I refer to the reply from the Minister for National Development’s Press Secretary on Tuesday entitled: “Ministry: MP Low wrong on lift upgrading”. I am responding to it as Mr Low Thia Khiang is currently out of town.

MND states that HDB’s letter published last Friday “should be read in conjunction with” the Minister’s earlier explanations to the media. This impliedly acknowledges that the reason given by HDB to Mr Muhd Yusuf Osman, who had pointedly asked why protocol seemed to be ignored when HDB worked with the unelected candidates in opposition wards to announce LUP plans rather than with the elected MPs, does not stand up to scrutiny.

It is not disputed that the LUP is a government programme. After all, it is to rectify a design flaw in public housing which does not cater for an ageing society. Given this imperative, the public interest should trump politics.

Mr Low’s letter was not about wanting credit for the programme. He has stated that he is prepared to work with the government’s appointees for the benefit of his constituents, and indeed has met the grassroots advisor several times over many months to give input on the LUP plans for Hougang.

It was HDB’s unjustifiable answer to Mr Yusuf – that the grassroots advisor was more appropriate than the MP to announce the LUP plans because he was able to gather residents’ input and marshal support for the plans – which compelled Mr Low’s response. HDB should have just given the real reason in its letter and not beat around the bush.

MND’s letter goes further to state that the LUP is funded from budget surpluses which Opposition MPs are not responsible for generating. However, the budget surpluses are hardly the effort of the government alone, as they include significant contributions from the public through taxes, levies and stamp fees, which the government simply reaps.

Finally, MND also appears to interpret the General Elections as an event where the only outcome which matters is who forms the government. This shows the respect the government has for the people’s choice of Member of Parliament, who is vested with the Constitutional mandate to represent the constituency.

SYLVIA LIM (Ms)
CHAIRMAN,
WORKERS’ PARTY

I refer to the HDB’s reply to Mr Muhammad Yusuf Osman’s letter on the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP ) in opposition wards published today, titled “Why grassroots advisers announce lift upgrading”.

The HDB deems it appropriate for the grassroots advisor to announce the LUP because “the adviser gathers input from residents, thereby ensuring that the programme’s plans meet residents’ needs”. The HDB further states that the adviser can propose changes based on residents’ feedback, and seek residents’ support.

On what basis does the HDB assume that the elected Member of Parliament, who has the support of the electorate in the constituency, is unable to do the same thing and is therefore not appropriate to play the same role as the adviser?

The HDB also said that the Town Councils have an in-depth knowledge of the schedule and status of the works in the estate and can co-ordinate other projects in the estate to minimize inconvenience to residents. Why is it, then, that elected opposition members, who are also chairmen of the Town Councils, are deemed less appropriate to announce and to manage the LUP?

Moreover, Town Councils are required to co-pay for the LUP whereas grassroots organizations are not. Why is the chairman of Town Council, the elected MP statutorily responsible for the management of the Town and who must decide to pay for the LUP, deemed to be inappropriate to play a leading role either in announcing the program or in the working committee?

In the concluding paragraph, HDB stated that they understood the advisers are ”working closely with the town council chairmen, that is, the respective Members of Parliament….” In other words, the role of the elected opposition Member of Parliament in this process is relegated to one which is administrative in nature, perhaps merely to authorize payment for the LUP from the Town Council funds to the HDB.

This is the manifestation of the government’s attitude towards elected opposition Members of Parliament, which is, that they are not representative of the constituency but the grassroots advisers are, despite the fact that the grassroots advisers, who were candidates of the People’s Action Party (PAP), were rejected by the voters at elections at Potong Pasir and Hougang.

I understand the LUP is essentially the government’s program although chairmen of opposition Town Councils have to agree to co-fund the program. I suppose the ruling party, the PAP, would want their potential candidates in the next election to claim credit for the LUP, although the money does not come from either the PAP or the grassroots organization. This is playing politics.

I am open and prepared to work with anyone from the government or its appointees for the benefit of my constituents. It does not matter what role I play or that I am seen to be cooperative with the government, so long as the will of the people at the election which returned me as their representative to Parliament is respected.

I feel compelled to respond to this issue because the justification given by the HDB for the role of advisers in opposition wards in LUP touches on the fundamental issue of respecting the will of the people expressed at elections. The elected representative in opposition wards in this instance is reduced to performing a municipal function as chairmen of Town Councils. This speaks so much of the respect of the ruling party for the will of the people expressed at General Elections and how mature we are as a democracy.

Low Thia Khiang

Member of Parliament for Hougang

9 October 2009

Webmaster’s note: This is the full version of the letter appearing in the Straits Times Forum on 10 Oct 2009.

The Workers’ Party unequivocally condemns the fresh charges pressed by the Myanmar military regime against Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

The Workers’ Party urges ASEAN, including the Singapore government to apply group pressure and influence on the Myanmar military regime to stop political harassment of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and to free all of its political detainees.

The Workers’ Party further urges the pursuit of a peaceful and truly democratic process, to determine the collective will of the Myanmar people in their choice of government and the determination of their future.

Yaw Shin Leong
Organising Secretary
The Workers’ Party

The Workers’ Party strongly condemns the vicious and senseless act of terrorism in Mumbai, India, which claimed the lives of at least 195 people including 28-year old Singaporean lawyer, Ms Lo Hwei Yen.

We would like to convey our sincere condolences to the families of Ms Lo Hwei Yen and the innocent victims of the attacks.

Lee Li Lian
Deputy Treasurer, The Workers’ Party 

2008-12-04: Webmaster’s note – death toll has been revised to 188 (Straits Times: Gunmen used code names) 

I note that some investors of the structured deposit linked to Lehman Brothers are contemplating a class action suit against the financial institutions (FIs) concerned, despite MAS’ advice to lodge their complaints with the individual FIs, and then with the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre or Fidrec which will now hear cases involving $50,000 or more. I am concerned that such investors may end up paying huge legal costs. In my view, seeking legal redress should only be resorted to if investors are unhappy with the ruling by Fidrec.

Many of these investors are uncertain and lack confidence in what the FIs will do with their complaints and whether they will be treated fairly, as inherently the FIs would also be concerned to protect their own interest.

I urge the MAS to issue a detailed standard guideline on how the individual FIs should handle the complaints and publish the process involved i.e. how the complaints will be classified, what possible outcomes investors can expect, as well as the procedure for further recourse to Fidrec should they disagree with the decision of the FIs.

MAS should also require the FIs and Fidrec to set a time frame for handling such cases before them, so that affected investors have some certainty to allay their anxieties and to decide at which point of time they should consider other options.

Low Thia Khiang
MP for Hougang
22 October 2008

The Workers’ Party is greatly saddened to hear of the passing of our immediate past Secretary-General, Mr Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, early this morning. 

Mr Jeyaretnam’s commitment and contributions to public service are well-known.  

After leaving the Subordinate Court judiciary as District Judge and First Magistrate, he went into private law practice, where he represented many clients of limited means, particularly in cases of public interest.

In 1971 Mr Jeyaretnam rejuvenated the Workers’ Party by becoming its Secretary-General. He then led the Party to contest successive General Elections since 1972. In the 1981 Anson By-Election, his 6th electoral contest, the voters elected him as the sole opposition Member of Parliament, rupturing the ruling party’s total control of Parliament since Independence. He was re-elected in the 1984 General Election with an increased majority. Even though he was disqualified from office in 1986, he remained committed to the cause of democracy and empowerment of the people, contesting in the 1997 General Elections as part of the Workers’ Party team in Cheng San GRC, thereby becoming Non-Constituency Member of Parliament until 2001. 

Despite the difficult political environment under which the Workers’ Party operates, and bearing the brunt of the ruling party’s attacks as the Party’s Secretary-General, he led the Party through a number of crises and assured WP’s continuance on its political path.  

Throughout the decades, Mr Jeyaretnam has remained unflinching despite the many obstacles he faced and the sacrifices made by him and his family.   

The Workers’ Party mourns the passing of a giant in Singapore politics and sends its deepest condolences to Mr Jeyaretnam’s family on their bereavement. 

LOW THIA KHIANG
SECRETARY GENERAL
30 Sep 2008

We refer to Mr Seng Han Thong’s reported response to WP’s Labour Day press release.

It seems that Mr Seng, a labour MP, has conveniently forgotten to address WP’s questions about his ex-boss Minister Lim Boon Heng’s insensitive comments. Instead, he side-steps them by querying whether all employees of Hougang Town Council (HGTC) are Singaporeans.

For the record, the staff of HGTC are all Singaporeans. However WP recognizes the contribution of foreign workers and is not against their employment. For instance, HGTC does not object to its contractors deploying foreign workers in the estate.

The WP Labour day message raised three issues pertaining to workers in Singapore in view of the changing economic circumstances, the government policy on foreign manpower and the government’s attitude towards the employment of foreigners.

WP said, first, the government’s attitude should be to put Singaporeans first; secondly, we should resist any erosion of Singaporeans’ societal standing; and thirdly, it is the government’s responsibility to show compassion for the plight of the workers facing the pressure of high inflation.

Therefore, the issue here is not of foreign workers’ employment per se but rather how the Singapore Government and the Labour Union will ensure that the dignity and societal position of Singaporeans workers are not compromised in view of globalization and labour mobility.

Yaw Shin Leong
Organising Secretary
The Workers’ Party

By Yaw Shin Leong, Organising Secretary of The Workers’ Party

The top down tripartite collaboration amongst the Government, employers and a pro-government labour union is a sure recipe for potential compromises for the Singaporean worker.

Overall employment creation in Singapore for the whole of 2007 is 236,600, surpassing 176,000 in 2006. However foreign employment rose to a new high of 144,500 in 2007. This means only 38.9% in 236,600 jobs created last year truly benefited Singaporeans.

Singaporeans will be none the better off, even if more jobs are created, when more than 60% of the jobs created go to foreigners. Although Singaporeans may participate in skills upgrading programs, many realize that promotional prospects are limited.

A certain portion of these jobs created could have been part time contract work positions. While the above statistics illustrate a rosy picture of high employment rate boosting the general public’s confidence in the Singapore’s economy, these figures require more detailed analysis to understand the actual employment status that Singaporeans are in.

Could it be that more Singaporeans are holding contractual part-time work positions, whereas foreigners might be benefiting from the full time positions created?

If this is the situation, this will disadvantage some segments of Singaporeans, resulting in less than ideal employment terms, such as compromised medical benefits and annual leave.

Singaporeans’ Societal Standing

To face the future with confidence and optimism, Singaporeans must be assured first of our societal standing in the midst of global uncertainties. Under the current top down tripartite collaboration model bold measures are taken to tackle macro economic challenges, and the impact on Singaporean workers must not be written off.

With reference to a recent report in the local media, Minister Lim Boon Heng gave an explanation to a distressed Singaporean woman concerned about losing her job to a ’sweet young beer girl from China’ that the foreigner’s presence actually helped to draw in businesses, in turn saving the Singaporean woman’s job. Such a ‘brush-off’ comment by a ministerial authority is hardly assuring.

According to Mr Lim’s logic, is he conceding that the PAP has created an economic model whereby Singaporeans must now be dependent on the foreign workers to retain our jobs? Singaporeans must now thank foreigners for helping us keep our jobs!

As a result of this ‘unique’ economic model, the societal standing of the Singaporean worker is now being eroded in our very own country.

Singapore is indeed becoming a ‘City of Possibilities’, however, it’s not for Singaporeans but foreigners. While Singaporeans are still conceptualising our great future filled with ‘possibilities’, alas, this might already have been stealthily taken away.

Showing Compassion

The current harsh reality of rising food prices and inflation is a major concern for all Singaporeans, especially so for the lower wage workers, whose livelihood is also threatened by the increasing numbers of foreign workers.

Our government must be compassionate and be proactive to initiate more substantial measures to help Singaporeans. Whilst NTUC has initiated a food voucher program, our government should also do something on top of the initiatives by NTUC. This is not to suggest that our government should subsidise food prices across the board but they are definitely capable of giving more help.

The Workers’ Party hereby repeats our call to reduce Singapore’s GST rate by 2% and to keep our GST rates at 5% for at least a year. We also propose that the government reduce fuel tax as a compassionate gesture to ease Singaporeans’ financial burdens.

In spite of this sombre backdrop, Workers’ Party encourages fellow Singaporeans to hold our heads high and not to lose heart. The Workers’ Party will continue to pressure the government so that Singaporeans’ privileges and opportunities are not compromised in the midst of a top down tripartite collaboration amongst the Government, employers and a pro-government labour union.

The Workers’ Party wishes all Workers in Singapore a Happy Labour Day.

Yaw Shin Leong
Organising Secretary
The Workers’ Party
1 May 2008

Two weeks have elapsed since the escape of Mas Selamat Kastari from the Whitley Road Centre.

Since the occurrence, the immediate priority has rightly been placed on his recapture. Our security forces have been hard at work in an island-wide manhunt, and Singaporeans too have put up with various inconveniences at checkpoints and other areas to facilitate this massive operation.

Many questions have been raised about how this incident could have taken place in a country which prides itself on safety and security. In seeking to reassure Singaporeans, the Minister for Home Affairs has established a Committee of Inquiry under the Prisons Act “to discover how the escape occurred and to recommend appropriate actions to prevent such an incident from occurring again”. (MHA letter to media dated 7 Mar 08).

As Whitley Road Centre is gazetted by law as a prison, the government’s decision to convene the inquiry under the Prisons Act is not wrong. The problem is that the Prisons Act states that such inquiries shall not be open to the public. The Committee will submit its report to the Minister, and no part of the proceedings may be released to anyone except with the Minister’s written permission.

This raises important questions as to how much the public will eventually be told, since the Minister retains the discretion to release the findings as he sees fit. In a matter of such high public interest as the escape of a high-risk terror suspect from a government-run facility, what assurances or checks are there that the public will be given full information? In the interest of transparency, other governments have conducted public hearings into sensitive matters such as intelligence failures.

One option is for the President to appoint a Commission of Inquiry under the Inquiries Act. He can do so when he considers that having a Commission to inquire into any matter would be for the public welfare or in the public interest. This regime will allow the inquiry to proceed in public as the President shall direct. If there is concern that release of certain sensitive information will jeopardize the national interest, the President may direct that certain information not be made public.

Moreover, since Singaporeans have been marshalled to assist the authorities to hunt for Mas Selamat, the least the government could do is to keep us fully informed of the inquiry and its findings.

SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN
11 MAR 08

The Workers’ Party wholly condemns the use of violence by the Myanmar military regime against unarmed civilians. Such acts amount to nothing but crimes of murder and mayhem.

Whatever the ‘peace’ that will be achieved by the present crackdown, the yearnings of the people to be free from more than four decades of military rule will not go away.

The Workers’ Party urges the international community including the Singapore government to use all influence and means at its disposal to stop the continued repression of the Myanmar people and to free all political detainees.

The Workers’ Party further urges the pursuit of peaceful and due political process to determine the collective will of the Myanmar people in their choice of government and the determination of their future.

SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN
2 OCT 2007