~ By David L K See ~

(1)  How the Hong Kong government protected the interests of its own citizens

1.1  "HK overturns landmark ruling on foreign maids"  (My Paper, 29 Mar 2012, page A2)

A landmark lower-court ruling that would have let foreign maids gain permanent residency in Hong Kong was overturned on appeal yesterday (by a three-member panel of High Court judges). Hong Kong is home to nearly 300,000 maids from mainly South-East Asian countries. Hong Kongers have raised fears that the case would result in a massive influx of maids' family members into Hong Kong.

[ NOTE:  This news report also gave a detailed breakdown of the actual numbers of various nationalities living in HK as shown above]

1.2  "HK plans locals-only housing to tame property prices"  (TODAY, 29 Mar 2012)

Mr Leung Chun-ying, leader-elect of Hong Kong yesterday said his government would lauch a pilot project to build middle-class housing for residents only, hoping to cool soaring property prices that have sparked a backlash against unlimited sales to overseas buyers.

(2)  How the  less-than-smart PAP government damaged the long-term future of
Singapore (The Nation) and Singaporeans (The People)

[NOTE: Several years ago, Singapore had already overtaken Hong Kong as the second most densely-populated place on Planet Earth.]

2.1  Over the past five years, driven by its misguided policy of  "GDP growth at all costs" [more GDP growth = more GDP bonus for its million-dollar ministers],  the  PAP government has "opened the floodgates" and "bent backwards with overboard incentives" to welcome foreigners into Singapore.

In the process, it has exposed its incompetence at anticipating and addressing the following consequences:

(i) physical land constraints as an already crowded tiny island

(ii) over-crowded public transport system (jam-packed buses and trains; frequent MRT breakdowns)

(iii) acute competition for jobs (affecting both our less-educated job-seekers and even PMETs)

(iv) acute competition for places and scholarships at schools and universities.

(v) competition for homes – non-citizens allowed to buy (and speculate) HDB resale flats (for Permanent Residents) and private property (for Foreigners) leading to sky-rocketing home prices to the detriment of genuine young Singaporean home-buyers.

2.2  In short, the PAP government has shown "utter disrespect for" and has "let down" Singapore Voters by:

(a) dishing out "overboard incentives" (e.g. taxpayer-funded scholarships) and issuing citizenship papers to PRs and Foreigners too cheaply

(b) having the audacity to lecture Singaporeans on serving National Service "with commitment" and to "die defending Singapore if necessary" while the sons of PRs and Foreigners largely being able to avoid the committment

(c) adding insult to injury in its secretive refusal to "come clean" on (i.e. openly disclose) the actual numbers and breakdown of the nationalities of all our non-citizens – do Singapore Citizens (as hosts) not have the right to know the actual numbers of PRs and Foreigners living here as their guests?

(d)  effectively sending Singapore Citizens these messages (as netizens aptly put it):
"YOU DIE, YOUR BUSINESS" and "JOBS FOR FOREIGNERS, NS FOR SINGAPOREANS"

2.3  The Writing is on the Wall though with a 'Super-Tsunami' wave of deep-seated and pent-up public anger which has resulted in voters demonstrating their lack of faith at the polls.

2011 General Elections – PAP vote share dropped to a pathetic 60%, the lowest since independence!

2011 Presidential Elections – a whopping 65% of voters did not vote for the PAP-nominated candidate!

2.4  Screaming headlines in the mainstream media such as the ones seen this morning's (5 Apr 2012) edition of TODAY –  "Speak out but work together, says PM" & "PAP has to engage a lot more, says Tharman".

But disgusted and disillusioned Singapore Voters say, Talk Is Cheap. Politicians must walk the talk in order to earn the respect, trust and votes of the People. I wonder if the PAP government would care to provide its sincere and honest response to this simple fact: "Why bother to speak up when Singaporeans risk receiving 'lawyer's letters' if they say something that the PAP million-dollar ministers don't like to hear?"


The writer is a 64-year-old tertiary-educated Singapore Citizen who has completed full-time National Service

Headline photo courtesy of TimeOut Singapore

___________________

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

Deconstructing the arguments of yet another teenage Singaporean elitist

By Visakan Veerasamy It’s very interesting to me whenever a teenager thinks…

海豚疑压力过大撞墙 圣淘沙名胜世界海洋馆称不知情

圣淘沙名胜世界海洋馆海豚疑压力过大撞墙,圣淘沙名胜世界表示对海豚撞墙事件不知情。 日前,国际反鲸豚表演和圈养组织Empty the Tanks于12月1日上传一段视频,视频内显示海豚不断用头部撞向水池的墙上,被指可能是压力过大出现自残行为。 Empty The  Tanks 解释,该视频是由网友发给他们,海豚用头部用力的撞向墙边九次之多,行为异乎寻常。视频已获得至少2000次转发,以及1000多次的留言,引起了网民的关注。 《海峡时报》报道,国家公园管理局动物与兽医事务组负责人指出,动物与兽医事务组向来对企业的资格采取严格的标准,为保动物的健康与福利,而且周四到场观察海豚的状况与设施,并没有发现任何异常。 设在美国的Empty the Tanks创始人瑞秋(Rachel…

人力部冀服务业减少依赖客工,惟网民质问如何处理外籍PMET专才

“有一天我们会看到新加坡服务业的外籍客工人数减少。” 人力部长杨莉明透露,这是新加坡要减少对该领域过度依赖客工的主要原因。 她在参与2019年预算案辩论,针对削减服务业客工配额时说到,“这不是一个轻易做出的决定。我们不得不多次考虑这个决定”。 客工比率顶限(Dependency Ratio Ceiling,简称DRC),指的是公司员工总数和可聘请客工人数限额,之间的比例。服务业客工比率顶限将会分两个阶段进行削减,即目前减至40巴仙到2021年的35巴仙。 她补充说,S准证的客工比率顶限也将从现在的15巴仙减至2021年的10巴仙。 不能确保客工来源不断 有鉴于其他东南亚国家中产阶级也在不断增长,如果客工在其他国家也能领到相近的薪资,他们可能会不愿到我国的服务业打工。 杨莉明指出,“我们必须问自己这个问题:‘我们是否可以无限期地获得外国员工?’而这个答案如果是‘不’,那么我们最好三思,然后调整我们的政策。” 最重要的是,降低客工比率顶限的正面影响,将逐步引领可持续性的经商模式、和重新培养本地人,以适应日益数字化的未来挑战。 政府也将通过扩大配套范围和新措施,以协助相关企业达到这个目标等,而财政部长宣布总值10亿新元的一系列措施,以协助当地公司转型。…

敦马:柔大臣未经许可巡海 惟狮城反应“未免过激”

马来西亚首相马哈迪坦言,柔佛大臣奥斯曼在本月九日,未经联邦政府许可下自行出海巡视。但他认为我国对柔大臣的反应“未免过激”,派出战舰“驱逐”柔大臣是不必要的。 敦马是在上周五受邀到英国牛津大学辩论社致词。在问答环节,他遭我国留学生达伦莫汉(Darrion Mohan)质问,对新马海事争议的立场,对于擅自出海巡视“挑衅”的柔大臣,马国会对他采取什么行动。 对此,敦马承认,柔大臣巡海并没有得到联邦政府“祝福”,“他以为那是柔佛水域,才去(巡视),但是(新加坡)对此事的反应未免太过严重,好像要打仗了一样,他只不过登上了公海的船。” 对此莫汉驳斥,那不是中立的公海水域,甚至在1979年马国绘制的地图也不被认可,过去马国也没有宣示主权,直到去年柔佛港口突然扩大界限,单方面宣布为马国水域。 敦马称争议水域也不属新加坡 敦马立即回应,上述水域也不是新加坡的水域,那是国际水域。柔大臣可以进入公海,不至于被新加坡派战舰驱赶。 对此莫汉表示“原则上不同意”,但基于仍有其他提问者,他把提问机会交给其他听众。 以下为敦马拜访牛津大学辩论社交流的完整视频。民众可快转到26:05分钟,聆听我国留学生和敦马约七分钟的精彩问答环节: 莫汉也质问敦马是否有意回到过去的“对抗性外交政策”。 对此,敦马以新马水供课题为例,指出新加坡以每1000加仑3仙的价格向马国买水,却以50仙的价格將净化后的水,卖回柔佛,“对马国极不公平,也不合理。” “从1962年到现在,难道你敢说(百物)价格完全不变吗?”…