st 29 Lee Khoon Choy People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 30 Lee Kuan Yew People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th 31 Lee Teck Him People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd 32 Lee Tee Tong People’s Action Party 1st 33 Lim Cheng Lock People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd 34 Lim Kim San People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 35 Lim Soo Peng People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd 36 Lim Guan Hoo People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 37 Lingam, S.V. People’s Action Party √ 1st 38 Loh Miaw Gong Barisan Sosialis 1st 39 Mahmud Awang People’s Action Party 1st 40 Mohd Ariff Bin Suradi, Haji People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd 41 Ng Kah Ting People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th 42 Ng Yeow Chong People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 43 Ong Pang Boon People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 44 Ong Lian Teng Barisan Sosialis 1st 45 Othman Bin Wok People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 46 Poh Ber Liak Barisan Sosialis 1st 47 Rahmat Bin Kenap People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 48 Rajaratnam, S People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 49 Ramaswamy, S. People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd 50 Rajoo, S. Barisan Sosialis √ 1st 51 Selvadurai, P. People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 52 Sia Kah Hui People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th 53 Sim Boon Woo People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd 54 Tan Cheng Tong People’s Action Party, Barisan Sosialis √ 1st 55 Tang See Chim People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 56 Tay Boon Too People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd 57 Teo Hup Teck People’s Action Party 1st 58 Teong Eng Siong People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 59 Toh Chin Chye People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 60 Wee Toon Boon People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd 61 Wong Soon Fong People’s Action Party, Barisan Sosialis √ 1st 62 Yaacob Bin Mohamed People’s Action Party √ 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 63 Yeoh Ghim Seng People’s Action Party 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th 64 Yong Nyuk Lin

Aljunied GRC Members Mr Chen Show Mao Ms Sylvia Lim Mr Low Thia Khiang Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap Mr Pritam Singh Ang Mo Kio GRC Members Mr Ang Hin Kee Mr Inderjit Singh Dr Intan Azura Binte Mokhtar Mr Lee Hsien Loong Mr Seng Han Thong Mr Yeo Guat Kwang Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC Members Mr Hri Kumar Nair Dr Ng Eng Hen Mrs Josephine Teo Mr Wong Kan Seng Mr Zainudin Nordin Bukit Panjang Member Dr Teo Ho Pin Chua Chu Kang GRC Members Mr Gan Kim Yong Ms Low Yen Ling Mr Alex Yam Ziming Mr Alvin Yeo Mr Zaqy Mohamad East Coast GRC Members Mr Lee Yi Shyan Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat Mr Lim Swee Say Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo Holland-Bukit Timah GRC Members Mr Christopher De Souza Mr Liang Eng Hwa Ms Sim Ann Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Hong Kah North Member Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan

Hougang Member Mr Png Eng Huat Joo Chiat Member Mr Charles Chong Jurong GRC Members Mr Ang Wei Neng Mdm Halimah Yacob Mr Desmond Lee Ti-Seng (Li Zhisheng) Mr David Ong Kim Huat Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam Marine Parade GRC Members Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef Mr Goh Chok Tong Mr Seah Kian Peng Mr Tan Chuan-Jin Ms Tin Pei Ling Moulmein-Kallang GRC Members Mr Lui Tuck Yew Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim Mountbatten Member Mr Lim Biow Chuan Nee Soon GRC Members Er Dr Lee Bee Wah Dr Lim Wee Kiak Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim Mr K Shanmugam Mr Tay Teck Guan Patrick Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC Members Mr Gan Thiam Poh Dr Janil Puthucheary Ms Penny Low Mr Teo Chee Hean Mr Teo Ser Luck Mr Zainal Bin Sapari Pioneer Member Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng Potong Pasir Member Mr Sitoh Yih Pin Punggol East Member Ms Lee Li Lian Radin Mas Member Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong Sembawang GRC Members Mr Hawazi Daipi Mr Khaw Boon Wan Ms Ellen Lee Mr Ong Teng Koon Mr Vikram Nair Sengkang West Member Dr Lam Pin Min Tampines GRC Members Mr Baey Yam Keng Mr Heng Swee Keat Mr Mah Bow Tan Mr Masagos Zulkifli Bin Masagos Mohamad Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong Tanjong Pagar GRC Members Mr Chan Chun Sing Dr Chia Shi-Lu Ms Indranee Rajah Mr Lee Kuan Yew Dr Lily Neo West Coast GRC Members Mr Arthur Fong Ms Foo Mee Har Mr S Iswaran Mr Lim Hng Kiang Mr Lawrence Wong Whampoa Member Mr Heng Chee How Yuhua Member Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien Non-Constituency Members of Parliament Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song Mrs Lina Chiam Mr Yee Jenn Jong Nominated Members Members Ms Faizah Jamal Mr Nicholas Fang Ms Janice Koh Mr Laurence Lien Ms Mary Liew
Ivan Lee
June 7th, 2014 at 10:45 am

Well said. We’ll wait for the change…but if it doesn’t happen soon enough, I believe Singaporeans will have our own devises to go about getting what we want, to write the next chapter in our own identity for ourselves.
Luke
June 7th, 2014 at 10:50 am

Well written article. Succinctly put points which are echoing all my current feelings.

Thank you, madam Lim for eloquently writing this article. I hope PM Lee would peruse this article.
Jason Chua C B
June 7th, 2014 at 10:51 am

Catherine,

If you think being a prime minister is so easy, why don’t you go ahead and run for the position?

It is easy to complain, complain, complain… but can’t you see that the government is already doing its best?

I think you owe Mr Lee Hsien Loong Sir an apology
BK
June 7th, 2014 at 10:51 am

Great read! Thanks for being the voice of many Singaporeans! We can only hope that the Government wakes up. Many young Singaporeans of today will never respond well to threats. It strives us on to be one united force, working together to ensure that for the good of the country and our future generation, the Government of today does the necessary to listen to its people and takes positive steps to regain the already much lost trust.
Tristen
June 7th, 2014 at 10:56 am

Catherine lim, thanks for spending time to write for Singaporeans. In my personal opinion though, if there are concrete points you are trying to bring across, you could consider learning from lky, with words that move the audience and yet so apt and strongly convincing, instead of as a showcase for ur literary talent. Your arguments are struggling to be heard among the unnecessary clatter of flowery phrases .
Peter
June 7th, 2014 at 10:59 am

Dear Catherine,

I am disappointed and amazed that an established author like you fail to see the crux of the matter and instead choose to side with the mob.

As you would probably know, the integrity of any government ministers, notwithstanding our PM Lee, is of utmost importance to a nation.

Our PM, as a head of State and government, represents not 60% of PAP supporters, not 40% of opposition supporters but 100% of Singaporeans!

If any diplomat or minister from a neighbouring country accuses or slanders our PM, ALL Singaporeans would rise against them!

If our PM is deemed as corruptible by diplomats and ministers from other countries, he would have a tough time trying to reject the unsolicited bribes that are offered to him in exchange for doing something detrimental to the interest of Singapore and Singaporeans!

This would affect the reputation of not only the current PM, but also future PMs of Singapore!

I am sure all Singaporeans would not want this to happen!

Hence the integrity and reputation of a head of State, our PM, cannot be compromised at all costs!

If Roy had ranted about the CPF policies itself until the sky falls down, nobody would bother him!

But once he starts to launch a personal character assault on ANY individual, notwithstanding it is our PM, then that is morally wrong and cannot go unchallenged!

Our PM’s willingness to proceed with the lawsuit against Roy shows that he does not go for populist policies and he is guided by what is right for Singapore!

I am flabbergasted that with your maturity of thought and your vast experience as an established author, you fail to see the above rationale and intentionally or otherwise, use the overall ground sentiment, which is a different issue altogether, to justify your attempted push for ‘positive’ change which would/may actually bring the downfall of the current government if the government is seen as weak!

Have you ever wondered whether the reasons for the ground swell of anger and frustrations are the result of instigations and propagations of lies and half-truths as well as incitement of hatred and anger against every policy that the govt makes?

To me, the vandalism acts, the slander by Roy, the ground suppport by disillusioned and misfits minority are just another ills of society that the govt needs to tackle like the Little India Riot! Nothing more!

So please do not exaggerate this small manifestation of the outcome of opposition incitement as if they are caused by the Singapore government!

With your vast reasoning capability as an author, I am astonished that you failed to see these loopholes in your arguments!

FLABBERGASTED!
Ling Chua
June 7th, 2014 at 11:02 am

Catherine, my favourite SG writer, gratefully yours. Echoing our thoughts in such a well-crafted and yet sensitive open letter. Thank you for demonstrating how graceful blogging can be achieved yet served it purpose without getting into a dramatic tassle.
Absolute
June 7th, 2014 at 11:05 am

tankoktim June 7th, 2014 at 9:24 am

> [tankoktim] is Right that on CPF should be used to make Guaranteed Profits which are returned to the CPF members. Just like EPF is Malaysia is investing MYR 2 Million every month into BURSA so that EPF members get Super Dividends! CPF should form a CPF Investment Bank. Following Businesses which GUARANTEE Profits should be RESERVED for CPF Investment Bank. 1. Start CPF Citizen SuperMart to take over NTUC and ShenSong SuperMart Licences. 2. Start CPF Integrated Land Transport to take over SMRT, SBS, Comfort Licences. 3. Start CPF Airlines to take over SIA, Silk Air Licences. 4. Start CPF Legal to take over HDB Conveyance. 5. Start CPF REITS to take over JTC and all state real estate. 6. Start CPF Exchange to take over SGX Licences. 7. Start CPF Insurance to take over INCOME. 8. Start CPF Holdings to take over Singapore Technology companies. 9. Start CPF Gaming to take over Genting Singapore and Marina Bay Sands Gaming Licences. 10. Start CPF Sweeps to take over Singapore Pools Licences. 11. Start CPF Oil & Gas to take over Keppel Corp and SembCorp. 12. Start CPF Housing to take over HDB. 13. Start CPF Food Court to take over Kopitam. 14. Start CPF Airports to take over SATS and airports. 15. Start CPF Post to take over SingPost. 16. Start CPF Pawn to take over all Pawn Shops. 17. Start CPF Hotels to take over Raffles Hotel. 18. Start CPF Shopping to take over IONS and PARAGON. 19. Start CPF Hospital to take over Mount E Hospital. 20. Start CPF Dental to take over Q&M. 21. Start CPF Medical to take over clinics. 22. Start CPF Trading to take over all Import & Export Licences. 23. Et cetera!

It is Extremely CLEAR that in this CPF LEGEND for Singaporeans, every Singaporean can TRUST CPF and RETIRE with Dignity as a Law Abiding Obedient Singaporean

This will GUARANTEE Singapore as World Number One Guaranteed Retirement Nation.

Just Implement the above CPF LEGEND because GOD GUARANTEES that it is GUARANTEED to WORK and LAST forever.
Michael
June 7th, 2014 at 11:05 am

To the gov, the solution is simple: gives out more citizenship and drowns out the locally born and breed Singaporeans! Isn’t that right? Lol!
Alex Spears
June 7th, 2014 at 11:05 am

We are with nanny government for so long, for so many generations. Singaporean brain washed already to think present government is right all the way. Singaporean have been neatly sliced to be rich or poor. Poor Singaporean got no chance to fight the rich. The POOR Singaporean has degenerated to a zombie. So many people just wasting their time with many many humble requests for a refund of CPF money.
Siong Boon
June 7th, 2014 at 11:07 am

Understand with good will why some things has to be done in a manner that poke Singaporeans. There are implication behind, to have policies which obviously anger the people. If I were a leader, I would want also want to make people life happier.
Xmen
June 7th, 2014 at 11:10 am
IMHO, you should direct your open letter to PAP instead. You obviously think highly of LHL, but many don’t. Why is PAP so quiet about the defamation lawsuit? Is it a party of toothless followers?

Here is a list of bold initiatives if PAP truly wants to empower people -
1. Free MSM from PAP’s tight grip. Instead of reading daily PAP times, people should be exposed to a marketplace of ideas and opinions including WP times, SDP times, Ngerng times.
2. Free his wife and related parties from key government posts. It will be a lot HARDER to cover up any wrongdoings.
3. Appoint a committee of a diverse group of people (Ngerng anyone?) to study CPF funding and propose changes for parliament to debate.
4. Rethink PWP/Immigration
I am not optimistic that the current PAP will change in any major way. History is on my side…
Eric
June 7th, 2014 at 11:12 am

Still waiting for LHL to slaughter some scared cows he promised during his crying session @GE2011.

I guess it will never happen.

I will only believe PAP when they do the following: 1) Open up and be transparent about CPF accounts. 2) Open up and be transparent about GIC accounts. 3) Open up and be transparent about HDB accounts.

Without the above, I will never trust what PAP says, their pattern of deceptions is well documented in their history.

And PAP will continue to slide down their slippery slope to losing majority votes.
Eric
June 7th, 2014 at 11:14 am

errata:

should be sacred cows…. scared cows might be graphically correct, though.
The way it is going
June 7th, 2014 at 11:17 am

Is the trust deficit something to do with ‘Politics is POWER’
Fook Seng
June 7th, 2014 at 11:22 am

A political change of government in Singapore will not be a smooth one. The way the electoral system has left it, there will be little time for an incoming ruling party to hone the skills of its MPs in parliament, let alone forming a cabinet, except by achieving close to an equality in popular votes before taking over. As the time-frame gets even shorter because of the present party’s reluctance to make significant change and the growing expectation of the populace, it will likely be an abrupt change of government at the discomfort of every party involved. This alone is the justification for change in the electoral system to have a better representation of differing aspirations of our people.
Costin Leow
June 7th, 2014 at 11:22 am

It is understandable how the people mistrust the politician, the political party and the government all in one sweep. These are 3 distinctly different entities functioning and responsible at very different levels. Is it a case of an efficient government but a political party with priorities and ideals misaligned with the people they’re supposed to represent? Or is it a case of a political party with respectable ideals but fronted by certain politicians that the people cannot agree with? Or is it even a case of an otherwise lovable politician but with ideas and initiatives that the people cannot accept? I believe that in any country or organization, the masses need to put more responsible thought into identifying the problem at the correct node and level. Irresponsible mob thinking is very powerful and dangerous force of this era. Making an overhaul at the wrong level may put the organization or country at a level of risk that cannot be afforded.
spin
June 7th, 2014 at 11:25 am

The country’s infrastructure had failed over the last 5 years, with public transport ie MRT trains breaking down and delayed services provided by the bus companies. You have tons of shopping malls everywhere but empty shop spaces as the business cannot handle the ever rising rental rates. The PMET jobs are no longer going to locals and many grads and experienced workers are out of job.

I’m not sure the firefighting measures to contain all these problems are enough to deem as improving Singaporeans’ lives as we do know not everyone benefited from the “improvements” for sure, so I beg to differ that they made our lives better.
Jean
June 7th, 2014 at 11:27 am

I feel the letter touched on a few good points. We are not in America whereby people get sued over the little things. Why does our government has to demand for public apology and rack up law suits like it is mere child’s play? Is that the right way to go about it? What are they trying to prove? The all mighty Parent and the misbehaving children?

On the otherhand, I agree that freedom of speech comes with responsibility and a price. People who rants must know that words are equally lethal and carry weight. I just hope that this would come to pass and with an ideally win win situation.
Tan Yew Guan
June 7th, 2014 at 11:28 am

The PAP won’t change… and will never change

Our vote will change them ..2016
AMBC
June 7th, 2014 at 11:30 am

Catherine, you said it all! Thank you for conveying our very strong feelings to the govt in a very tactful way. Many would have used the GE to express their unhappiness instead.
Unhappy Singaporean
June 7th, 2014 at 11:32 am

I, for one, totally respect LKY and am very appreciative of things he has done for Singapore. Without him, Singapore would not have been a First World Country.

A decade ago, I was totally disinterested in politics. Because similar with most Singaporeans, the mentality is if nothing is broken, why is that a need to fix it?

GE2011 was the year where I slowly question, is the government heading in the right direction? Are they pursuing policies for the good for all Singaporeans or have they been too comfortable in their roles and are now using past policies, refining it a little here and there and applying it thinking what worked well then will do the same now.

Catherine you have rightly mentioned, the times have changed. Policies that has worked so well in the past may not seem so viable now. And in fact, may even run counter-productive to the current situation.

PAP also seem to create the impression that their main goal is to purse the GDP growth and with that met, all Singaporeans should be happy. And hence the relentless pursuit of ensuring the country is managed like a highly profitable MNC.

The results of GE2011 woke them into action and while I do applaud PAP efforts in fixing the housing problem, I also acknowledge there are many areas where it can be further improved upon. Nonetheless, while they should be concentrating on fixing the issues highlighted in GE2011, PAP controversially raised and endorsed the White Paper in parliament. The PAP are not dumb. They know the policy will not sit well with the people and hence, the Paper was issued only after the bi-election. But the fact that all PAP MPs voted for the White Paper (with a few absentism) also goes to show the party is tightly controlled. This created doubts and further erosion of trust between Singaporeans and the government. Is the government really listening or are they selectively listening to us? I shudder to think the direction of the country is heading and whether the government is thinking about Singaporeans first or economy first.

In my opinion, while your letter is well-written, it will however fall on deaf ears. The only time when they really listen is during the GE. And if the top few leaders who control the party has truly forgotten how to listen to the people, I guess its time to vote for people who (may not arguably be as talented but) will listen and act in our best interests.
AK
June 7th, 2014 at 11:46 am

Catherine,

I read your book “Or Else, the Lightning God and Other Stories” 20 years back ago, and fast forward today, I glad to read a well articulate piece of writing that serve a higher purpose and concerns of a Singaporean who has witness changes for the last 50 years.

Like you, I am deeply concerned on the fate of Singapore, where we are going to in the next 10-20 years. But I won’t be able to write such in a manner that hopefully would reach our dear PM.
Teddy
June 7th, 2014 at 11:53 am

The problem is that best policy and ideas are concocted and endorsed by well-to-do civil servants and politicians who might not have empathy. How many of them stay in HDB and have kids in neighborhood schools in the normal stream? How many of them have Ivy League degrees and sent their kids of their degree overseas? Can they listen to their grassroots advisers of yes men who volunteer so that they have benefits like early queue in P1 registration, EC? Need genuine connection and a heart for people.
Gavin
June 7th, 2014 at 11:54 am

Hi Anna Murphy,

I think the alternative that Catherine Lim alludes to in her last sentence does not refer to the opposition taking over the government.

My guess is that it refers to something akin to the Arab Spring.

That, to me, is the really frightening alternative, when all order breaks down, and chaos reigns.

I’m not 100% certain my guess is right though.
Is Law Suit Good For Singaporeans?
June 7th, 2014 at 11:57 am

The law suit against Roy is undoubtedly good for PM Lee and PAP. But is it good for Singaporeans?

How does the law suit against Roy benefit Singaporeans?

Singaporeans benefit from Roy’s blog because it made us think about CPF and the transparency of CPF. This is good for Singaporeans.

But maybe not so good for PM Lee and PAP?
Logan
June 7th, 2014 at 12:09 pm

Abolish RC and leave it to the democratically elected MP’s to do their job. Reform NTUC and cut the links with the Govt. Absolute freedom of the print and broadcasting media. Abolish GRC’s and fight the elections like a warrior. If none of these can be achieved don’t waste your time to connect with your people. More and more of them will cut you off. A cut of another 10% is sufficient to see your demise.
John Tan
June 7th, 2014 at 12:11 pm

Hi Dr C. Lim After talking to many people, my feel is that it has gone pass TRUST. It’s more like DEEP ANGER or DEEP RESENTMENT right now. After this stage, it’ll be HATRED. Than we can say goodbye to the PAP.
Jerry
June 7th, 2014 at 12:15 pm

Hi Catherine,

That was beautifully worded. It is sad to see the country in tatters, one can only hope that PAP wake up from their ignorance. Alternatively, 2016 will be a defining political moment in Singapore’s history.

Time will tell, thank you for speaking up for us, so eloquently and objectively.
(Fee)Dom of Expression
June 7th, 2014 at 12:17 pm

Kudos to Sam for pointing out his insight. Yes, indeed – the attempt to reframe problems so as not to lose credibility. My concern is that the leadership of our leaders is creating a culture of leaders in the civil service and larger than that believe that being aggressively assertive would get them their way. For this reason, we don’t witness exemplary leadership in manner and action in the Civil Service. As is the ruler, so is the ruled. There are many civil servants who comply with the mispolicies but do not agree with them.
(Fee)Dom of Expression
June 7th, 2014 at 12:36 pm

The brutal truth is that Singaporeans don’t matter until election times are near.
Victor Chick
June 7th, 2014 at 12:45 pm

Thanks for bringing up the issue. I am seeing the new generation of “leaders” while moving up the ladder, their egos went up as well. Hope those who truly believes in serving the people when they enter politics remain true to their original purpose.
PBDA
June 7th, 2014 at 12:48 pm

It seems to be not a case of Roy vs LHL but a case of the People vs LHL. And the State Times are trying hard to prevent that from maturing through its timely silence. The same goes with the MPs in parliament. Their non-participation in the CPF matter is a political move in itself. The gripe on the ground and in every other kopitiams is that singaporeans can’t get their money back when they are 55 and have to wait till they are 65 to get a pittance in installments. I get $340 in May after turning 65 and the following month, I die without receiving the remaining $300 000 (that’s a conservative projected MS amount 30 years from now). Is this OK with all of you? This PAP government with its hubris has never respected citizens and have been constantly patronizing at Singaporeans. The world’s highest paid PM doesn’t give a shit how Singaporeans retire. He ought to perform better than other world leaders as he claims he’s so good. He ought to do better but he is underperforming year in and year out since he took over. Singapore is growing and his cronies are growing but not Singaporeans. As the highest paid PM on the planet, he must do better. Otherwise, he must seriously consider stepping down for the sake of young Singaporeans. He and his ministers are already multi-millionaires; so that everyone who sits in the first row in parliament are millionaires. Shame on you for putting the future retirement of Singaporeans in such a pathetic and apathetic state! Do you think that’s right? Huh, do you?
2016
June 7th, 2014 at 12:58 pm

Correction: Singapore is expanding, ya…it’s not growing. Singapore is expanding because it is taking planeloads of immigrant but that’s not the same as growing. Productivity goes up because of expansion. This is superficial. We ought to be growing instead of merely expanding the size of the cheap labour force here. Singaporeans are still asleep…some have gotten use to the smell of their own shit because they stayed in the toilet for too long. This is why our beloved PAP doesn’t want any foreign intervention or elements to local politics to awaken the political unconsciousness of the Singaporean populace. They want the people to continue remaining ignorant and sleep. You can’t change what you don’t know and this simple formula perpetuate the status quo. The maxim is: There must not be at any cost any outsiders to open the window in the toilet – to let in some fresh air, to make Singaporeans’ realize that there is fresh air and they could actually get out of their toilets.
Zai
June 7th, 2014 at 12:59 pm

Well written. I see what I saw, hear what is heard and feel what was written.
Dominic
June 7th, 2014 at 1:07 pm

Thanks to ms. Lim for the precious piece of letter. Well siad !!!

Thanks to ” Conflation PaP with SINGAPORE ” : Well Said !!! Like to amend a little : Shouln’t it be “WE WANT SINGAPOREANS TO DO BETTER THRN SINGAPORE CAN BE BETTER !!! “
Tempered Nietzsche
June 7th, 2014 at 1:16 pm

Some are voting with their hands. I’m voting with my feet. The machinery is too strong to change and especially with the White Paper. Singapore will survive on the same half a century PAP terms. The next 50 years will be the same. A leopard doesn’t change its spots.
Edward
June 7th, 2014 at 1:43 pm

Catherine,

Thanks for the open letter which generally reflects what many of us have thought about and even share. An eloquently written letter that many of us are not able to write. Now, we all wait for the PM to respond and act rationally. Everyone of us Singaporeans are standing for Singapore as a nation and the government of the day has to play their parts with integrity and sincerity.
Moxie
June 7th, 2014 at 1:44 pm

Very well written and full of constructive criticisms. Let us hope these suggestions do not fall on deaf ears
Jerry Tan
June 7th, 2014 at 1:56 pm

Thank you for caring enough ( for the people and OUR HOME ) to write this letter.

Millions of Singaporean’s (Born & breed here ) lives are at stake.

I hope they change before the inevitable happens.

Thanks again Catherine.

JT