Jason Lee/

For almost 12 years, I have never been a fan of outgoing President S R Nathan.

In view of the legacy left by the late President Ong Teng Cheong, is inevitable that comparisons between Mr Ong and his successor(s) would be made.

In this regard, Mr Nathan’s actions, or “inactions”, over the years further alienated me from him.

I often ask: What exactly did he do apart from making overseas state visits and gracing events in Singapore?

And when I read in January 2009 that the Finance Minister had submitted a formal proposal to the President for permission to dip into the reserves in the midst of the financial crisis just two days before Budget Day, my disappointment grew further.

Was the Government so certain that the President would agree to their request, I asked? If that was the case, was it because the President had been perceived as a Government-friendly custodian of the reserves, I had wondered?

Since then, I had been looking forward to the next Presidential Election in August 2011. I was optimistic that the next President of Singapore would be someone I know we can depend on to “safeguard” our interests; someone who would put national interests above self-interest or that of the ruling party of the day.

Almost 30 months on, my sentiments have changed and how I wish Mr Nathan would continue for a third term.

For one, I am now convinced that this is a President who cares for his fellow Singaporeans. It is not something new but it took me almost 12 years to “realise” that this is a President who loves to mingle with fellow Singaporeans whether in public or at private events. This is a President who, despite his age, still relishes the opportunities to meet-and-greet ordinary folks. How many of our current Ministers feel the same way?

More importantly, my “desire” to see Mr Nathan serve a third term stems from my personal belief that none of the six presidential hopefuls would perform the role any better.

One presidential hopeful has been saying that his experience and expertise would add value to the nation if he is elected as President, especially since he now sees “dark clouds on the horizon”. If that is the case, shouldn’t he be serving in Cabinet? Wouldn’t that add more value to the nation as it seeks to ride out the tough times ahead? Moreover, what exactly did Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong say to this presidential hopeful when he told the former of his intention to run in the Presidential Election in early June? Did PM Lee endorse his bid, whether explicitly or implicitly?

Another presidential hopeful has been highlighting past cases/events to illustrate his independence from the Government. Most Singaporeans who are eligible to cast their vote on August 27 would already have known of his independent streak, and hence, would it not be better for this hopeful to spell out his exact plans going forward if elected as President? (Of course, he might argue that there is no reason to do so since he has yet to be certified fit to run in the election.) Moreover, this hopeful was quoted as saying that he decided to run in the Presidential Election after sensing much anger during the rallies in the lead up to May 7 General Elections. Personally, I would think that it should not require someone with the grassroots experience and contacts to realise the sense of ground resentment only after attending the political rallies.

A third high-profile potential candidate has been championing himself as the “Voice of the People”. Having represented many ordinary folks during the mini-bonds saga, that might indeed be the case. Surprisingly though, this candidate actually wrote on his blog a few weeks ago: “Many people are writing to me for assistance on their insurance and other personal problems, more so than previously. I am not able to find the time to assist them now, as I have many things to attend to for the Presidential Election. I hope that they can approach me after the election, when I can find more time.” Hmm, I just wonder whether he will be able to spare the time to respond to these online requests for assistance/advice after the election if he should be elected?

Another possible candidate “graciously” backed out of the recent General Elections so as to avoid a three-cornered fight. One cannot help but wonder whether he would similarly do so should the PEC grant three or more hopefuls the Certificate of Eligibility next week?

Come August 27, I want to vote for a man whom I believe would always place the nation’s interests above all else; someone who is pro-people at all times, and would never demonstrate deference or blind loyalty to any individual or party except to the people of Singapore.

True, we may have more choices this time round, but that certainly does not make my “job” as a voter any easier. If only the incumbent President had decided to seek another term, I would not be in such a dilemma.

Today, I am convinced that President Nathan has served Singapore to the best of his abilities, and I sincerely thank him for his contributions to this nation.

I just hope and pray that Singapore’s next President will continue the legacies of the late President Ong and President Nathan. Whoever that may be, I know it’s unlikely I’ll be among those who will vote for him on August 27. It’s more likely that I’ll spoil the vote. What a shame – especially since I genuinely believe in the significance of the EP scheme.


Jason is a former journalist with a mainstream media.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

会员欲提存款付女儿学费遭拒 公积金局为解答投诉疲于奔命

最近中央公积金局有点忙,忙着回答在网络上被网民们疯传的各种提问。 先是有脸书用户Desmond Chua于21日在脸书申诉,会员退休金户口(Retirement Account)中一半的资金被转入公积金终身计划(CPF Life Plan)中,且在过世后无法享有利息,非常不公平。 再来,是民众林国良(译音)投诉无法提1万5000元公积金存款,为女儿还大专学费。 Desmond Chua说,55岁后,公积金局将他账户中的7万7500元转入公积金终身入息标准计划(CPF LIFE Standard Plan)中,留下另外七万余元在他的退休户口。…

Ministerial Salaries – can economics explain?

~ by Dr Ivan Png ~ Since 1994, when they were first…

【冠状病毒19】新增六例入境病例 包括三及七岁印度女童

根据卫生部文告,新增六例入境病例,分别从印度、阿联酋、中国和越南抵境。 两名新加坡人在8月7日和8日,从印度和阿拉伯联合酋长国返回我国。 本月10日,持家属准证的三岁和七岁女童,从印度抵达新加坡。 本月7日,一名工作准证持有者从中国抵新;另一名学生证持有者,从越南抵境。 这六例入境病例都没出现症状,入境后遵守居家通知也接受冠病检测。 社区病例方面,两名印度籍工作证持有者,在8月19日确诊,一人与早前病例有关联。 本地累计确诊已增至5万6031例。尚有87人仍在住院,转入社区设施的多达3107人。 此外有再有277人出院或离开社区隔离设施,累计康复人数增至5万2810个。本地累计死亡病例维持27例。  

旧楼有价? 99年屋契如“计时炸弹” 买房养老还行得通吗? 

过去,我们的长辈汲汲营营,将血汗钱一点一滴存入公积金和银行,刻苦耐劳只为实现有个家的梦。房子,就是一生打拼下来最大的资产,也是家庭积蓄最佳的增值投资。 政府在建国初期即推行政府组屋计划,实现全民“居者有其屋”,我国房屋政策也成为他国模范。房子具有增值效果,为了补偿公积金的低派息利率,计划好近退休时脱售手上组屋,再购置另一规模较小组屋,实现体面退休生活。 不久前,国家发展部长黄循财就表明,组屋的屋契是99年,已考量可共两代人居住。新国土地有限,没有更多土地可再循环使用,政府也得为下一代着想,申请转换永久地契并不可行。 针对买家高价购买屋契寿命较短的组屋,满怀希望有朝一日换选重建,黄部长今年三月在该部博客提醒,屋契到期的政府组屋价值归零,必须归还政府。自1995年至今,只有4巴仙能获选加入选择性整体重建计划(SERS)。 此言一出,房产市场立时安静许多。部长的言论也点醒许多梦中人:他们集一生资产买下的组屋,很难再继承给第二代以后,越临近屋契到期,房屋贬值越大,最终需归还给建屋发展局,作其他的发展用途。虽说“居者有其屋”,但是土地还是国家的,房子不可能一代传一代。 “买房不仅要乘早,卖房也要乘早”。这些现实,都与政府一直鼓吹房屋会增值的说法,大相径庭。 然而,黄部长在5月17日的国会辩论中,仍坚称旧楼有价:“在过去12个月,位于成熟地段的旧式4房组屋、少过60年屋契,以30万新元出售。这价格相信以足以购买一间小型退休房楼和一些退休金。” 他补充,也有卖主以25万卖出67年屋龄、位于马西岭的三房组屋,再买下价值10万元的30年屋契工作室公寓,还有余钱存于退休年金。 另一方面,建屋发展局局长蔡君炫博士,也坚持99年屋契足以应付两代人要求,屋契到期即归还政府,才能根据未来的需求重新规划土地。她说,政府相对提供国人多个屋契套现措施,套现渠道包括出租房间、加入建屋局屋契回购计划,以及“大屋换小屋”,购买屋契较短的小型单位,利用剩余售屋所得加入终身入息计划,获取终身养老金。 各种因素下  未来买房成本更高昂 然而,纵观土地价值、建筑材料和基本建设(如轻快铁)等因素,都会影响未来房地产价格,很多公民担忧,组屋不能继承给子孙,新生代面对的房产市场早已水涨船高,他们会面对更沉重的房贷,这还不包括通货膨胀和生活成本压力。…