Kenneth Jeyaratnam
The crisis - and reforms
In the wake of government's record in past few years, it will be hard for it to claim it alone can solve Singapore's economic problems, says the new Reform Party leader.
July 7, 2009
The following is a speech by Kenneth Jeyaretnam, Reform Party leader, at the Foreign Correspondents Association Lunch on July 2, 2009.
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for inviting me to this luncheon today. The Foreign Correspondents Association has been here in Singapore even longer than I have and like my father has played a significant and historic role in the story of our region’s history.
It is surely no less an historic moment for Singapore’s newest political party, The Reform Party to be given this exciting platform.
I am very proud to join the ranks of such prominent figures as our Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and from the opposition Jaswant Singh of India, Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim and so many other statesman, politicians and even Nobel Prize winners.
Not least of these is my dear late father JBJ. I really do feel unworthy but then again, maybe July is a quiet month for the press.
You have asked me to discuss my hopes and visions for The Reform Party and how I see the current political situation in Singapore.
However as an economist I shall insist on boring you with my views on the current economic situation and the economic future for Singapore.
I hope you won’t mind if I start by adding a bit of background to my emergence on the political scene. It seems to me that the ladies and gentleman of the press are in dire need of a bit more information about me.
I say this because despite being Singaporean, I am always referred to in the press as ‘British-trained economist’, Kenneth Jeyaretnam.
Hmm..I wonder why I have never read in the Singapore press, British-trained mathematician prime minister Lee Hsien Loong or British trained-lawyer, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
Naturally I suspect that the mainstream media want to light up a subliminal marker in the people’s minds that a)I’m a foreigner and b) that my economics is suspiciously left-wing because it’s from a country associated with economic failure and the welfare state.
In actual fact I’m much less British than, my father, who spent many more years than I as a British subject. So I went to University in England but I was born here, I went to school here, excepting two years, and I completed National Service.
And I always say that if I’m fit to die for my country then I’m fit to stand for it.
I’m not ashamed of being a patriot. On the second point I have always believed by and large in free markets, though governments may need to intervene to prevent undesirable or suboptimal outcomes.
Indeed at Cambridge, I often used to have economics discussions with our current Finance Minister, Mr Tharman, who was there doing a masters, and at that time he was far, far to the left of me on most economic policy issues.
In addition to British-trained the other appendage to my name is usually “Son Of.”.. JBJ. That one is of course entirely true. I’m just grateful my father’s name wasn’t Sam!
There’s no arguing that the Reform Party and indeed the very notion of an active opposition, was my father’s legacy to Singapore.
He always strove, at great personal cost, to get the people to realise they had the power to change things just by exercising their democratic rights - Hence his call at the inauguration dinner to the people to arise from their slumber.
Unfortunately many here wear ear plugs when they slumber but luckily for me there’s nothing like a recession for waking people up.
My father named his new party The Reform Party for a reason. He believed that the way forward, for freeing the people of Singapore was through political Reform.
It’s a legacy which I’m proud to continue but also to extend and adapt to the current needs of Singapore.
We have always been told that the current authoritarian framework has benefited us economically - I feel we’re victims of the approved version of history.
In fact Singapore’s growth record is good but not spectacular.
It hardly compares with nations such as Taiwan and South Korea - Nations that started considerably poorer and are now at comparable levels of per-capita real incomes. Nations which moved away from authoritarianism and are now much freer than Singapore-so that authoritarian framework is clearly no longer beneficial.
The task I have set myself for the Reform Party is to get across the message that the Faustian bargain the electorate thought they had struck in surrendering liberty for economic prosperity didn’t have to be so.
In some of my economic articles for the Party I have talked about an outmoded economic model which doesn’t really improve the welfare of the bulk of Singaporeans.
While the GDP growth rate over the last few years looked impressive, fuelled globally by an unsustainable growth in US imports, the productivity of the workforce first stagnated and then fell sharply.
Growth was built upon the addition of seemingly inexhaustible inputs of cheap labour from abroad with concomitant dire consequences for the real wages of those at the median and below.
Domestic consumption has been driven down to a level that is on a par with China and countries at a much earlier stage of development.
The savings rate rose to 47% in 2008 which given what little we hear about the decline in value of our external investments is manifestly excessive.
Yet all we hear from the government is that we need to have more of the same policies of cutting business costs and just wait for the inevitable return of the US consumption binge.
So whilst the need for Reform in the field of democracy and civil rights is an integral part of the Party’s platform I believe that there are equally fundamental reforms that need to be made in the economic sphere.
In essence The Reform Party has become the double Reform Party.
These are indeed exciting times for Democracy and the Opposition in Singapore. Given its record over the last few years it will be difficult for the government to continue its claim that it alone has a monopoly on good economic management.
Or at least we hope to make it difficult for the government to go on claiming that monopoly.
Unfortunately it is also a very challenging time for the Opposition. After many years of conditioning, Singaporeans think very differently to those who have been brought up in a liberal western democracy.
There’s little point, I’ve found, in talking about the European Convention on Human Rights to people who think that expressing an opinion will lead to mob rule and rioting.
Or, as we were told often in the past, that foreign investment and MNCs would flee Singapore if there were significant numbers of Opposition MPs in Parliament.
The latest parliamentary changes proposed by the government don’t help promote democracy - amounting to no more than smoke and mirrors.
It’s a cheap parlour trick that will have no impact at all on The Reform Party’s strategy - but clearly gives the government a legitimate excuse for changing constituency boundaries yet again.
The silent and peaceful protesters in Iran summed up our feelings best when they held up notices saying simply, “election not selection”
Throughout all, I maintain my belief in the people of Singapore. We are its greatest resource. We are a uniquely talented and situated nation and we deserve prosperity and emancipation.
In time we will come to the realisation that these are not mutually exclusive but actually are dependent one upon the other.
I believe that The Reform Party is the party to bring that to the people of Singapore and my modest hope is that this will be achieved if not in the next five years than in my lifetime.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=32896.1
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Aware Saga: No action to be taken against previous exco
| Aware Saga | |||||
| No action to be taken against previous exco | |||||
| EGM cost about $100,000, but Aware got back over $106,000 in fees and donations | |||||
| |||||
| |||||
THERE was an uproar when the newly elected committee of Singapore's best known women's group spent about $100,000 in their first month in office.
Most of that was for holding an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) at which the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) voted to throw out the committee. Now it turns out that Aware has ended up with a profit from the whole affair. It collected more than $106,000 in membership fees and donations during the crisis, it was revealed at a media conference at the Aware Centre yesterday. More than $98,000 was gathered in membership fees alone, from 29 Mar to 2 May. A total of 2,748 people joined Aware or renewed their membership during the crisis. An additional $8,000 was donated by the companies that provided services at the EGM on 2 May. The current committee is now willing to forgive and move on. Initially, when it was revealed that the previous exco had spent so much, some Aware members had called for the money to be recovered from those who served on it. The current exco then formed an internal review team, as it felt that the previous team did not adhere fully to the Aware Constitution and with Aware's standard operating processes. However, Aware president Dana Lam, 56, said yesterday that no action will be taken against the previous exco. 'There are several reasons for this,' she said. 'First, we recognise that they were handicapped by their lack of experience with NGO (non-governmental organisation) culture.' Secondly, the previous exco was working under some stress because the number of members was increasing every day during the saga. She added: 'They also had the vote of no confidence hanging over their head. 'Especially as we are able to recover some of the money anyway, through the generosity of the donors, we don't see a need to pursue this any further.' Reasonable amount Added Ms Corinna Lim, 45, the assistant honorary secretary: 'You can't get away from paying for certain things, like the rental of the venue. There are not many venues which can accommodate so many people. 'We did our checks, and found that it (the amount spent) was actually a reasonable cost.' Aware has enough money to fund its ongoing services, such as providing counselling services, a helpline, and a legal clinic for women, until the term of the current exco ends in March 2010. It also has enough to run some of its projects, until the end of the year. It has plans to raise funds actively from now on, like through an upcoming flag day on 8 Aug, and by approaching donors. Said Ms Yap Ching Wi, 41, the honorary secretary: 'By the time we came into this term, we had lost a good few months, so we are catching up. Getting support 'We'll work as hard as we can, and we're very confident that we can get support from the public and all the supporters of Aware.' Said Ms Lam: 'Most importantly, we want to get on with our work - which is to identify and help remove the obstacles that prevent women from realising their full potential. 'This is, and always has been, Aware's agenda.' All the companies that provided services at the EGM provided some monetary assistance to Aware. Rajah & Tann, Aware's legal adviser at the EGM, donated $5,000, and Deloitte & Touche donated $3,000. Rajah & Tann also waived a portion of its fees, as did Boardroom Corporate & Advisory Services. Both Suntec Singapore and Ape Communications gave Aware a discount of more than 25 per cent for using their venue or services. The current exco of Aware was elected on 2 May after a vote of no confidence was successfully passed on the previous exco, headed by Ms Josie Lau. |
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=32880.1
Too late to rescue banks
July 8, 2009
Too late to rescue banks
WASHINGTON - A GOVERNMENT plan designed to rid banks' books of the troubled assets that exacerbated the financial crisis will do little to address a fundamental weakness of the industry or the broader economy, analysts say.
WILL IT WORK?
Mr Ross said banks will never break even on many of their troubled assets, but that the government plan will get them five-to-10 percentage points closer.
The PPIP was initially expected to remove up to US$1 trillion in bad assets off the banks' books. But Mr Ross said the programme likely will max out at US$125 billion.
... more
The Treasury Department this week will announce the names of between five and 10 fund investment firms participating in the multibillion-dollar plan, according to two industry officials.
The plan, known as the Public-Private Investment Program, or PPIP, will leverage private capital with government subsidies so that these investment firms can buy up the soured mortgage-related assets that have clogged banks' balance sheets and made them reluctant to lend freely to businesses and consumers.
But since announcing the plan five months ago, the government has shelved part of it that would help these firms buy individual mortgages and other loans held by the banks. As a result, some analysts say its impact will be muted.
Fears of a deeper recession, including rising unemployment and falling home values, raise the spectre of massive defaults on consumer and commercial real estate loans, analysts said.
But the securities backed by mortgages and other complex assets to be targeted by PPIP are no longer as big a threat to the banking industry's stability, analysts said.
Ten of the nation's biggest financial companies - including JPMorgan Chase & Co, American Express Co and Goldman Sachs Group Inc - last month got the go-ahead to return US$68 billion (S$99.5 billion) in federal bailout money, a development viewed as evidence that the financial sector was beginning to stabilise after benefiting from the government's US$700 billion financial rescue fund.
Some of the PPIP managers are expected to include Blackrock Inc, Pacific Investment Management Co and TCW Group Inc, according to the two industry officials. Billionaire investor Wilbur Ross said on Tuesday that he would use up to US$1 billion to participate. -- AP
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=32872.1
Too late to rescue banks
WASHINGTON - A GOVERNMENT plan designed to rid banks' books of the troubled assets that exacerbated the financial crisis will do little to address a fundamental weakness of the industry or the broader economy, analysts say.
WILL IT WORK?
Mr Ross said banks will never break even on many of their troubled assets, but that the government plan will get them five-to-10 percentage points closer.
The PPIP was initially expected to remove up to US$1 trillion in bad assets off the banks' books. But Mr Ross said the programme likely will max out at US$125 billion.
... more
The Treasury Department this week will announce the names of between five and 10 fund investment firms participating in the multibillion-dollar plan, according to two industry officials.
The plan, known as the Public-Private Investment Program, or PPIP, will leverage private capital with government subsidies so that these investment firms can buy up the soured mortgage-related assets that have clogged banks' balance sheets and made them reluctant to lend freely to businesses and consumers.
But since announcing the plan five months ago, the government has shelved part of it that would help these firms buy individual mortgages and other loans held by the banks. As a result, some analysts say its impact will be muted.
Fears of a deeper recession, including rising unemployment and falling home values, raise the spectre of massive defaults on consumer and commercial real estate loans, analysts said.
But the securities backed by mortgages and other complex assets to be targeted by PPIP are no longer as big a threat to the banking industry's stability, analysts said.
Ten of the nation's biggest financial companies - including JPMorgan Chase & Co, American Express Co and Goldman Sachs Group Inc - last month got the go-ahead to return US$68 billion (S$99.5 billion) in federal bailout money, a development viewed as evidence that the financial sector was beginning to stabilise after benefiting from the government's US$700 billion financial rescue fund.
Some of the PPIP managers are expected to include Blackrock Inc, Pacific Investment Management Co and TCW Group Inc, according to the two industry officials. Billionaire investor Wilbur Ross said on Tuesday that he would use up to US$1 billion to participate. -- AP
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=32872.1
Do IMH Doctors Practise Medicine?Or Wayang?
Do IMH Doctors Practise Medicine?Or Wayang?
Chronological Events Of This Case --- http://pothepanda.xanga.com/703351636/police-abuse-cover-upvictim-charged-with-alledged-shoptheft-instead/
Police Abuse of IMH Act --- http://pothepanda.xanga.com/703923895/030609--police-abuse-in-singapore-exposed-imh-is-singapores-gulag/
First up i'll like to apologise for not being to update the latest Court Appearance on the 30th June.I've been kept busy by Chia Ti Lik.Heck,i've been down to his office every weekday since that day.
Well,some interesting things have happened.As readers may recall,on the 3rd June 2009,DPP John Lu Zhuo Ren had made an application in the Subordinate Courts of Singapore to remand me in IMH.As informed by Mr Chia Ti Lik,DPP John Lu's basis was that i have apparently been traced as admitted to IMH once before in 2006,and that my blog postings were delusional.
DJ Soh Tze Bian had then made a ruling that the medical report of my alleged admission into IMH in 2006 be produced and given to both the DPP and my solicitor.
We received that document on the 29 June 2009,it was faxed over to my solicitor's office at 6pm.The office was already closed and my court appearance was due the next day at 2.30pm.Based on the documents received,the Bedok Police IO in charge of this case,a Norman Malimar,had requested a medical report of my previous admission into IMH.This medical report was sent to Bedok Police Station on the 11th June 2009.For some reason,we only received it 1 day before we were due to appear in Court again.No doubt,this is another exemplary display of our Police Force's competence.
Chia Ti Lik applied for an adjournment for him to make representations.He claims that this was because he was too busy.I informed Mr Chia to inform DJ Soh that as i had only seen the document minutes before we were due to attend the Court,i reserve all rights to peruse and challenge that document.However,i agreed with the key line in the medical report that i had "NO MENTAL ILLNESS."
According to Chia Ti Lik,DPP John Lu Zhuo Ren again attempted to apply for me to be thrown into IMH for my own good.DJ Soh rejected the application and stated that since IMH medical report found me NO MENTAL ILLNESS,he does not see any reason for me to be thrown into IMH.However,DJ Soh apparently advised Mr Chia to get me to self-admit into IMH or be an outpatient there,to cover myself.DJ Soh then made a very strange offer to Mr Chia.According to Mr Chia,DJ Soh told Mr Chia,"Mr Chia,if your client has no money,he can apply for me to put him into IMH for free."
After thinking it through,i realised what is happening.Suffice to say that i will not self-admit or even go to IMH as an outpatient.What a nicely disguised trap!
After looking through the document and interviewing key witnesses,we issued a letter to IMH demanding that they substantiate certain allegations and statements they put into the medical report.
http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/PoThePanda/ChiaToIMH060720091Of2.jpg
http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/PoThePanda/DSC00146.jpg
This is their reply.They replied with a form for self-admission,and they actually had the cheek to ask us to pay them a deposit for a new medical report.
http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/PoThePanda/IMHToChia07072009.jpg
We are sending them another letter tomorrow.I think i will get Chia Ti Lik to make it very clear to them that our 1st letter is a very polite letter asking them to substantiate and provide proof of certain things they had written into the medical report.However,their reply tells you something about the integrity,honesty and trustworthiness of documents produced by IMH,supposedly an official government agency.
Should they refuse or be unable to response appropriately,i reserve all rights to sue IMH and Dr Sandeep Raj Kata Naik for professional negligence,criminal defamation and perjury.
Watch this space!
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=33175.3
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)