7:45pm Nearly full house. Forum starting soon!
7:48pm Panelists arrive!
8:00pm Stephen from Pasir Ris Punggol GRC. On HDB – SDP would like to privatize the building of public housing. Do you consider your way of providing for funding for it?
Goh Meng Seng :Govt has become the number landlord. Not feasible to privatize the use of land. If it had started in 1965, then yes, it is feasible, but not now.
Chee Soon Juan: Not correct to say SDP wants to privatize public housing. But to ensure HDB remains a zero profit venture. Need to get HDB to be transparent in all its transactions. First step is to get Govt to reveal the true cost of building HDB flat.
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: Conflict of interest between HDB and SLA. Ridiculous to speak of a ‘market’ as HDB prices is set by Govt. HDB should go back to being supplier of cheap affordable housing to the lower 30% of income strata. Also provide better choice for rest of population. Increase the supply of land to allow for greater amount of housing to be built.
Question to Chiam See Tong– Raymond Anthony Fernardo husband of woman with schizophrenia. Difficult to get support. Caregiver also fall into depression. Why is it so difficult to get Parliament to talk about support of people with mental illness.
Chiam See Tong: PAP don’t like problems of people with mental disabilities.
Raymond: But I thought PM Lee says he wants to make Singapore a home for all Singaporeans?
Chiam: He says a lot of things. (audience applause) PAP credibility is down the drain.
SMU Grad Alvin to Gerald Giam. Income inequality lots of driving forces behind. What is WP’s policies to mitigate?
Gerald Giam: Focus on helping those in the lower income groups. Workfare supplement currently too little. Average $80 per month. Hardly enough. WP to propose to raise Workfare quantum. Most important though is to reduce the inflow of foreign workers especially for lower income jobs.
Patrick Lee political observer to Dr Chee. What is opposition’s plan for the next five years in economics?
Chee Soon Juan: Top 10 percent of income earners grown. But bottom 10 percent hardly moved. But very high GDP. So where is this money coming from? If continue on this trend the social friction will worsen.
SMU Grad Alvin to Gerald Giam. Income inequality lots of driving forces behind. What is WP’s policies to mitigate?
Gerald Giam: Focus on helping those in the lower income groups. Workfare supplement currently too little.
New Asia Republic’s Donaldson Tan to Kenneth Jeyaretnam: PAP policies on entrepreneurship, raising retirement age etc… what policy direction is the PAP pointing to? What is Reform Party’s policy?
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: Focus on productivity. Singapore has one of the lowest productivity in the world. All our GDP growth has been fueled by growing workforce. PAP paying only lip service to productivity growth which is the source of high income and higher value industries.
GENERAL QUESTION
a) Problem is not system. But the people in the system. People in the civil service are not in tune with the people on the ground. What are your solutions to this problem when majority of policy makers do not know what the people are thinking?
b) Everybody says HDB price is too high. But what is opposition going to do about HDB prices? They’re stuck. If lower prices, home owners are going to scream. If keep it the same new buyers are going to be unhappy.
Chia Ti Lik (Socialist Front): Problem of disconnected policy makers – Give the ruling party a black eye in this coming GE. PAP has stayed in power for too long. They’ve created an elite admin service with super high pay. These elites no longer see themselves as having to push for something for the benefit of the people. What we see is a reflection of group think and accumulation of 40 years of uninterrupted rule.
On HDB Prices – Land is 100% controlled by the Govt. They’ve created asset appreciation policies. This money from the people went into Govt coffers and is used to spearhead their investment overseas. We do not have an accountable system where there’s transparency and fruits shared from investment with the people. The high prices sadly may have to remain because Singaporeans have already committed to those properties. And it would be irresponsible to change that. But we’re committed to socialist policies. The old HDB prcies can remain. But the new ones can go on a lower price scales.
Goh Meng Seng: Problem of disconnected policy makers – Send strong signal to the Government. By voting for opposition.
With regards to HDB – The high prices is not a problem created by us, it’s by the PAP. There are actually two segments of flats in HDB. New flat and resale. New flat PAP has full control. Do away with grants for young couples to buy resale flats as it distorts the market and leads to higher prices.Discard the idea that HDB is investment. It is not. It is a home.
Dr Chee Soon Juan sharing a moment with Mr Chiam See Tong
Chee Soon Juan: On HDB – The biggest thing an elected opposition MP can do is make Minister of National Development open the book and reveal cost of HDB flat. Also make them account for where our reserves come from. How much came from HDB sales? Get them to open the books, and then let’s talk. With this information, I’m sure we can find smart people who can come up with the solutions. But we need the information first. Our biggest battle is not PAP but what PAP has done to our minds.
On policy markers being out of touch – they live in world of their own. They don’t live in HDB flats. The solution is to vote the opposition for a voice in the system.
Chiam See Tong: On HDB – PAP is making lots of profits. Not true there’s subsidies in housing. The government is making lots of money from housing.
On policy makers being out of touch – They started of as socialists now they are capitalists. Only advice I can give is vote for the opposition.
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: Disagrees that policies are on the right track. There’s enough money to fund a better social support system.
On HDB – If property prices crash, there will be serious consequences. Govt has vested interest in property prices rising. When RP is in power, has to be careful not to cause property prices to crash, while creating more affordable housing for lower income group.
Gerald Giam: On issue of HDB – Govt has not planned for influx of migrants. Solution is to increase supply. Housing loan should be reduced to twenty years or less, not 30 years. New flats are now pegged to resale flats. Solution – to peg price of new HDB flats to median income.
On complacency of Govt – PAP with its vast network knows what’s going on. It’s ignoring the feedback from the ground and persisting in the same policies.
New topic: Civil Liberties
Member of audience ‘Mr Chua’ worries that PAP does not has the same sense of patriotism as ordinary Singaporeans. Patriotism is most important issue in Singapore. Hopes that stay united, do not fight among yourselves.
Chia Ti Lik - Civil liberties have been curtailed. Even opposition have to contend in legalistic rulings. Civil liberties are a must for us to grow as a nation. A must to change this system and change the lives of the people in our country in the days to come. Should not be divorced from bread and butter issues. The only time when you see people rally together is during GE every five years. You don’t see that everyday, cos the ruling party doesn’t want you to know that so many of you are against them.
Human rights activist and lawyer M Ravi to Goh Meng Seng
Racial quota on HDB flats an example of discrimination against minorities. What is NSP’s stance on removing this kind of policies?
Goh Meng Seng: Race is a political construct. Tampines has 24% Malays. The result is highest number of Malay coffeeshops. Ethnic economics is good for minorities. As long as the concentration of minorities in an area is not more than 50% he can accept that.
Political detainee Michael Fernandez says in other countries, Government has offered compensation for people previously detained without trial. What does the opposition have to say?
Academic Andrew Teo to Dr Chee on his appearance on American radio talk show. How effective? Also how do you convince ordinary Singaporeans of the need for civil liberties? Is there coherent planning among opposition to take on the PAP?
Chee Soon Juan: opposition have been meeting from time to time to ‘sit and talk’. On issue of detention without trial, ISA must go. Now Govt is using existence of terrorism to justify ISA but there are other ways to deal with terrorism. On issue of convincing Singaporeans on civil liberties – use of new media. Economic rights and political rights are different sides of the same coin.
Public assembly is used by public to show their dissatisfaction of the government. In Hong Kong, people use public assembly to force Government to back down on unreasonable policies.
Chiam See Tong: Defense is a priority. No point being rich when you have no one to guard them. No matter how much you may dislike National Service, but everyone is to play a part.
On ISA – he agrees with Dr Chee. ISA must go. When Devan Nair was in Parliament he supported the ISD, until he was detained. He regretted his earlier decision. There is no Emergency (which took place in the 50s) now to justify for existence of ISA.
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: It is a fundamental human right that people should not be deprived of a chance for a trial. Supports the compensation for people who have been detained without trial. To replace the ISA, RP will suggest a ‘modern anti-terrorism legislation’, something along the line of the Control Order n the UK.
On National Service – to reduce it to less than two years. New citizens have to do national service also, if not pay a lump sum tax to compensate Singaporeans.
Gerald Giam do away with ISA. With regards to terrorism, have a modified detention system which allows for detainees the right to have a lawyer.
Chiam See Tong: On ISA – he agrees with Dr Chee. ISA must go. When Devan Nair was in Parliament he supported the ISD, until he was detained. He regretted his earlier decision. There is no Emergency (which took place in the 50s) now to justify for existence of ISA.
Chia Ti Lik: Socialist Front is named in tribute of those members of Barisan Sosialis who had been detained under ISA. Not only the ISA must go, but the Temporary Provisions Act as well. On issue of conscription – a must.
Goh Meng Seng: yes to National Service, but can be reduced. Why spend time preparing for National Parade when the time can be used to train for defence?
MEDIA
Media student from NTU – what are the challenges opposition face dealing with a partisan mainstream media, and what should be role of media in Singapore?
Gerald Giam: Important media is independent of political influence. Under Newspaper and Printing presses act, Govt can exert even more influence that the media owners. Feels that this should not be the case.
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: RP believes in free marketplace of ideas. Abolish the restrictions on free media such as Newspaper and Printing Presses Act.
Chiam See Tong: Media has to serve the country not serve the masters. Press must have freedom to publish without fear, and must always have the nation in mind, that’s its true master. Eg – in one of the rallies, a fist fight broke out between two people. But the headlines read ‘Riots broke out’. So it’s clear which side the mainstream media leans on.
Chee Soon Juan: Engage the editors. Use the internet. They read and know what’s going on. Make sure they are on the side of the people. Make sure the editors report fairly and in a balanced way. Don’t just talk about the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act.
Goh Meng Seng: A govt-controlled media is not necessarily biased. Eg – BBC. We cannot take for granted a free press will come to us. As citizens you have a role to demand for press freedom.
Chia Ti Lik: Until we change the Parliament to change the laws curbing media, we can use the internet to force the mainstream media to be more objective. Media in other countries is supposed to be the watchdog and that is the role that the media has to rise up to.
Member of audience ‘Kenneth’ asks about opposition stance on defamation laws.
‘Brandon’ : civil liberties does not give people room to be innovative and creative. How would the parties allow innovation to foster through civil liberties?
MARUAH chairperson Braema Mathi asks for parties’ views on Wikileaks. If it’s necessary to take an unpopular stance with the people, how will the parties do it?
Chia Ti Lik: On Defamation. Nobody asks the PAP to step into the political arena. The moment you step into this arena, don’t expect to go crying to some judge when people say something bad about you. On Wikileaks, it happens because of a lack of information. If the government were more transparent, Wikileaks won’t have the kind of attention it is getting now. On unpopular measures – nation comes first. If it’s a necessary but unpopular decision, SF will do it.
Goh Meng Seng: On defamation, there should be a defense if what is said iif it s for the public interest. On Wikileaks, what is off the record should not be published.
Chee Soon Juan: On unpopular measures – when we first started talking about civil liberties and protesting, we got a lot of heat and were called all sorts of names.
Chiam See Tong: The purpose of defamation law had a good purpose, it keeps the dialogue civilized. But unfortunately it can be misused. We have to look out for people who are abusing the law. Under the law whatever is said in Parliament is free from lawsuits. In Parliament you can say anything. But over here the qualified privilege is taken away. In elections also, there should have been a qualified privilege. But you see people getting sued during elections. This keeps many people from taking part in politics.
Chiam says he has been lucky not to be sued. How is that done? The main thing is not to say anything bad about the other party.
Gerald Giam: On unpopular policies – If it’s for the good of the people, implement it. The onus is on the politician to persuade the population, not to restrict opposition, and bulldoze through. On lack of civil liberties curbing innovation – don’t wait for the tide to turn. Do something if you feel strongly. On defamation – the law is very broad. On Wikileaks – it’s important for diplomats to have frank conversation with others. Singapore’s edge is our ability to gather information about the region and share it with the ‘bigger’ nations. If it comes to a stage where Singaporean diplomats cannot speak frankly, it prevents us from punching above our weight. But now that Wikileaks is out, I encourage you to read it.
Final Question and closing remark
- What is the parties strategy during elections?
- How to avoid three corner fight?
- Opinion of paying top dollar for top talent?
- What are your motivations for going through this trial of being in the political fire, but how long are you going to stay? What is your take on personal integrity?
Chiam: My closing remark. Follow my example. Put your money where your mouth is.
Chia Ti Lik: Parties have to come together. SF will avoid three corner fights. We will cooperate with the rest. Our guns are pointed in only direction – that is the PAP. With regards to top dollar for public servants – people who choose to step in politics are performing public service. That means sacrifice. That means no top dollar. Personal integrity for people in public office has to be paramount.
Goh Meng Seng: Takes opportunity to pay tribute to Mr Chiam See Tong. The first rally he attended was SDP’s (then under Chiam). But it took me another ten years to step out from behind the Internet. I am a coward. But if I can do it, so can you. If we do not have a passion we cannot last long. Passion of Mr Chiam to be in politics for 34 years. That is one thing I cannot match. For the young ones, please start early. What is NSP’s strategy? Our aim is to break PAP’s monopoly. What happens next? Whether the various oppositions form a coalition govt remains to be seen.
You must have right mindset to serve. Politics is about public service, not money.
Chee Soon Juan: On strategy – there are more younger people in this forum than older ones. And many people got to know this forum through internet. Strategy is to use internet. Hopes that audience do not feel a sense of detachment, like passive observers. You don’t have that luxury here unlike in democratic countries. We don’t have democracy here. Don’t sit there passively. Risk sacrifices you will have to make. But it’s worth it. This country is worth fighting for.
Kenneth Jeyaretnam: We are not just there just to be a check and balance. We intend to form a government. But it is only going happen if people like you come forth and help us. We believe we have better policies than the PAP and the people to put that in place. But without your support, without you overcoming your fear… don’t grumble until polling day, then go and vote the incumbent, and then grumble for the next four years. Join the Reform Party, be a candidate. On every walkabout, RP has been asked if they are contesting. People want to have a choice.
Gerald Giam: Encourages audience to go and tell others about the opposition. It’s only through talking to your family and friends that we gain credibility. Take the time to research the candidates get to know more about the opposition.
Forum ends at 10:40pm
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
PAP sues everyone for “damaging their reputation”, but in the recent wikileaks, we can see that MM Lee & MIW goes around to damage the reputation of other countries and leaders.
Isn’t all this super hypocritical?
PAP time is up, all the familee will be jailed for treason, corruption and talk cock.
haha….indeed
Will you upload a video of the highlights of this forum?
Would be good to hear the speakers.
The fundamental problem is our society is getting more unfair.
PAP isnt real problem any party that has power for so long will act like this. The problem is the people who vote. As long as they show they are willing to vote for oppostion to be in power if the ruling party does not perform at its best we wouldnt have so many problems now.
Good for the TOC to organise this forum and also to see many who aspire to improve living conditions in Singapore.
To effect change the opposition needs to get into parliament. The important question is how united are the oppositions?
Its a pity that no one brought up free medical fees for NS men at the C ward level and outpatient clinics.
Thank you TOC for making this happen.
I was there and I teared when I saw Mr Chiam. Why? I see a man that has fought for all of us for so many years. A brave man that stood up for soooo many of us cowards. Like what he said, put your money where your mouth is. Don’t just talk, people, do something about it.
Gerald is right! Each of us just need to start small by reaching out to our immediate circle.
Our family and friends know us well. Its up to us to try our best sincere effort to bring the message across.
I myself have done what i thought was impossible. I tried to sell the idea of opposition to my brothers. They used to be a typical apathetic citizen.
I talk to them like a brother. I encourage them to tell me why they do not support growth of a stronger opposition. Every points they have I confidently rebutted them until they are converted. Its possible. But it takes extreme patience.
They mostly have not seen certain aspects or things that happened. we need to point them to those things and they will not be able to rebut.
Important is to make sure we fully understand their points and concerns then offer them the alternative and what is good for the country and democracy and the people.
It must be a win-win. Refrain from completely one-sided. Praise what need to be praised but point back to the need for opposition , check and balance, plurality of views, freedom in parliament that Chiam spoke about.
Enough is enough. This country must improve politically. While the minority have the wisdom to see the need for opposition, the majority can also catchup and reach enlightenment soon. Still have hope.
Wiki wiki every body.
sincerely
George Lee Bong Loong
Swift to the points. It brings to light many issues that people do not like about PAP. Even those who did not get the opportunity to attend the forum feel the same sentiments. PAP should be ashamed of themselves. 2006 election promise? don’t give us the same crap again. The influx of foreigners is a tomb for the papy.
It was a mistake on the part of the party in power to not call for elections at the end of the year. We can only speculate as to the reasons for the vacillation. I sense a lack of leadership.
Perhaps they are prepàring a massive ground sweeting campaign after chinese new year.
Great night guys but next time lets have a more open and less structured discussion like it was at the end of the night.
Just let the public ask questions to the entire group of opposition rather than press for individual questions to individual candidates.
thank you
the TOC should take the next stride.. put together a debate, involving those candidates contesting in hotly contested wards.. some will say that it is wayang especially those who have a lot to lose in an open forum such as a debate. But in the Singapore context, I think the combative nature of a debate would actually be very constructive both in policy and political terms.
Imagine watching George Yeo debate Sylvia Lim, that will be quite something dun u think?
About time for all to work together, for the improvement of our country. Vote PAP out, before I die
Why point the guns at the PAP? Shouldnt the will of a political party be to defend the interests of the people who, through the mandate of the vote, confer upon them the guns of political power? The opposition is too transfixed on removing the PAP from power. I do not see any real policy alternatives being presented, explained and defended in this forum. Take housing for example, Dr Chee asked for more info, almost every one says make new housing prices cheaper, criticises the claim of subsidies. But hey, cheaper new flat prices will affect resale prices and ultimately prices in the private property market. How are you going to fund these so called subsidies? What if there is no budget surplus and our reserves are not as high as they are now? Sustainability was never mentioned.
Mr P Jeyaratnam says they intend to form the next government. Right and Good. The the coming elections is a platform for the opposition to showcase specific policy alternatives to the people. What is your manifesto? Why are your policies better? What are your policy objectives? What is your long term plan for Singapore other than shooting down the PAP?
Just like any other Singaporean, I am waiting for the day when the political arena is robust with ideas, debate and consensus building. But I am just not convinced enough from this forum that the opposition is thorough and prepared enough in working out their role as yet.
ABF
ABF,
Due to constraints of time, the speakers do not have the opportunity to go in depth into the specific policy alternative. While we are looking to see if there’s opportunity to do a more issue-specific event, you can find out more by going to the parties’ main website where some of their proposals are more detailed.
Glad to be at the forum soaking up the atmosphere. Most heartening to see more young faces than those in their mid forties and beyond.
Agreed with the focused Q&A format (economics, civil liberties and political issues) but questions should be allowed to flow freely whether in general or party specific. However, each audience should be limited to one question to allow more of them opportunity to raise their questions.
Moderator can always elicit response from the various parties to give all a balanced response time. To maximise time, audience with question in mind should stand by near the mike.
Overall, it was a successful forum with the only blight being the absence of a PAP representative. (Probably not being able to defend their policies and can only rely on ST to spread propaganda as usual).
The team at TOC deserves our full support for their selfless dedication. Hope to have another forum in the not too distant future perhaps on “unjust laws and consitution changes.”
“Discard the idea that HDB is investment. It is not. It is a home”
- Goh Meng Seng
I personally agree totally that HDB should not be used as a means to earn more money. It should serve as it is originally intended. A home that is affordable for the common people.
It would sadden me if current trend were allowed to continue. I would suspect that if so, the next generation might not be able to afford a standard HDB home and have no choice but to rent a space to start a family.
CTL – I was disappointed that being a lawyer, he did not mention things such as Reynolds privilege when talking about defamation. Considering that non-lawyers CSJ and KJ talked about substantive stuff e.g. summary judgment procedure for CSJ & Reynolds (i.e. Press Freedom – he used laymen’s terms) for KJ. However, he did point out CLTPA.
GMS – Contradictory. On the one hand he talks of distortion of the free market (implying that he is a fan of the free market), and on the other hand claims he is a socialist. He talks about >50% of minorities in an area as an “outlier”. Sure that’s the test for outlier? + why are outliers necessarily bad? I had the distinct idea that he did not really know what he was talking about. Bad grammar + horrible pronunciation.
CSJ – As a blogger Vicky pointed out re the previous NUS forum, he “sounds fake”. Such a waste of his eloquence – please drop the weird accent if you can, Dr Chee. Either sound like KJ, or the rest of the Singaporeans. Anyway he made some very pertinent points but really not sure if his plans are practicable e.g. HDB selling flats at loss, tell the minister “open the books” – they didn’t even open books for President Ong Teng Cheong, why’d they open for some oppo MP?
CST – My respect for him went up another notch by the end of the session. But frankly, he is too ill to be an MP. The difficulty he had in speaking showed. Also, he tells the guy with mental problems PAP does not care about you – but the real question to him was what are YOU going to do, not does the PAP care about me (everybody there was, as GG pointed out, probably at least in sympathy with oppo anyway).
KJ – I am quite afraid that this guy does not know what he is doing. He seems to think that he can do things which might work elsewhere (e.g. we intend to form the next govt), and I get the feel that he is looking at the system from a detached perspective – ordinarily a good thing but not something I like in a politician. But the policy stances seemed theoretically all right and I was glad for the suggestion to reduce NS. Frankly, have we all been so indoctrinated that we don’t believe NS duration can be reduced? Also liked that he was the only one who gave a proper answer to Mr Fernandez question (Mr Fernandez was asking about what can be done for former ISA detainees) – when everybody only said “ISA must go” he pointed out the possibility of compensation. Please stop the backbiting re WP ad JBJ.
GG – Professionalism of WP showed. Clearly prepared on policy issues and very specific proposals. Wheelchair issue (unmodified bus stops) really shows the level of detail WP goes into. Housing median income peg an interesting and refreshing idea rather than CSJ/GMS simple “don’t make profit” stance. Foreign service experience lends credibility. Re ISA, slightly disappointed that he did not consider compensation or even a govt apology for former detainees. Re defamation law, also slightly disappointed that he missed the point when he quoted the former judge who said that the suits should not have been brought – you cannot rely on the goodwill of others not to bring lawsuits when the law gives them a cause of action in the first place. Glad he can speak eloquently in proper English while still sounding natural and Singaporean. Only him and CST managed that (somehow CTL did not seem so good – I expected much better from a lawyer). But disappointed with the stop-start quality of his speech (probably he is thinking, but it makes the speech that much harder to follow).
General – Disappointed that nobody suggested NS for girls re NS question, but hot button issue and probably bad time to talk about it. Little talk of other economic issues – tax? FDI? labour law? but then audience did not ask much about those things. I could see why moderator wanted the structure, which was to make sure each party leader got asked a question. But backfired when that Mr Chua made his ridiculous speech right in the middle of the forum (organisers probably expected these things). Generally disappointed that nobody really surprised me with anything truly new but then again general population probably is averse to outlandish suggestions.
reservist_cpl
So why didn’t you bring out those questions of your interest then? Waiting for others or just happy to be a critical judge?
Enlighten us please!
HDB as investment tool is a totally flawed policy. Everyone can only allow to buy a single HDB. Once you sell (to reap “investment” profits) you are immediately homeless. Unlike foreigners (PR) who can buy HDB and still able to own a land back home, does Singaporeans have such priviledged of profiting compared to the PR counterparts? So which side of HDB give more priviledges to? obviously not to Singaporeans and yet PRs are the one jerking up our home prices at the expenses of those who wanted a true home. Unfortunately PAP remain as daft as ever and they themselves have to blame for their PARTY unpopularity. They can hide from attending such forum, but they cannot escape election as judgement day.
reservist_cpl
CSJ: How did his ‘zero profit venture’ (aka breakeven) become ‘sellings flats at a loss’ in your post?
I am the gentleman (Raymond Anthony Fernando) who asked the question to Mr Chiam about support for the mentally ill and why such issues are not discussed in parliament. I wanted the views of the rest of the other politicians as well, but due to time constraints, I could not secure their views. That was really sad.
To give a little background. My wife has been stricken with the dreaded schizophrenia since the tender age of 17 and as her sole caregiver, my journey in taking care of her alone has been extremely stressful and arduous. This resulted in my faled attempted suicide in 1995. 5 years ago, she was also stricken with severe arthritis- leaving her mobility severely impaired. She is very much at fall risks.
Besides these two disabilites, she also has to cope with 3 other chronic illnesses, one of which is incontinence.
Besides writing to the press to raise awareness of mental illness and to secure the much-needed support which caregivers like myself badly need, I have also written to several MPs to raise the plight of the mentally ill in Parliament. No one wants to do this. Until it hits one of their own kind- as with the case of MP Seng Han Thong.
I have suffered burnout countless times, but it is the deep love & devotion that I have for my wife that keeps me going. Medication compliance alone is very tough- I have to give my wife 44 tablets a day to manage all her illnesses. Then what about her multiple medical appts at hospitals/clinics. Then there is housework to be done.
Isn’t it a sad state of affairs that having written close to 100 letters to the media, I still cannot get the support that I so badly need. You can view some of these letters on my website & blog:
http://www.rayofhope.per.sg/
Then understand my plight.
As a advocate for the mentally ill, I can only do so much. MPs or would-be MPs must also be a voice for us- the maginalised citizens who cannot enter parliament must also feel that Singapore is also their home. Will that day come?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Raymond Anthony Fernando
Caregiver
Where the PAP is not involved in this meeting?
At least a Parlimentary Sec level should be there to defend the PAP policies.
Or they are too scared to debate in an grove-off style….only dare to do it in parLEEment where “proper controlled” and well-prepared questions and answers are the working norm?
But then the PAP ministers are the world best….I mean best paid….so they must the “bestest”. What are all these oppostion leaders compare to these PAP elites. So why they were not there to show their colours?
WHY? Give me a bloody good reason. WHY?
I have just read your blog site. Your story truly touches me and I cannot think of anyone that can match your courage and perseverance. Unfortunately I have a feeling that the sad reality is that most of the rest of humanity (including Singaporeans) are selfish in nature.
If the majority of Singaporeans are more keen in their personal wealth, comfort and lifestyle I would think the (current or future) government would not be moving faster in providing you with more privileges/benefits.
On a slightly separate note, I am wondering how many citizens would be glad to know that some of their tax monies would be used for welfare. And subsequently would want to work harder to contribute more towards that direction.
Congratulations.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Look forward to issue-specific forum.
Thank you for your kind comments, “seeprompt”. It is much apprecaited. Just read today’s papers about the woman who took off all her clothes and went up the bus. Then onlookers started taking pictures and videos of her in the buff. Somebody must stand up for her. I will!
Came across this Brilliant Suggestion by a S’pore Netizen on “How to screw the PAP back for screwing up the long-term future of Singapore & Singaporeans”:
CUNNINGLY-CLEVER PAP:
Left Hand give “some” money (before elections).
Right Hand collect “much more” money (after elections). [Example: increase GST]
NOT-DAFT S’PORE VOTER:
Left Hand take the money (and also the abalone porridge!).
Right Hand vote for the opposition (to teach the PAP a long-overdue and well-deserved lesson on how not to insult the intelligence of S’poreans with political bribery)
Gai Cao Huan Dai
(Sure you don’t mean gai chao huan dai?)
I did not want to ask party specific questions. Besides, there were other reasons which militated against me asking questions.
In any case, I was disappointed with some of the responses which I thought were inadequate. Of course, if questions weren’t asked, they couldn’t have responded. But sufficient questions were asked.
A picture paints a thousand words.
There is hope yet!
Will we get to see Andrew Loh as the 7th man for a ‘magnificent seven’ ?
reservist_cpl 18 December 2010
Seems like you’re there on a mission.
Anyway, one can’t possibly expect much out of a 2.5hr forum shared by numerous parties. This forum was just a starter and future forums should go into one specific topic for in-depth Q&A.
By the way, why criticize another’s accent or pronunciation when it’s not possible for everyone to speak in the same manner?
This is a political forum and not a “Singapore’s Got Glib-Tongue Political Talent” show. We are there to hear and witness the different parties’ viewpoints. Whether one agrees with them or not is still an individual’s position.
Hope you can agree on this. And YES, the message is in my chosen moniker. Thanks for pointing out the correct hanyu pinyin too.
Red Flower Clan. 18 December 2010
You should know that time was running out and it was not possible to cover more questions.
Hope you don’t base all your hopes on just one forum because it’s naive and inconceivable. Do participate in more of these forums if you’re truly concerned about yours and Singapore’s future.
Good day.
Participation in open meeting is good for the oppos and they can plan in advance, to avoid unnecessary confrontation during next GE. Them must learn to accept differences among themselves first and point their muzzles toward PAP.
As for the oppos, their stand is quite clear, now will the people point their muzzle at the right direction?
My sincere respects to all opposition one truly needs guts to stand up and fight for true blue Singaporeans that gut which i certainly do not have but my spouse vote and mine is yours hope you guys win a majority in the next upcoming 2011 election
GOOD LUCK
I find it quite disappointing that no video has been posted up for an event like this.
@WI
We do have videos taken of the event and will be uploading them soon. Do understand that everyone on the team are volunteers with day jobs and it takes time to edit the videos. Perhaps you would like to volunteer for another similar event. You can always write to us at theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
It would have been more reassuring if that information was shared earlier when at least two people asked for videos. I’m not faulting anyone, I was just expressing my view that there didn’t seem to be any video or even if there was going to be any since the above queries were not answered.
Sure, if the opportunity arises.
If the purpose of the forum is not to address specific issues concerning Singaporeans going to vote in the coming elections, then what is the point of having the forum? Almost everyone knows the opposition wants to kick the PAP out. The problem is not that the 2.5 hours is not sufficient. The problem is in the minds of the opposition members. You do not win elections or join the politics because you have a personal grouse against the establishment. Not because you think civil servants should earn less because they are not smarter or more efficient workers than you (for example) You are in politics because you can offer better policy alternatives that can and indeed must be packaged to appeal to the very people who are going to vote. This is politics. Chiam once talked about being a constructive MP. I have not seen any constuction from the opposition.
Come on. I am not even asking for specifics. But if you guys are going to run the country. at least identify the key areas where you would make a difference. Tell us your vision. Where do you think is Singapore’s direction? Otherwise whats the point of having a forum?
ABF, least the oppositions are doing the present singaporeans alternatives to the fixing gaps in the current policies. The people in politics surely has discussed about these which could not be discussed in a mere 2.5 hour forum.
I suggest either you get PAP to envision our citizen’s future or suggest an alternative instead.
hello there fellas
i really realy cherish this place so i desired to advise you about this webpage we are telling you of the new best internet commerce platform izzonet that was just available a week ago and is the most useful commerce platform it is totaly a turn key system that does the work of 20 humans it is totaly An automatic and lets you among other things to upload all your products instantly from your retail store to ebay amazon yahoo stores and 14 other comparison sites as well as manny coupan sites at the click of 1 button and has many unique featurs and Benifits that you will not find anyware.
and you dont need to belive me you can go to izzonet and see for your self you can also get a 14 day trial for at no cost try it for yourself all i ask is that you press thx for this uncover after if you like my share i before now made cash flow using it so i just wanted you to take a look
so i just wanted you to know and show it with you, get the info about it aby copy this link to your browser if its not clickble by you http://bit.ly/go0fby
do check it out
thank you
Brian
It was reported that in ’09 the genuine Money Trading Market had over 3 Billion in sales and employs over 100,000 Chinese. The primary game driving this information mill Wow cataclysm release plus the gold inside game. You’ve seen the advertisements Buy WoW Gold everywhere over the net. You even get spam in-game asking if you would like Buy Warcraft Gold for cheap and many even guarantee no bans. We understand this is usually a lie since it is impossible to guarantee an issue that violates the EULA. If you are tired of seeing those Buy discount WoW Gold use special coupon BS sites. Create your voice heard inside Blizzard forums because Blizzard do not cares and has stopped suspensions. http://www.forsaken-farmers.com/currency/wow-us-gold/ – Buy Warcraft Gold