Connect with us

Current Affairs

Put Mah Bow Tan on “live” TV

Published

14 years ago

on

Andrew Loh /

The Prime Minister has been on national television twice in the past one week to field questions from members of the public. The Finance Minister too was featured in a televised debate with opposition members.

As a result, Singaporeans perhaps have a clearer picture of what the political parties’ views are on various issues, and the public has had an opportunity to hear different views.

One of the hot topics for the upcoming General Election is the affordability of public housing, or Housing and Development (HDB) flats. The minister in charge is the Minister for National Development, Mr Mah Bow Tan. Since the opposition Workers’ Party (WP) released its 63-page election manifesto on 9 April, Mr Mah has shot down its recommendations to peg flats’ prices to the median income of households, instead of pegging them to resale market prices. Mr Mah calls the WP’s recommendations “irresponsible”. He said this “would mean larger subsidies for housing at the expense of other needs, such as healthcare, education or defence.”

The WP responded by accusing Mr Mah of “misleading” the public and called on the Government to reveal the land cost of building the flats. Mr Low Thia Khiang, secretary-general of the WP, asked if the Government is prepared to collect less money from land sales. “It is a question of taking your money from the left pocket and putting in the right pocket. So, let us know what is the land cost,” Mr Low said.

With almost one million HDB flats currently, housing some 85 per cent of Singaporeans, the runaway prices of these flats has become a deep concern for many Singaporeans. From the first quarter of 2007 to the third quarter (flash estimate) of 2010, the HDB resale price index has risen by 60 percent.

Thus the worries of Singaporeans, especially the younger ones who need a home to start families, and the older ones who are saddled with uncertainty over job security and depressed wages, are real and valid.

Just last month, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew vowed, in the midst of concerns over home prices, that the values of homes “will never come down.” (Straits Times)

With Mr Mah rejecting alternative suggestions to stabilize prices, and insisting that HDB flats are “affordable”, what are Singaporeans to make of all this?

In the past week, senior members of the PAP have urged Singaporeans to scrutinise the opposition parties’ candidates and proposals, in particular the WP’s manifesto recommendations. Indeed, the PAP’s senior members have also called on Singaporeans to do the same for the PAP’s new candidates as well.

In the same spirit, shouldn’t Singaporeans be given a chance to scrutinise the Minister for National Development too, given that his policies are causing wide-spread concerns and affect millions of homeowners?

When challenged to a debate on his policies by National Solidarity Party secretary general, Mr Goh Meng Seng, Mr Mah said there was “nothing to debate” and rejected the challenge. It is puzzling, to say the least, why Mr Mah would say that there is “nothing to debate”.

The WP too has said it welcomes scrutiny of its manifesto.

Mr Mah should be mindful that he is not emperor of his own fiefdom and that he is a public servant, paid by public money and is accountable to the public. Dismissing concerns and insisting that he and his policies are right is not what Singaporeans expect of a highly-paid minister.

If his policies fail – and indeed some have said they have – it will affect millions of homeowners for the years ahead.

It is thus a serious matter.

Mr Mah should therefore be put on national television in a “live” programme in the same way the Prime Minister was, and account and explain his policies to Singaporeans. The public and members of the opposition parties should be invited to question him on his plans for public housing, going forward.

Clearly, questions need to be asked and answers given by the minister.

Questions such as:

  1. Is Mr Mah accepting that prices of HDB flats may in the future, on the current projected trend, reach astronomical heights?
  2. If HDB flats are “affordable”, as he claims, why does the HDB need to build more smaller 2 and 3-room flats?
  3. Why is there an increase in the number in the queue for cheap rental flats?
  4. MM Lee, in 1990, predicted that the values of HDB homes would “double” in “15 to 20 years”, and it has been so. Is this the same projection that Mr Mah has for the next 15 to 20 years? Will we see, for example, a 4-room HDB flat going for S$800,000 as the “normal” price?
  5. Will Mr Mah reveal the land cost for building these flats?
  6. With a working model of a 6.5 million population, how will this affect the number of flats and its prices?
  7. And of course, what is the breakdown of the cost of building these flats?

These are important questions which Singaporeans must have answers to in order to plan their future. It is not a curiosity borne out of boredom but of serious consideration of real potential consequences.

In March, Mr Mah released a book on his thoughts about “housing a nation.” Made up of nine articles which he had penned for the Today newspaper, the book touches on various aspects of Singapore’s public housing programme.

According to a news report:

“Eight thousand copies of the book, in both English and Chinese, have been printed. The majority of the books will be distributed for free over the next few weeks to HDB Branch Offices, town councils, public libraries, resource centres, relevant government agencies and educational institutions.”

Clearly, Mr Mah is able to defend his policies.

As MND Minister since 1999, Mr Mah should not shirk his responsibility and be accountable to Singaporeans.

As such, he should take the opportunity to be on “live” tv and address the concerns of homeowners and potential homeowners.

After all, isn’t that what a responsible minister – one who is asking Singaporeans to cast their votes for him in the forthcoming elections –  would and should do?

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Farewell to Dr Lee Wei Ling: Rain marks solemn tribute, echoing her father’s funeral

Dr Lee Wei Ling’s funeral was conducted on 12 October 2024, in Singapore, with family members leading the procession in the rain. In a heartfelt eulogy, her brother, Lee Hsien Yang, remembered her dedication to medicine and family. Dr Lee had requested a simple ceremony, with her ashes to be scattered at sea.

Published

1 day ago

on

12 October 2024

By

Li Huanwu and Li Shaowu sending off their aunt, Dr Lee Wei Ling in the rain (Photo: Lianhe Zaobao/唐家鴻)

Dr Lee Wei Ling was farewelled on 12 October 2024, in a solemn funeral ceremony attended by close family members and friends.

The weather was marked by light rain, drawing comparisons to the conditions during her father, Lee Kuan Yew’s funeral in 2015.

Her nephews, Li Huanwu and Li Shaowu, led the procession, carrying Dr Lee’s portrait and walking side by side under the rain, symbolically reflecting the loss felt by her family.

In his emotional eulogy through a recorded video, her brother, Lee Hsien Yang, spoke of Dr Lee’s profound contributions to medicine and her unshakable devotion to family.

He described her as a remarkable individual whose life had left an indelible mark on those who knew her, as well as on Singapore’s medical community.

Expressing deep sorrow at her passing, Lee Hsien Yang reflected on their close bond and the immense loss he felt, having been unable to attend her final farewell.

He recalled his private goodbye to her in June 2022, a poignant moment that stayed with him during her last months.

Lee Hsien Yang also reiterated Dr Lee’s wish for a simple funeral, a reflection of her humility.

In accordance with her wishes, her body was cremated, and her ashes will be scattered at sea, symbolising her desire for a modest and unobtrusive departure from the world.

LHY acknowledged the efforts of his sons, Li Huanwu and Li Shaowu, for their role in managing their aunt’s care during his absence, thanking them for their dedication to her comfort in her final days.

During his eulogy for his sister, Lee Hsien Yang also conveyed a message from Dr Lee regarding the family’s long-standing issue surrounding their home at 38 Oxley Road.

Quoting from Dr Lee’s message, LHY said: “My father, Lee Kuan Yew, and my mother, Kwa Geok Choo’s, unwavering and deeply felt wish was for their house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629, to be demolished upon the last parent’s death.”

Dr Lee had been a vocal advocate for ensuring that this wish was honoured since Lee Kuan Yew’s death in 2015.

Dr Lee and LHY had strongly supported their father’s wishes, while their elder brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, took a different stance. This disagreement led to a public and highly publicised rift within the family.

In her final message, Dr Lee reiterated: “Lee Kuan Yew had directed each of his three children to ensure that their parents’ wish for demolition be fulfilled. He had also appealed directly to the people of Singapore. Please honour my father by honouring his wish for his home to be demolished.”

Dr Lee had maintained a private life, focusing on her medical career as a respected neurologist. She was known for her candid views, often unflinching in her advocacy for transparency and integrity.

Her professional accomplishments, combined with her strong commitment to her parents’ legacy, made her a significant figure in both Singapore’s medical community and public discourse.

Diagnosed in 2020 with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), a rare neurodegenerative disorder, Dr Lee faced immense physical and emotional challenges in her final years.

The illness progressively affected her movement, speech, and ability to swallow.

Despite her health struggles, Dr Lee remained actively involved in public discussions, particularly on matters concerning her father’s legacy, until her condition worsened to the point where communication became difficult.

By March 2023, her brother LHY revealed that her condition had deteriorated significantly, and he feared he might not be able to see her again due to his own circumstances.

Even in her final months, Dr Lee maintained a close relationship with her immediate family, who cared for her during her illness.

Dr Lee’s funeral and cremation mark the end of a significant era for the Lee family and Singapore.

Her legacy as a dedicated neurologist and a firm advocate for her parents’ values will continue to resonate, even as the debates over the future of the Oxley Road property remain unresolved.

The rain that fell during her funeral, so reminiscent of her father’s final farewell, added a symbolic layer to this momentous chapter in Singapore’s history.

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

TJC issued 3rd POFMA order under Minister K Shanmugam for alleged falsehoods

The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC) was issued its third POFMA correction order on 5 October 2024 under the direction of Minister K Shanmugam for alleged falsehoods about death penalty processes. TJC has rejected the government’s claims, describing POFMA as a tool to suppress dissent.

Published

1 week ago

on

6 October 2024

By

The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC), an advocacy group opposed to the death penalty, was issued its third Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) correction direction on 5 October 2024.

The correction was ordered by Minister for Home Affairs and Law, K Shanmugam, following TJC’s publication of what the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) alleges to be false information regarding Singapore’s death row procedures and the prosecution of drug trafficking cases.

These statements were made on TJC’s website and across its social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter).

In addition to TJC, civil activist Kokila Annamalai was also issued a correction direction by the minister over posts she made on Facebook and X between 4 and 5 October 2024.

According to MHA, these posts echoed similar views on the death penalty and the legal procedures for drug-related offences, and contained statements that the ministry claims are false concerning the treatment of death row prisoners and the state’s legal responsibilities in drug trafficking cases.

MHA stated that the posts suggested the government schedules and stays executions arbitrarily, without due regard to legal processes, and that the state does not bear the burden of proving drug trafficking charges.

However, these alleged falsehoods are contested by MHA, which maintains that the government strictly follows legal procedures, scheduling executions only after all legal avenues have been exhausted, and that the state always carries the burden of proof in such cases.

In its official release, MHA emphasised, “The prosecution always bears the legal burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and this applies to all criminal offences, including drug trafficking.”

It also pointed to an article on the government fact-checking site Factually to provide further clarification on the issues raised.

As a result of these allegations, both TJC and Annamalai are now required to post correction notices. TJC must display these corrections on its website and social media platforms, while Annamalai is required to carry similar notices on her Facebook and X posts.

TikTok has also been issued a targeted correction direction, requiring the platform to communicate the correction to all Singapore-based users who viewed the related TJC post.

In a statement following the issuance of the correction direction, TJC strongly rejected the government’s claims. The group criticised the POFMA law, calling it a “political weapon used to crush dissent,” and argued that the order was more about the exercise of state power than the pursuit of truth. “We have put up the Correction Directions not because we accept any of what the government asserts, but because of the grossly unjust terms of the POFMA law,” TJC stated.

TJC further argued that the government’s control over Singapore’s media landscape enables it to push pro-death penalty views without opposition. The group also stated that it would not engage in prolonged legal battles over the POFMA correction orders, opting to focus on its abolitionist work instead.

This marks the third time TJC has been subject to a POFMA correction direction in recent months.

The group was previously issued two orders in August 2024 for making similar statements concerning death row prisoners.

In its latest statement, MHA noted that despite being corrected previously, TJC had repeated what the ministry views as falsehoods.

MHA also criticised TJC for presenting the perspective of a convicted drug trafficker without acknowledging the harm caused to victims of drug abuse.

Annamalai, a prominent civil rights activist, is also known for her involvement in various social justice campaigns. She was charged in June 2024 for her participation in a pro-Palestinian procession near the Istana. Her posts, now subject to correction, contained information similar to those presented by TJC regarding death penalty procedures and drug-related cases.

POFMA, which was introduced in 2019, allows the government to issue correction directions when it deems falsehoods are being spread online.

Critics of the law argue that it can be used to suppress dissent, while the government asserts that it is a necessary tool for combating misinformation. The law has been frequently invoked against opposition politicians and activists.

As of October 2024, Minister K Shanmugam has issued 17 POFMA directions, more than any other minister. Shanmugam, who was instrumental in introducing POFMA, is followed by National Development Minister Desmond Lee, who has issued 10 POFMA directions.

Major media outlets, including The Straits Times, Channel News Asia, and Mothership, have covered the POFMA directions. However, as of the time of writing, none have included TJC’s response rejecting the government’s allegations.

Continue Reading

Trending