Time Out Between WP and Hawkers, and PAP

The storm in a teacup that made WP look mean and niao. You bet the PAP, with the help of its papers and TV, would look for other little things to chip away at WP's credibility soon, regardless of what achievements underdog WP made or obstacles it faces.

Make no mistake, this AHPETC hawker misunderstanding is a small WP slip, nothing like its FMSS pie in the face. Now that was a serious WP blowback, which was so AIM-like in the poor corporate governance and town council money going from right pocket to left pocket. LOL

BTW what blogger black out today? Why should the PAP tell us what to read and what is objectionable, and bloggers to tell us what they think is objectionable and that they are the blogs to read more as they stood up to PAP? Riiight.

AHPETC, NEA and hawkers agree on cleaning schedule
By Elgin Toh
Singapolitics
Thursday, Jun 06, 2013

SINGAPORE - The Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) has agreed to bring forward the annual spring cleaning of two Bedok hawker centres from the end of the year to "within a month".

This latest compromise in the three-month-old spat over hawker centre cleaning was announced after a meeting on Thursday afternoon between the National Environment Agency (NEA), AHPETC and hawker representatives.

Hawkers coming out of the meeting told reporters they were happy with the outcome.

Mr Chan Kheng Heng, secretary of the hawkers' association at Block 511 said: "Everything is resolved and we are satisfied."

On Monday, AHPETC had announced a cleaning schedule which said the hawker centres - at Block 511 in Bedok North Street 3 and Block 630 in Bedok Reservoir Road - would be cleaned in October or November.

But the National Environment Agency rejected the proposal on hygiene grounds and called for cleaning for Block 511 to take place in June as originally scheduled.

WP and PAP, FMSS and AIM, Who Cornering Whom?

Oh oh did PAP anyhow count to anyhow whack WP?

"MND’s latest response of 14 May 2013 claims that our media release earlier that day showing that the increase was only 4.16% gave an incomplete picture. MND stated that they compute the MA rate by dividing the MA tender rate by the total number of residential and commercial units. However, even adopting MND’s methodology of including both residential and commercial units, we find that the rate difference should only be 4.55% and not 20%"

WP Statement

First PAP bring up FMSS say it lacks corporate governance. Hey AIM also like lack corporate governance? Then PAP said FMSS created without tender. Hey but AIM was PAP's scorched earth policy and FMSS was urgently set up to prevent that, to protect residents? Then PAP said FMSS was filled with WP supporters? Hey isn't AIM made up of PAP members?

Now the last straw, PAP then claimed WP's managing agent's rate 20% more than before but WP said they calculated left, right, centre, inside, outside also at most, the increase is 4.55%, understanding that FMSS does not enjoy the economies of scale compared to CPG? Facepalm.

The only thing that PAP made sense is that town councils are political. Let's not kid ourselves.

White Paper and the Idiotic Public and PAP

And just as it quickly began, shallow White Paper dropped in front of our faces, the debate is over in parliament. OK feedback was sought last year but only 2,500 was collected.  As the PAP did not lift its party whip, the results were more or less expected. The PAP leering at one end, the WP and NMPs huddled back to back at the other. One lone NMP abstained, the coolest one as he signaled that the White Paper has both its merits and shits and would not commit. Or the dumbest as he with one cast of no-vote, he won enemies on both sides. The lesson from that, get WP in with at least a third of the seats and then we can see bills being negotiated before they can be passed in parliament. Not like now lock stock and barrel White Paper passed as policy.

There are lots of dumb fucks shouting Nay to population growth to 6.9 million by 2030. Like Gilbert Goh NSP member who whined about no jobs for locals as foreigners stole the jobs. He is going to hold some Speakers' Corner xenophobe bash soon. Great no maids, foreign wives and cleaners for you. Was he ever a businessmen to understand how the businesses feel? Anyway, WTF, unemployment is about 2% since 2010, and higher at 3% during that short 2009 recession. Despite all the hordes of Tiongs, Banglas, Ah Neh, Pinoy coming in, unemployment is still low and stable, not at 10%!. Facepalm.

Another sadly who lost the plot, is former MP Chiam See Tong. Listen me out. He said he was appalled that population would increase to that 6.9 figure as it would strain Singapore's living space and condition. The fucking problem is not the number of people, but the number of housing, the capacity of transport, social services and overall living space and thus quality of life.  Not the number of people in a city. Look at Hong Kong, New York, Tokyo. Modern international cities with high population density but with infrastructure that can cope. 

WP is right all along and actually struggle to maintain the balance between the dumb fuck PAP blind to public concerns and the dumb fuck masses, blind to the fucking need of businesses and the economy, not seeing beyond their noses that businesses, the economy and human capital is what keeping Singapore afloat. Human resources, human capital, skills and sweat, that is needed. Bringing in foreigners is fine - but slowly slowly slowly. WP got it right, listen to them you brainless shitheads.

Parliament endorses Population White Paper
Posted: 08 February 2013 1849 hrs

SINGAPORE: After five days of intense debate, Parliament on Friday passed the amended motion to endorse the White Paper on Population with 77 ayes and 13 nays.

Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Eugene Tan abstained from the vote.

Workers' Party MP Low Thia Khiang called for division on the amended motion to endorse the White Paper. In a division, the vote of each Member is collected and tabulated through an electronic voting system.

Other than opposition MPs, who all voted against the motion, NMPs Faizah Jamal, Janice Koh and Laurence Lian also voted 'no'.

The amendment, proposed by MP Liang Eng Hwa and passed by MPs, among other things, explicitly states that the White Paper "supports maintaining a strong Singaporean core by encouraging more Singaporeans to get married and have children, supplemented by a calibrated pace of immigration to prevent the citizen population from shrinking".

"Although the Amended Motion captures some of the Workers' Party concerns about the White Paper, fundamentally the White Paper still forms the basis of the roadmap forward to 2030, which the House was asked to endorse," said WP chairman Sylvia Lim in a statement.

Explaining the party's reason for voting against the amended motion, she said the party "believes that the path proposed by the White Paper will further dilute the Singaporean core and weaken our national identity" and lead the Republic to "require unsustainable population injections in the future".

Ms Lim added that the party believes that the greater well-being of Singaporeans "lies in sustainable economic growth driven by increases in our productivity and in our resident workforce, rather than further increases in our dependency on imported foreign labour". Demographic challenges must be "addressed fundamentally and urgently" but focusing on increasing the total fertility rate and growing the resident labour force participation rate, she said.

Earlier, both Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean addressed the House.

Concerns over the impact on the Singaporean core and caps on the foreign workforce were among the issues debated over the last five days.

Speaking on a range of topics, Mr Lee pledged that Singaporeans would not be "overwhelmed" by a flood of foreigners and sought to assure Singaporeans that their interests are at the centre of all the government's plans, and economic growth and population policies are just a means to improving citizens' well-being.

Over the next few years, the conversation on population will continue, said Mr Lee. He listed three areas for discussion: marriage & parenthood, the economy and the Singapore identity.

PAP Out, WP In

The facts speak for itself and Punggol East voted with their hearts! WP won and won big! WP grabbed 54.52% and PAP clutched only 43.71%.

More than 10% difference! More showing of the re-alignment of the political stars in future and WP's ascendency, is comparison with the Aljunied GRC contest, the other big battle that could go either way. In that epic 2011 battle, WP had 54.72% and PAP had 45.28%. From comparing the results yesterday and in 2011, PAP's was less popular than before while WP maintained prestige more or less.

Despite all the criticisms against WP, some fair, some unfair, some serious, some trivial, WP won by about 10% over the incumbent PAP despite a multi-party fight. Yes it was a by-election and chance of WP winning are much higher, coupled with the unpopularity of PAP in housing, inflation, transport and what not, PAP had skid marks and crashed into the wall.

Congratulations to WP, a win is a win and that is all that matters in politics. And it is also a win for Singapore truth be told as after all, it is not any party like SDP, but WP. LOL Will there be AIM-like problems when WP tries to take over the town council, especially when Punggol East town council is under the PAP GRC? Scratch head.

WP's Lee sets out immediate priorities for Punggol East
By Hetty Musfirah | Posted: 27 January 2013 1122 hrs

SINGAPORE: Member of Parliament-elect for Punggol East, Lee Li Lian, said her immediate priorities are the town council and meet-the-people sessions (MPS) in the ward.

The Workers' Party (WP) candidate told reporters after a thank-you parade on Sunday morning that she will be working on the logistics for the MPS.

She said volunteers from the single-member ward of Hougang and the group representation constituency of Aljunied, which are held by WP, will help out during the transition period.

As for the town council, Ms Lee said WP will give details on the handover some time next week.

For now, she will work closely with the relevant parties and ensure a problem-free transition.

Turning to Parliament, Ms Lee said she hopes to highlight issues raised during her by-election campaign.

She also hopes her win will spur more women and younger people to come forward in the political arena.

Will WP Get a Black Eye?

In 2011, WP won Aljunied because they were so close in 2006, Low Thia Khiang was leading from the front in Aljunied GRC, and WP had underdog status in the GE. In Hougang BE, it was WP homeground and HQ, no way PAP could penetrate it and turn it from Blue to White. Punggol East 2013 is different. Much different.

WP's is not really an underdog in this By-E.  Some ways yes, others, no. The underdogs in the internet are PAP (gasp, believe it), RP (yup) and SDA (super yup) in no particular order. PAP, RP and SDA are all so poor thing and pathetic in their own self-pwn ways. Anyway, people like to support the underdog. Especially when the underdog is made fun of. Png Eng Huat, HUAT AH, crossed the imaginary civil line that WP never crossed before by making fun of Dr Arse's name, saying that the Dr would "Koon" or sleep. Not sure if he meant sleep like Palmer sleep around or Ah Teo "sleep" on stage on first day of PAP rally. Orrrrrrr BTW we nobodies can mock Dr Arse. Not a politician on stage, don't stoop so low like the PAP like when they mocked a politician's O level grades.

I don't have problems with WP arrogance or not, accusations hurled from its jealous fellow opposition party critics. WP is leading and they can do what they want strategically in an election as they are their own captains of their political destiny. All these pleas by other parties about unity and whatfuck is just trying to hitchhike on WP's success so far. Spineless freeloaders IMHO.

However, I do have doubts about WP's intellectual clout to see through its policy reforms.WP has been quite convincing on its promise to moderate immigration and having foreigners here as long as they benefit Singapore. The devil is however in the details and WP has not shared what these little nitty gritty criteria are for allowing foreigners in.

Similarly, their policies on housing and transport, I'm not so swayed. Pritam Singh is as usual a powerful orator on stage but his views on housing and the stress on supply is simplistic, assuming it reflects WP high command's thinking. The cooling measures, 7 in total, are not meant to shock the market and bring prices down. Bringing prices down drastically would piss off investors and the construction industry, although buyers would be happy. BTW construction is mostly keeping Singapore from falling into recession. The cooling measures are to slow down the increase in property prices. Killer measures to bring down prices are dead easy but politically costly. Would WP dare to push for a policy that MAS should somehow jack up interest rates to 4-5% to kill off demand for property, and thus push property prices down? And if interest rates go up, how would it affect SME borrowing to survive in this uncertain economy?

I don't doubt WP's heart. I doubt their head. I don't doubt PAP's head. I doubt their heart.

All this said and done. I think WP might lose this BE simply because at the end of the 3rd and final rally, WP did not lead the audience there in reciting the pledge! They broke that special special tradition and therefore will break their winning streak. I pantang. WP should too.

Boring Watchdog WP

WP is not doing that great so far. Yeah sure it is still popular, but put it next to another opposition party like RP, you can see how different it is. WP started the campaign sluggishly with the flimsy mantra that they should be voted in so that PAP can work harder. Yes, yes, yes. With the lost of a GRC, PAP is shaking and worried about their little Risk board of Singapore slowly being carved out into WP blue areas. Let me repeat that mantra - so if we vote WP in, the PAP would work harder.?!

So that means the WP MP does not need to work hard and just sits around slapping the PAP once in a while. In that case, why vote WP in? Why not vote RP's secretary-general, KJ, who actually brought the government to court over the $4 billion loan to the IMF. Did WP bring the PAP government to court over anything? In fact, WP did not file any motions in parliament at all since they fought tooth and claw into it after 2011. Actually, maybe voters who are different from WP and PAP politically, like those who support SDP, should think of supporting RP. Dr CSJ was the one who shouted at then PM Goh over loans to Indonesia remember? It is like deja vu except that KJ is smarter and by the book, and looked better as a result. RP and SDP are closer than we think, just like PAP and WP are closer than we think in terms of their rather conservative ideology.If KJ decides to canvass for the LGBT vote these last few days, then he is after the SDP voters too.

WP is a great party, but they lost the drive for this By-E. They were energised in 2011 but in these few days, did not really follow up in the rallies on transport or housing, recent fuckups by the PAP. Or revisit their manifesto winners like healthcare. WP looked like it either ran out of ideas or steam, or both! Despite saying they would not bring it up until after the government issued a report, WP brought up the AIM issue during its second rally and that was the most creative rally point they had, which should be kept for later. Or more wet markets in Punggol East. What about something bold like WP kindergartens to rival that of PCF?

WP's mantra of voting them in to make PAP work harder is as boring and flat as the PAP's shitty fear-mongering during GE. PAP would threaten - vote us in or else investors would run away, vote us in or else property prices in the area would dive, vote us in or else upgrading would take forever to come.

WP is also coasting along, even claiming credit for everything so far as their reasoning is that if they were not in parliament, PAP would not have done anything to improve our lives. Err OK some merit but... And if we want more improvements, we should vote more WP MPs in. OK well. But not too many since they are not ready to take over the government yet. WTF! First world parliament my ass. Remember their MPs who plagiarised? Remember them telling the other parties that they choped Punggol East?

Still, WP has 2-3 more days to go and they might pick up the ball they dropped. Like I said, they are a great party but so far, they are just sadly stumbling along and if not careful, waste the chance of getting this SMC.

SDP Shows its Stupid Cards in the By-E Poker

Unfuckingbelievable. SDP was both cock and crazy enough to suggest this absurd joint proposal to WP as a spirit of cooperation of win-win in the approaching By-E. Yeah, right. SDP would offer its candidate instead, suggesting that its man is more capable as a political icon than anyone WP can propose.If the coalition wins the By-E, WP can run the town council, suggesting that WP can do the heavy lifting afterwards while SDP dumps Punggol East voters after the initial courtship and fling. Are SDP and Chee Soon Juan snakes or not you think? Hisssssssss

SDP thinks its proposal is reasonable and clever. SDP is deluded that it is in the spirit of gentlemanly cooperation. SDP has been whining that it sent letters to WP to open up cooperation. Really, with these sort of proposals and conditions, what do you think WP would do - of course reject it as any political party with dignity would do. SDP then thinking itself smart would later say that WP rejected a perfectly honest and friendly proposal that was beneficial to Singaporeans. Oh SDP and Chee Soon Juan, what big fucking bullshit you have!

This is all a SDP farce and when nomination day comes and no SDP candidate steps forward, you bet that shameless SDP would give the excuse that for the benefit of Singaporeans and with a heavy heart, they decided to generously bow out and let WP take on PAP. WTF. And if, if, if, WP loses Punggol East, SDP would then sadly say that WP should have listened and allowed SDP to use their man. Facepalm.

Hopeless SDP should just shut the fuck up and  take part in the By-E. They are always yelping about democracy this, diversity that, freedom of choice for citizens this and level political playing field that. So why don't they man up, and let the people choose on the 26th. If they are so confident of their popularity and prowess, they would be cock-sure about their victory in this By-E, and there is no need for this song and dance courtship of WP.

SDP proposes joint campaign with Workers' Party

SINGAPORE - The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has proposed that it run a joint campaign with the Workers' Party (WP) in the Punggol East by-election.

"In the spirit of compromise and cooperation, we would like to propose that our two parties run a joint campaign and field one candidate from the SDP. If victorious, the SDP candidate will enter Parliament and the WP will run the Punggol East Town Council," said SDP Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan.

He termed it a "win-win-win situation" where there would be another seat for the Opposition in Parliament and it would lay the ground for "bigger Opposition representation" in the next General Election.

Dr Chee noted that the WP would have "added clout" in their Town Council management and the SDP would have the opportunity to "table and debate the Government on our alternative policies".

The SDP has emailed the WP on the proposal and sought a meeting with them tomorrow, he said, adding that this was the "answer" to preventing a three-corner fight.

"I assure you, we are very serious about contesting in this by-election. Our campaigning started way before the by-election was called," he added.

Separately, the Singapore People's Party, citing erroneous media reports, has issued a statement to reiterate that it will not be contesting in the Punggol East by-election.

WP's HQ Donation Drive

I only know of 2 parties which have big party offices - PAP and PKMS. How they got their windfall to buy property only heaven knows.

WP is now confidently considering expansion. They did not say where their future HQ would be, but knowing WP, it would be prudent for image and for economy, maybe somewhere in Hougang. I doubt they would get a Dhoby Ghaut office space like that megalomaniac Tan Jee Say. So if you want see WP thrive, please donate to the guys in blue, don't be shy!

The thing is whether it is a good time to buy commercial property at this time when property market is very bullish, instead of when there is a correction.

WP needs S$1m to buy own headquarters

04:45 AM Jan 07, 2013

SINGAPORE - The Workers' Party (WP) is hoping to raise S$1 million through public donations to buy its own headquarters because it finds its current rented office along Syed Alwi Road too small.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of Bricks in Blue, a musical concert it staged yesterday, party Chairman Sylvia Lim said: "The rentals that we're (paying) ... are always subject to market forces and will increase over time - as you know, the property market is very buoyant when it comes to rental - so that is also part of our consideration."

Owning an asset will also mean the WP may sublet part of it to "make ourselves more self-sufficient", the Member of Parliament for Aljunied Group Representation Constituency added.

Ms Lim said that about one-third of the S$1.5 million the party expects will be needed for the downpayment of the property has been raised since the general election last year, through monthly S$1,000 contributions from the party's elected Members of Parliament and private donations from friends and acquaintances. The balance of the purchase price will be financed through a loan, Ms Lim said.

While the party has yet to find a suitable property, Ms Lim said that they are hoping to secure a two-storey shophouse unit. SHARON SEE

PAP Scorched Earth at Aljunied GRC!

What we suspected, but now confirm and double confirmed!

Recently, MND gave a report that WP's Aljunied GRC team CMI - WP got a red card for their late audit / management report. Ooooooh eyes on WP for being lame and giving excuses. Yes WP cannot excuse that away. However, as more bits and pieces came out about AIM, the financial services company that was holding WP Aljunied Town Concil hostage by putting admin obstacles in front of WP's management report to MND, then the blame and shame game on WP turned into one on PAP's scorched earth policy. Not new, this PAP denial of the political enemy access to infrastructure, like how WP had trouble with use of common space in Hougang because MND and PA were politically motivated in their decisions. Ooooooh

Lau gay Alex Au was half right to say that AIM is a stay-behind sabo party - right because AIM is actually owned by former PAP MPs and I think still PAP members, not so right as AIM took over the financial and computer systems of the PAP town councils before GE 2011 in January last year, and not just before handover of Aljunied to WP. How was the tender process that AIM won, we are very curious!

Tessa Wong, one of the few ST journalists who covered opposition news objectively, nudged readers to think about who should fingers be pointing at, and for WP Pritam Singh to copy it lock stock and barrel into his Facebook note, he endorsed the finger taichi implied! Ohoh, would nation-building press ST warn Pritam Singh about blatant copyright infringement by copying the entire ST article into his Facebook? LOL

AIM, the Tessa Wong report also said its directors and former PAP members don't want to comment, like MIA!

Palmergate in Pictures

Some of the funnier grabs from the Internet. Still no naked pictures of Palmer and his fling. Half-naked ones also don't have!

The Sketch Times

WP to start the year, PAP to end the year and it has been a fucking great year! Woohoo.

Cartoon Press 

It's all about how to own up and milking the rhetoric, without letting people know you are milking the rhetoric otherwise it just curdles quickly and yucks. PAP did a good job by pressuring Palmer take one for the team and resign. But they overdid it in their spinning.

EDMW 

Karma, and revenge is a dish of big sweet mangoes. WP's rhetoic was sublime, and Low's display of gracious understanding pat on Palmer's back, good showmanship. They sat back and watched the parade.

Xiaxue

Xiaxue unloads a splendid point and wins the wife votes, and the hubbies next to them as the hubbies must nod and openly agree with the wives here if they are smart. Politicians should have high moral standards, or at least as high as possible. Or least don't be stupid to get found out even if have low moral standards.

Good Game, Michael Palmer

Who is Palmer?

He is the former Speaker in parliament, former MP in Punngol East SMC, former PAP member and man who screwed Laura Ong, someone from PA. Didn't everybody say PAP and PA are bedfellows! Wonder if she is prettier than the woman that former WP MP bonked!

Still, one thing about this Palmer, this guy had balls. Balls to stand alone in a SMC in the last GE when all his other PAP comrades hide with the big boys in GRCs. Balls to bonk around after the Yaw Shin Leong scandal earlier this year that led to the Hougang by-election. Facepalmer!

Obviously didn't learn that lesson from Low Thia Khiang's protege that these sort of private sordid things cannot be kept under the covers for long when one is a political figure with enemies of all colours. Private tho affairs may be, the game is to make it public interest when one is a politician. Stupid cockhead, also not thinking ahead!

And to match and even surpass WP's standards of transparency set a few months ago, the PAP is putting Palmer on a donkey cart, parading him around town with a self-flagellating press conference and even naming the woman who led to his fall, outdoing WP in openness and decisiveness on who can shame its own more. Karma is an equal opportunity bitch who just squeezed PAP's balls after the PAP preached about MPs setting high moral standards a few months ago. LOL

You know what,? While we snigger about Palmer and make snide remarks about PAP's karma, Low Thia Khiang is ever the graceful politician-gentleman in his comments about Palmer. He did not kick mud into Palmer's face like what the PAP did when Yaw was crawling away in the mud. Low Thia Khiang has class.

Michael Palmer's resignation 'unfortunate': Low Thia Khiang
Updated 09:58 PM Dec 12, 2012

SINGAPORE - Workers' Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang today said it is "unfortunate" that Mr Michael Palmer has resigned as Speaker of Parliament.

Describing Mr Palmer as a "well balanced Speaker", Mr Low said Mr Palmer "managed Parliamentary affairs very well and very efficiently".

"He's well balanced giving both front and back benchers sufficient time to debate. He also has given members of the Opposition sufficient time to engage the front bench, said Mr Low. "Personally I quite like him as a Speaker so it's unfortunate that he has resigned."

Mr Low was speaking to the media at the sidelines of his Meet the People Session this evening.

Mr Palmer, who was Member of Parliament (MP) for Punggol East SMC, today announced his resignation as Speaker and as a member of the People's Action Party (PAP) after admitting to having a relationship with a member of the People's Association staff.

Asked about what this episode showed about the PAP and its selection process for candidates, Mr Low said that no selection process is foolproof.

Declining to compare this with the WP's experience earlier this year - when then WP MP for Hougang SMC Mr Yaw Shin Leong's infidelity was revealed - Mr Low said it would not be fair to do so as "every case is unique". Mr Yaw was subsequently sacked from the party.

He said, however, that he hoped the people "who have been critical of the Workers' Party", including the media, would "display fairness and integrity in their comments and their sincerity in what they have said during the episode of Yaw Shin Leong".

"I think we have done our part and my conscience is clear. Other than that, it's always unpleasant to know, to learn of such things happen(ing) whether it's in the Opposition or the PAP. We hope to have a good public service," he said.

Earlier today, the WP issued a press release urging the Prime Minister to call a by-election in the Punggol East constituency as soon as possible. The party said it was ready to offer a choice to the voters of Punggol East SMC again in the by-election.

Asked who the party would field as a candidate, Mr Low said it was "premature" to speculate on the candidate. During the General Election last year, the WP fielded Ms Lee Lilian.

Must Mind the Child-Care Sector

The childcare sector is a sensitive and popular topic as it is related to education and couples having more children/brats. Many parents bitch that it is too expensive to bring up a kid and childcare is neither convenient nor cheap. Blablablabla. Depends. PAP aka PCF kindergartens are cheap (less than $200/month), give out lots of homework and are everywhere in a void deck near you, but people want to send to those branded $1,000++ a month Eton or Pats what. Of course those are expensive! Other parents complain that it is stressful to bring up a child in Singapore's no-mercy stream and stream some more education system.  Then don't ask the government to put one leg into the childcare sector as it would be more stressful! Facepalm.

PAP promised during the rally that the government would use taxpayers' money to support and expand the anchor operators in the childcare sector. OK they didn't mention "taxpayers" but obviously it as where else is the money coming from.

Who are the anchor operators? They are - PCF (PAP) and NTUC (PAP)! On one hand it is good as there are standards and standardisation since 2 giants are getting into the pen. On the other hand, it crushes the competition. Once public money is pumped into PCF and NTUC and make these giants even bigger, from an unfair business competition understanding, small-medium childcare centres would bleed to death.

Hence, this is something I truly like about WP NCMP Yee Jenn Jong, who is the SME champion and in the past, he complained about NTUC with its economies of scale and resources, finishing off SMEs retailers and service providers. SMEs are the foundation of Singapore's businesses and employers and they should be given their space to grow and innovate. In parliament, while it is hard to ignore that PCF and First Campus' expansion is good for parents, the WP NCMP said that it should not be at the expense of the little guy. Branded Eton, Pat, Julia Gabriel etc would not suffer as they target a different market and demand for them would not be affected as people would still be biased in favour of their supposed better quality childcare and education, compared to the anchor operators.

However, the other smaller childcare centres either the non-profit or the profit ones, would face unfair competition as public money is used to subsidise the anchor operators. Not the same but good to compare, think of SMRT and SBS and how crap they are because they don't have real competition. What the NCMP suggested in the end is that if public money is used, better than giving it to PCF or NTUC outright, it can be in the form of subsidies and rent control for childcare businesses if they meet strict conditions e.g. hygiene, staff-student ratio,

Proposal for transforming the child care sector

In the child care industry, there are many private operators, most with one or a few centres while several run chain stores.

We also have non-profit operators, dominated by NTUC First Campus and PCF Sparkletots. They are called Anchor Operators, so determined after an exercise in 2009. The criteria used included: (a) $5 million paid-up capital, (b) non-profit and (c) without any religious or racial affiliation.

Anchor Operators function mostly from HDB void decks, at rents of between $2 to $4 per square metre as disclosed by MCYS. For a typical centre of 400-500 sqm, this means monthly rent of $1,000 onwards. They receive generous set-up and furnishing grants for each new centre. In addition, Anchors get recurrent grant for manpower development and learning programmes which is estimated to go into $30 million per year.

MCYS publishes upcoming new centres from HDB and SLA. From its website, I see just a few centres available to private and non profit operators. Yet at the opening of the 100th NTUC centre in October last year, NTUC declared it will open 50 new centres over the next 2 years, which is one every fortnight. PCF too had been growing just as rapidly in the last three years. Just five years ago, PCF was a small child care player. Today, it is number 2 with 90 centres, just behind NTUC. The many new centres by these two do not match the very small number of published centres for non profit operators. Are they given unpublished quotas?

We are told that the role of non profit and Anchor operators is to bring cost down while maintaining quality.

Sir, there is no magic in non profit or in Anchor Operators. The lower fees they provide can be matched by private operators. I will now demonstrate that if private operators get the same benefits as non profit and indeed the Anchor Operators, they have shown that they could match the fees of non profit peers.

Financial modelling for child care is straightforward. The main start-up cost is renovation, fitting out, and investment in resources. Set-up cost can be high, running into several hundred thousand dollars per centre.

In a typical centre paying competitive rents, manpower and rent account for some 80% of all ongoing operating costs. Private operators function from landed houses, commercial and government-owned buildings or purpose-built HDB void decks. Tenancy is often subjected to bidding. When tenancy expires, there is usually open bidding or adjustments to market rate.Competition has caused rents to be in excess of $10,000 to even as high as $40,000 per month in recent tenders.

Anchor Operators getchoice new sites regularly at highly subsidized rents. They receive start-up, furnishing, maintenance and recurrent grants. These give them huge operating benefits over competitors.

The difference in monthly rent between non profit and private operators can be $15,000 per month or more. Divide $15,000 by a typical centre enrolment of 75 children. That works out to around $200 cost advantage per child per month. With setup grants, Anchor Operators need to provide less for amortization of investment. They get ongoing grants to defray costs. Yet with these cost advantages, non-profit’s median fees is currently just two hundred over dollars lower than that of private operators. We can find private centres whose fees are not much higher than that of Anchor Operators. Are Anchor Operators with all these cost advantages, really doing enough to keep fees affordable?

Sir, there are other industry data to support my claim.

In a parliament reply this year, MCYS disclosed that EtonHouse, a premium operator with fees of $1,500 per month, charges only $728 per month at its Hampton Preschool. The centre is a collaboration with PCF. PCF secured the site at low rent, and can enjoy other grants. EtonHouse is responsible for programme delivery, set-up and pedagogy. According to a speech by Mr Wong Kan Seng in 2009 , EtonHouse manages the centre and was selected because PCF wanted to work with a private operator that could deliver ‘high quality programmes’. While there could be variations in operations compared to a typical EtonHouse’s centre, the fact is, EtonHouse could deliver ‘high quality programmes’ atless than halfof its usual fees when it operates at a void deck that enjoys subsidised rents and grants.

In the 1990s, government buildings started to provide for workplace childcare. There was an interesting practice then to charge $1 or other token monthly rent for purpose-built child care facilities which catered to children of staff working in the building. Bids were called. I noted that in open competition, these sites went to established private players whose own centres charged in the mid to upper price range.

The condition for low rent then was that fees for children of staff in the buildings must be kept low. Premium private operators could match prevailing fees of non profit operators.

Today, costs are escalating due mainly to rent and manpower. Manpower cost affects all in the industry. Anchor Operators with recurrent grants can better retain staff, head-huntfrom other centres and deal with rising costs. Rent is steadily rising in our competitive market.

This has caused fees to rise. Out of pocket payments by parents in many private centres today are higher than before subsidies were increased in 2008. MCYS has no control over fees. Centres just need to give ‘ample’ notice to parents, which MCYS recommends as 3 months, and then fees will go up.

The government has announced new measures for the industry. While they may be initiated with good intent, I fear it could end up creating more unfair competition, destroying the diversity and innovation in our current system.

I have a proposal to bring costs down while pushing for quality and diversity – Child care as a public good with private partnership through contestability.

I noted that in delivering public goods such as transport, the government has pumped billions in rail and bus investments without expecting payback from private operators or charging infrastructure at market rent to them. We were told this is to bring the cost of public transport to a level that people can accept.

If we wish for young working couples to be able to afford child care and be encouraged to have more children, then we have a case to use a public good’s approach for child care.

Government can build and lease out centres at managed low rent. All its existing sites can come under the model. Based on answers in parliament, there are 290 void deck centres for non profit and 176 for private operators in void deck and JTC buildings, and another 52 in government buildings. That’s 518 centres, roughly 52.4% of all child care in Singapore. With 200 more centres to be built mostly in government controlled spaces, the share of sites under government‘s control will rise.

Old schools, disused community centres and other SLA spaces can be purpose-built by the government into mega child care facilities, even housing different operators under one roof. Child care generally should be within 2-3 km of workplaces or homes. Many small void decks in new flats are not ideal for child care, limiting options in new towns. We can have mega child care sites as long as we ensure there is easy access by parents, with roads and parking well planned.

We can utilise unused land parcels next to primary schools. There are small plots around some primary schools which are not big enough for meaningful commercial projects. We can tap on infrastructure of the primary schools to add new preschool facilities. This will make use of unutilised space, save on infrastructure costs and cultivate exchange between preschool and primary school.

The government can negotiate as main tenant with large private landlords for sites as a bloc to supplement their bank of child care sites. It can work with property developers who get additional Gross Floor Area when they set aside preschool space at cheap rents and let the government use the space for any type of operator. We should actively pursue all options to increase the state’s child care bank to cater to the mass market.

How do we allocate these centres? Rather than have more Anchor Operators, I have another suggestion.

The Anchor Operators concept has skewed the market. It is like giving a boxer super glooves and energy boosters while tying the hands of the competitor and asking them to fight each other. The stated objective for Anchor Operators was to “develop childcare operators that will set the benchmark for quality and affordable childcare services.”

It may have allowed Anchor Operators to achieve higher quality as they get resources, economy of scale, and certainty of their leases. Is it fair to expect other operators to keep pace? Other operators get little or no state funding. They hesitate to invest, worried if others will outbid them for their centres at each renewal, which will wipe out sunk investment. New HDB sites are so few compared to unannounced sites for Anchor Operators. Anchor Operators could lure their staff away with scholarships. Instead of encouraging other operators to step up, it cancause some to think short term and extract as much out of their investment while they can.

We can apply contestability. Contest clusters of sites openly based on concept rather than on rent. This was done before, when government building sites charged token rent and selection was on other factors such as quality and fees.

There is no need for a one-time selection of new Anchor Operators which will strengthen only a select few and weaken everyone else. Worst, it may become impossible for new operators to enter the market, killing off future innovation. We need active competition to raise standards and to continuously drive innovation.

Recurrent and other grants should apply to all qualifying participants as long as they meet strict selection criteria on fees and quality. There should be no differentiation between private and non profit operators. We already know what the current Anchor Operators can do with the support they had been given. Why have we been limiting ourselves to think only selected non profit players can bring cost down? Let’s open up and see how all others, including private operators can better that in terms of price and quality, if given similar support. I believe fair competition may even force current Anchor Operators to better their pricing, ultimately benefiting consumers.

New operators can surface from time to time. Small operators may band together into economic groups to better compete.

Contestability will drive diversity and quality. Operators cannot increase fees without approval. The government will regain control over the fee process to ensure affordability.

Government can better direct its key programmes. MCYS had found it hard to get private operators to go along with some of its programmes, such as SPARK. Last month, we were told only 115 preschools had attained SPARK accreditation, of which just 39 were private operators. This is way way below the target of 85% of all centres to be SPARK-tested by 2013, a figure established by Minister of State for Education, Mr Masagos in November 2010. We can allow only SPARK-accredited operators to contest these sites.

There may not even be a need for state-run preschools. The call for nationalisation was made by many frustrated with differing standards and high costs. We can improve quality even at the low cost segment by having a critical mass of centres available in this public-good model, and the state regulate to steer quality and pricing. It can designate some centres for the low income group by packaging centres for different market segments in each tender exercise.

While this proposal is in the context of child care, it can also be used for kindergartens.

In summary, I am calling for child care to be a public good with fair contestability of sites at managed rents for all types of operators, with tighter control of fees and quality by the state. This will benefit Singaporeans as fees will drop industry-wide while preserving diversity and driving up quality and innovation. I hope the government can carefully consider this proposal.

Pritam Cannot Take Criticism from Bloggers! Says Singapolitics.

  The Sketch Times - Lovers' quarrel!.

WP Pritam Singh is a great orator during rallies. He can say anything clever or stupid, rhetoric or reason, and people would cheer. But lately that spell has broken. Broken so much that WP lost confidence in him and Pritam is no more vice-chair of the WP media team in the recent CEC shake-up in that solid party. The first doubt in Pritam's media power was when Pritam was caught bluffing as his parliament speech was copied almost word for word from a blogger-friend without attribution. Or maybe he was really that anonymous blogger Ground Notes, but cannot admit he was that anonymous blogger, so there was no plagiarism really! LOL.

 Stir stir stir! But has valid points tho.

The second and latest doubt was when Pritam was caught being petty with Andrew Loh, the Public House guy who had tea and scones with the PM at the Istana. Over a Molly Meek article which was the background to the spat between Pritam and Andrew, Pritam was pissed with Andrew because Andrew didn't want to give WP some room.

"He leave us alone lah instead of criticising here there and everywhere", said Petty Pritam

With that comment, Pritam has made a fool of himself and WP again. Please, WP is not special and it deserves to get knocked about like the PAP. Also, Pritam is not bulletproof to criticisms. With that whiney complaint, he sounded so like the PAP. WTF. Loser!

Anyway, backtrack a bit. Molly Meek had said that those bloggers who invited to tea with PAP were co-opted. PAP's strategy to win back the internet space it has lost is to talk to bloggers like Mr Brown and win them over for propaganda, seduce them to the White Side. Fuck. Wait. Isn't that the strategy of all opposition parties anyway. Fuck. Wait. Isn't that the strategy of restaurants and other retailers who invite food and other bloggers for makan and events anyway to co-opt them for product endorsement? Grow fucking up. That is the way things are done in the social media lobbying, political or commercial. All parties do that, just that PAP is so late, 2 general elections late to be exact, in the competition.

Friend friend again after teh

In the end, Pritam and Andrew decided to set time and place tea with each other to settle the misunderstanding. Sounded like some ah beng settlement talk LOL but it turned out well in the end, not like that sad Downtown East murder when rival gangs met to settle. As after all, everyone is doing their different part to offer moderate views on what we want Singapore to be. A national conversation, but without the PAP!

BTW, you know right. ST's Singapolitics was the one that reported the spat between Pritam and Andrew. Nation-building naughty ST via its Singapolitics is trying to add a bit of excitement into what is going on in the social media.

Poh Lee Guan's Turn in Slimelight

This has been an exciting week of distractions from the rising COE prices, shrinking of Singapore's economy by 1.1% in 2nd quarter, a still bullish property market etc Alex Au, Ravi and now Poh Lee Guan are getting people's attention. We in the internet are better and more interested in bitching about politics, rather than arguing about policies affecting transport, housing, jobs etc. Why? Politics easier to complain than policies, and more interesting! LOL

The latest incident entertaining us in the internet is that WP finally sacked Poh Lee Guan. Ah Poh is the uncle in the recent By-E who wanted to run for Hougang and sabo WP by turning that Teochew ground into a 3-corner fight. Why did he do that? Why did people leave WP around that time too? The simple explanations are why do people leave any organisation or company? They can't get along as there is no advancement, and there is promise of advancement elsewhere instead. Is Ah Poh going to retire from politics as he knows he is deemed a traitor and disloyal to his party? The million dollar question is which party dares accept Ah Poh if he thinks he still wants to try his luck in the next election.

Workers' Party expels veteran member Poh Lee Guan

The Workers' Party (WP) has expelled veteran member Poh Lee Guan, after he put himself up as a candidate in the Hougang by-election in May.

In a letter sent to the 50-year-old last week, it told him that the party executive council did not find his explanation of his actions - given at a meeting on July 10 - acceptable and decided to expel him.

WP chief Low Thia Khiang confirmed the move to The Straits Times, saying that the decision was based on Article 22 of the WP's constitution. This provides for the expulsion or suspension of a member whose conduct is deemed to have gone against the party's aims, principles and welfare.

But Dr Poh maintains that he had the party's interests at heart, and stands by his explanation that he had submitted the paperwork to be a candidate just to act as a 'spare', in case something happened to WP candidate Png Eng Huat.

PAP is So Screwed

This By-E is quite horrible. All smears, little style, even less substance, hmm unless substance and style relates to how the PAP tries to undermine WP and, how the WP walked into PAP's traps the past few days.

Firstly, it stinks that the PAP is going on, and on, and on about alleged WP dishonesty over Ah Huat's NCMP jostling. There is nothing dishonest. If there is anything, he is a blur fuck to be caught in this distraction. Is there anything wrong that he is against the NCMP scheme? Does it mean he thinks lesser of Sylvia Lim who took up the NCMP post in 2006? No and no. I hope I don't sound like a prissy girl who presses her thighs close together on a first date.

The NCMP nonsense is just political fart. One should just pinch one's nose, frown and walk quickly away. It bears no real relevance to the Hougang By-E, albeit the Secret Squirrel leak by a disgruntled former or current CEC bloke was quite entertaining for a while. Political fart, unless one is a complete idiot more interested in such bullshit and smears than about covered walkways, LUP, selective intake of foreigners as talent and as scholars blablabla. Read Choo Zheng Xi's TOC article (finally, a TOC article worth reading after all the apologetic WP crap by the WP Internet army during this period). BTW, if one is interested in bullshit politics and rumours, just watch the coming Malaysian elections. Its an art up north ever since they brought in the mattress into court, almost like the smearing in US politics. Or if you can't wait that long for an idiot fix, just read Temasek Times and Temasek Review. Remember, remember, whether Ah Huat's was WP's first or last choice as a NCMP in 2011, whether Ah Huat supports or slams the NCMP system, it does not fucking mean shit except that it is PAP distraction in the style of Gomez in 2006.

Secondly, why did WP go there waiting to be pounced by the PAP. Why? Don't go there, don't bother. WP probably saw that it would be damned if they do, damned if they don't respond to the PAP. If they don't respond, the PAP hounds would yelp and bark that WP is trying to hide by being silent. If they do respond, then, they would be dancing to PAP's tune as PAP would nitpick WP's explanations, finding a strawman here and there.

OK maybe a response was expected as there are lots of dumb Singaporeans who think it is a big deal - the same dumb Singaporeans who think YSL or some PAP ministers fucking around has anything to do with their abilities in office, or think that Nicole Seah is much more than a shallow drama diva. Don't dignify the PAP with such a response by the Sec-Gen. Ok, maybe a response by the Chairman (chairperson, power to feministspeak!) someone high up but not that high. Just smile, move on and focus on whatever humdrum local or highbrow national policy debates you think Hougang voters like to hear. If WP has to resort to such explanations on why how what the WP NCMP selection process is about and blur fuck Ah Huat talking about ballot this and ballot that, it is just wasting speech air time. LTK wasted his Tuesday rally time on this NCMP bullshit. Many, me included, know too well the PAP, jealous of WP's popularity and support in Hougang, is just trying to derail WP's already less-than-smooth rallying so far.

I pity Desmond. Not only is he going to lose, his probably genuine claims of a clean fight is being rubbished as his PAP comrades are dirtying the contest for him - using distraction and insinuations. After TCH moves on come 28 May Monday, Desmond is stuck there in Hougang as he promised to and the residents would blame him for the smears his party carried out in his name.

Well, I was initially confident of Desmond's defeat but surprisingly getting 45-40% of the votes. However, with some PAP members thinking it worthwhile to bring up YSL and now hang the NCMP mess around Ah Huat's neck, the rebel scum at Hougang would again be defiant and vote in spite and resistance in favour of Ah Huat. Nevertheless, there is one day more and the last chance for redemption by the PAP, and for spurting ahead instead of losing ground by the WP before cooling off day.

Poor Silly Choo, Can Change Carrots Can?

Sad silly Desmond Choo, still talking about promises to upgrade Hougang. The very fact that he keeps talking about Hougang needing upgrading means that Hougang has been neglected for upgrading for a very long time already! Self-pwn!

Just yesterday the WP keep parroting the same boring rallying cry that Hougang is not for sale and Hougang residents cannot be bought. Yes, since the more PAP threatenedHougang, the more Hougang resisted and voted for WP instead. They would even vote for Ah Huat, HUAT AH, who does not seem like a strong performer. If he goes to parliament, he sure gets eaten alive as he is not witty like Low Thia Khiang, brains like Sylvia Lim or Chen Show Mao, or articulate like Pritam Singh. But he represents WP and if WP picked him, that means he is OK? OK.

Choo still has not realised that he needs to change tactics. Or maybe he has but people like PM or other old timers like that Rear Admiral told him to play tough, not to act soft like the porridge he is giving out, apparently the Hokkien porridge and not the Teochew muei according to the WP Internet Brigade.

Choo, Choo, tsk tsk, please don't always talk about upgrading and hard concrete and metal facilities for Hougang. It is the soft services that Hougang people can be bought over. Free legal clinic is actually an excellent idea as a start. Free TCM. Free tuition for underprivileged children, although other loyal PAP wards would rightly complain that rebel Hougang got these goodies first instead of them! These are PAP services, not HDB so these types of pork-barrel politics are easier to package and sell. Did you and your PAP grassroots listen to the people when you do your market walks or house visits? Probably not. The PAP just talks, hears but does not discuss, listen.

Choo to lobby for more facilities in Hougang
Published on May 20, 2012

The lack of covered linkways and drop-off points is a source of major inconvenience to Hougang residents and PAP candidate Desmond Choo intends to 'fight very hard' to secure these facilities for them.

Mr Choo, 34, said residents' feedback on the lack of such facilities struck a chord with him.

'If you walk the ground, you will find that a lot of residents are hampered by the fact that there are no linkways, no sheltered drop-off points, really insufficient coverage, causing inconvenience not only to the elderly but young families with kids. 'Try pushing a pram and carrying an umbrella at the same time. It is not easy,' he said.

Mr Choo is also lobbying for a new market to be built in Hougang Avenue 3, to replace the one torn down five years ago. On Saturday, he said he was waiting to hear from the Ministry of National Development on the matter.

The Boring By-Election is (Finally) Here

While M Ravi and his woman puppet or proxy waiting for court to give expert legal advice on when a by-election for Hougang SMC is to be held according to the constitution, the government went ahead earlier to announce a by-election on 26 May. What would lawyer M Ravi and cleaner Vellama say proudly while eating prata supper to celebrate? They were the ones who pressured the PAP to call for a by-election! Yawn. Yeah, right, you win. Like a boss.

Is it a two-corner fight in the Teochew kampung? PAP Desmond Choo from PAP vs whoever WP wants to send into the ring? SDP and NSP have chickened out of this round. SDP said already they would not play but NSP wanted to hint earlier that they might. SPP and SDA might join in still, but they are the weakest. SPP could have stood a good chance as the 3rd party if not for the recent resignations of its stronger members. Hougang is seen as WP territory and nobody from another opposition party dares to go in and get a bad reputation from Singaporeans. However, in the name of democracy, why should WP hog, and PAP try to hog Hougang? Maybe the residents there want to choose someone else? From the PE, we voters can already get the sense that politics is more real and more representative if as many candidates as possible put their bets on the table.

Who else dares to go in if the other parties dare not? The independents might be the ones as they don't need to kowtow to a party secretary-general. However, who could it be. Tan Kian Lian was BBQed in the last PE and learnt his lesson. Andrew Kuan has been a no show for some time. Tan Cheng Bock also seemed quiet since August last year after his disappointing defeat. Only Tan Jee Say might be deluded enough to try it as he was so egoistically optimistic about his chances in 2011 and then became shocked over his defeat. He already set up shop in high rental Dhoby Ghaut - where he got his money from and why he must open up his political office in an elitist central area instead of a heartland is a mystery.

So one unknown is whether independents want to jump inside the pool. The other unknown is how big PAP's defeat would be.  Of course WP would win as this is a WP heartland being contested. Desmond Choo might be good, can speak better Teochew and prepare the best oh-ni to win over the Hougang uncles and aunties, but he would never be good enough for Hougang because he is White, and Hougang since 1991 likes light Blue. In May 2011, horny WP YSL gathered 64.8% and PAP snatched only 35.2%. If PAP gets more than 35.2% this time, it is a WP victory, but also symbolically, a PAP victory.

One Year After GE 2011, So What?

If only we can throw all the parliamentarians into the bin!

Last year, the opposition finally won a GRC since the GRC ploy was conceived in 1988. Since then, we placed lots of hope on the WP really shoving the PAP aside in parliament. There was some shoving, but more like the PAP shoving the new WP MPs and NCMPs around. There were accusations of plagiarism (Pritam Singh and Chen Show Mao) and unsubstantiated facts in speeches (Gerald Giam). PAP bullies! - The WP crowd would shout.However, that's life in politics, that's life in parliament. WP to their credit, took it standing up and did not cry like pussies. The experienced WP members Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim didn't face the problems their newer guys did. The worst WP fracas was actually outside parliament. Hougang slipped into a by-election mode because its horny new MP Yaw screwed around and got kicked out of WP and therefore lost his MP seat. WTF. Should we thank him for a by-election and another public holiday? Yes, unless you are a Hougang resident as it is just a waste of your time. Anyway, the new WP cadres in parliament are just not as smart as we hoped they are and I bet Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim are smacking their fellow MPs and NCMPs to shape them up to avoid another self-pwn that the PAP would take advantage of. One year on, WP still has promise but it is not up there yet. If they keep this shoddy performance up, they might lose their GRC in the next round.

The PAP are just as bad as usual. Vikram Nair is the curly haired bad boy and he can sure bite, making parliament interesting at the very least. His infamous comment that Chen Show Mao's welfare and empowerment of the needy was like a Nigerian scam promised to make parliament more exciting and biting.  However, the thin-skinned folks in the internet want PAP to play nice, especially with specky nice guy Chen Show Mao. Frankly I want to see Pritam Singh and Vikram Nair go head to head. Nothing like seeing stereotypical eloquent Indians fencing with each other and accusing each other of political swindling and scams. Politics without the bitching rhetoric is just boring! One year on, the PAP still prefers to belittle and intimidate whenever they can. Sure, they have not sued anyone yet for defamation, but that bullying style does not sit well with the pussy Singaporean crowd who think that politics is made up of nice sincere smiles and cute bunnies with floppy years. Bring on the knuckledusters! - I can hear old Harry whispering and lifting feebly his two fists into the air, boxing style.

One year after the GE and promise of good times ahead, the PAP is still doing a shit job of most things. The optimistic exception for the moment is housing as Khaw Boon Wan is cranking up supply with new flats etc and cooling demand with ABSD. Right on top of my complaint list, the MRT system is literally falling apart, and PAP is going to give bus companies a jab to improve the public transport system. I don't know whether the jab is in the arm is to boost the bus companies or a jab into the eyes of taxpayers.

That is the biggest fuckshitbrains PAP policy in the past 12 months. Transport is the main pain in the ass and don't get me foaming at mouth about COE yet, not foreigners, not healthcare with means testing, not the cost of new flats. The government is still not deregulating public transport and allowing the re-entry of small private (pirate-like) bus companies to compete and complement the existing MRT and bus systems. Instead, they want to use taxpayers money and hand it over to shareholders of SMRT and SBS, no doubt some of them are retail investors like some of us but so what it just does not make sense. IMHO, now that is the ultimate PAP-fuck-you-you-voted-for-us salute. They want to show they are doing something, but in the end it still stinks because they are doing a shitty job of it.

The Cleaner, the court...

The court's reaction is unexpected. Instead of announcing their ruling now and throwing it out, they want to delay now and then throw it out later. Why the cleaner bother also I don't know. Maybe because she didn't read the debate on the by-election and that the constitution did not cater for a expiry date on when a by-election should be held.

Why waste time go and apply for the court to force a by-election? She think with her court application, backed by her infamous lawyer Ravi, would make a difference? All the more with Ravi as her lawyer, the court is unlikely to budge. Tragic that Ravi, her lawyer, would not understand that nowhere in Article 49 of our Constitution, there is a provision of a time frame for a by-election.


"Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force."

Court reserves judgment on Hougang by-election hearing
By Amir/Claire Huang | Posted: 30 March 2012 2050 hrs

SINGAPORE: The High Court reserved judgement on an application by a Hougang resident for a by-election in the single-seat constituency, after lawyers presented their arguments in chambers on Friday.

Madam Vellama Marie Muthu, a 42-year-old part-time cleaner, filed an application on March 2 for the Prime Minister to call a by-election within three months.

Lawyers from the Attorney-General's Chambers argued that the application was "wholly misconceived" and "unarguable in law and fact".

They added that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had "stated unequivocally" in Parliament on March 9 that he intended to call a by-election but had not decided on the timing yet.

A judgement will be delivered at a later date.

The Hougang constituency was left without a Member of Parliament (MP) after Mr Yaw Shin Leong was expelled by his Workers' Party, following reports of his personal indiscretions.

WP Chen Show Mao Bruised and Battered, Not in Kansas Anymore

Mr Mao Mr Chen, You're Not in Kansas Anymore!

WP Chen Show Mao was the star catch in last year's GE rallies, almost like Sylvia Lim was the star in the 2006 GE. He swooped in from somewhere, rapidly built up a cult personality around himself with his astounding credentials that would fit jolly well among the candidates in white, except that his colours were blue. Chen Show Mao could do no wrong it seemed. His GE rally speeches were above-average but neither awesome nor awful, not that witty as Low Thia Khiang, not that scarily rousing like facist-seeming Pritam Singh.

Recently, his speeches and his credibility have suffered an even greater dip as he was accused of plagiarism. Sharp guys who probably agreed with the former Davis Polk & Wardwell  corporate raider, pointed out that Chen Show Mao's politicised ideas on government spending and economics were borrowed or stolen from this other guy, Donald Low, point by point, without attribution and credit given to the source. Those against the WP manned the guns and started firing at Mr Chen. WP defenders also jumped into their trenches and shelled back. Frankly, no big crap that Mr Chen copy/paste but some attribution was necessary since he is a big blue target for WP's critics. He should be street smart enough to avoid such ambushes. Maybe he is just not street smart as Low Thia Khiang, that's why.

The hypocrisy of those blindly propping Chen Show Mao up is laughable and predictable. Sometimes you wonder where the anti-PAP or anti-WP idiots come from. So much for our education system. If it was Vikram Nair that borrowed or stole ideas from Donald Low, you bet these same fellows defending the WP MP would hammer Nair senseless. Donald Low might do an 180 turn and instead of saying it is ok now, might insinuate ("insinuate" because if say outright he would get sued by PAP until no pants even) intellectual property piracy, the anti-PAP rabble would accuse the Sembawang PAP MP of zero originality at best and a thief at worst. Such is life!

It is not one year since the 2011 GE and already the internet rabble is excited that they can take shots at WP as well as the PAP. Mon-Tue-Wed-Thu, scream at PAP. Fri-Sat, shout at WP. Sun-rabble sabbath and rest day.

Politics is becoming more fascinating as people are beginning to realise that all parties in parliament are fair game. The fun and responsibilities of a cynical populace. The burden of the enlightened electorate! The PAP would get most of the slime since they control most of the seats in parliament, but some shit is also proportionately reserved just for WP as they are not the small underdogs that they used to be anymore. The bigger they grow, the more shit they would get. Justly so.

Update
Pritam Singh also accused of plagiarism since his parliament speech was based on a blogger's article and there was no attribution. Facepalm.