I support BN supporters!

To all my friends who are supporters of Barisan Nasional: I support you.

I fully support your right to choose a BN representative to represent you and your fellow constituents. I fully support your right to vote for this person, to make speeches for him or her, to work in his or her campaign, to gain similar support from your friends or family and even to donate your time or effort to his or her political cause and career.

I whole-heartedly, 100%, completely agree you have every right to do all this.

And in the same way, every single eligible Malaysian has a right to make a similar choice. Whether for BN or not is irrelevant. The right to vote for and support a politician of your choice is enshrined in our constitution.

In the same way I respect and support your rights, I expect you to offer me the same respect and support. Whom I wish to represent me and my family is not important at all and doesn’t figure in this statement nor in my philosophy in general.

Now, if you have read thus far and think ‘OK I can give John my respect, no matter his choice’ then do read on.

If you’ve come this far and think ‘I know where John is headed and it’s not in BN’s direction and there’s no way I can accept that’ then you might just as well stop now for what I have to say is for right-thinking Malaysians who are rational and mature.

OK, ready to read on?

Firstly, let me say I still support the Bersih movement, now in version 3.0 as it were. I still support the 8 original demands from Bersih 2.0 and am in agreement with the 3 additional demands in Bersih 3.0. Here’s the thing - you don’t have to agree with my choice here. Not at all. If you do, then you’re my friend for more reasons than maybe even I initially thought.

If you don’t, then let’s talk a bit more…

To carry on, I would like you to divorce Bersih from our political leanings for a while - the two are, after all, actually independent of each other. Let’s also just take BN or PR or whatever out of our minds for just a few moments and talk about our rights in general, for that is where I started this conversation. After all, we’ve already agreed you and I both have a right to vote for whomever we please, right? So whomever we choose at this point is not relevant.

What is relevant is that we both have a right to choose. And by extension of this right, our choice of candidates have their rights too.

What rights might this be, you ask?

Well, firstly, they have a right to be chosen by Malaysians who are truly, unambiguously, incorruptibly, undeniably, irrefutably and honestly allowed to by law. That means simply that they live or maintain a home in the area where they vote. It also means they must not be barred by law and uhm… alive. But of course… They also must not be bribed or coerced.

What happens if a person maintains a home in that constituency but cannot be present to vote? If he has the right to vote, then it follows that the system should present every opportunity for him to exercise that right, don’t you agree? Well, I guess then that that person should be given the right to vote by post. This would be wonderful for our armed forces helping to maintain peace all over the world (remember Somalia?) or aid workers in various disaster areas and so on. After all, our candidates, if they are to fairly fight for the right to represent a particular set of constituents, should be given every opportunity to be voted for or against by the constituents of the area they wish to represent.

Just ask yourself, if this were a BN politician you’re thinking of, would you be in agreement thus far? Yes? Good… on to the next point.

Would you like to ensure that an opposing candidate doesn’t have the same person vote for him twice? That just would not be fair, right? What could we do to prevent this? Well, there are expensive electronic systems we can put in place. And then there is the cheap and proven use of indelible ink. A voter gets his ballot papers, casts his vote then has his thumb or finger dipped in ink he can’t wash away until all the votes have been cast and counted. So, if there are 1000 people in your area, you would expect a total of no more than 1000 votes. I’m sure you agree it just wouldn’t be right if your candidate had 500 votes and the other guy had 501.

If, like me, you’ve travelled through much of Malaysia (well I must admit I haven’t seen much of Sabah and Sarawak but would love to) you’ll know there are still many beautiful and quite unspoilt areas around. I especially love parts of Endau Rompin National Park and even Tasik Bera. Some of these areas have no TV or phone reception and the internet is non-existent for people who live there. If they get newspapers it’s days late. But they do live in Malaysia and are represented in Parliament by elected representatives.

Shouldn’t these representatives have every right to access these voters too, and tell them about their plans and programmes and what they’re going to do for them? Well, if you were a candidate and had to travel to meet people from the towns and cities as well as these more remote people, wouldn’t you need more time to do so? I think it’s only right if you think your candidate needs a bit more time than say a week in order to campaign. In fact I completely agree all candidates need a bit more time than just a week or so. Maybe 3 weeks? In fact when we had our very first elections in 1955, we campaigned for 42 days! Agree? Good, now let’s move on.

We now get our news from a variety of sources and it’s only natural that some media owners would have their own preferences or biases. Don’t you think media owners have a responsibility above and beyond their biases though? By that I mean they should be fair in their reporting and should not spread false or uncorroborated stories. After all, what they say influences many and as Spiderman learnt, ‘with great power comes great responsibility’. Media owners should thus be careful about what they say.

I think this works for your candidate, considering the rise of the alternative media. It would not be right for any media owner to publish untruths or rumours that would damage your candidate’s credibility. I completely agree with that. In fact I also think they should offer all candidates a chance to be heard. Why play favourites and report only the utterances of their preferred candidates? Yours should have a chance too.

Come to think of it, everyone in the elections should be restrained in their comments about others. Leave out things that are not relevant to the electoral or democratic process. Gutter journalism has no place in modern society for we now live in a world where the word has truly taken on a might to challenge the sword. But worse, it can incite some to raise the sword. With great power comes great responsibility…

Agreed? Good…

Let’s have a quick chat now about something really cool. Did you know it now takes less time to get a Malaysian passport renewed than a Singaporean one? I had mine done at Subang in 3 hours while my Singaporean friend had to wait days!Great, huh?

Well, if the Immigration Department can be efficient, don’t you think it would be good if other government agencies could be too? Take the Elections Commission for example. A friend of mine recently registered to vote and, like me and everyone else, it took 6 months for his name to appear on the roll. Imagine if many people were influenced by your choice but could not vote because they were not registered in time… Not good right?

What if they, like my friend, then found mistakes in their registration?

You see, my friend is a guy but he found that he was registered as a woman instead. If he had not found out and turned up to vote, his vote would not have been counted.

You wouldn’t want your fellow supporters to be disqualified because of mistakes like this would you?

You also would not want your or your fellow supporters’ votes to be jeopardised because of threats and so on, right? Imagine if you turned up to vote and were put off by opposition supporters behaving threateningly. That would not be right and you would expect the Police, among others, to protect your rights, correct? I agree with you - that’s what the Police are supposed to do and if you were in any way threatened while trying to exercise your democratic right I would be one of the first to stand up and shout ‘That must be stopped!’ So, fair reporting and better government agencies too - we seem to agree on a lot of things.

In fact, if you’ve read this far, I think we’re just about in total agreement - except maybe in our choice of candidates but we did say we would leave that out of this discussion.

So, what have we discussed really? And where do we stand now?

Well, we discussed - and agreed - on our rights and the rights of our candidates. No arguments there. I support your candidate’s every right as mentioned above.

And I say ‘Congratulations!’
‘For what?’ you ask?
‘For joining Bersih.’

Because every single one of the things we agreed on above is mentioned in the 8 demands of the Bersih movement. Every. Single. One. And not one more. Nor one less. So, when you nodded in agreement with what I said above, you also nodded in agreement with all those who have supported the Bersih movement.

So you see, when I loudly proclaimed last July that I was being non-partisan and that everything about Bersih is non-partisan, I wasn’t lying or exaggerating. It is the truth. And it is also true that it is in EVERYONE’s interest that the demands of Bersih 2.0 and 3.0 are met. Everyone. Every single Malaysian.

I really don’t give a hoot about who each of us supports politically. I do give a hoot and more about whether our support is expressed in a general elections that is clean and fair. That is all we want. And if you are as right-thinking and mature as I hope you are, then it is all you want too.

So, join me. And many others in our call for what is right. And for our rights.

"I can't be political - for my kids" Pt 1

Bersih is apolitical. What this means is that it has no allegiance to any political organisation. And it serves no direct political purpose. What it does serve though is social justice. This is a basic tenet of a democracy so ultimately, Bersih serves a democratic purpose.

Now although Bersih has no political allegiance, political organisations may agree with and align themselves to Bersih’s goals. And why shoudn’t they?

To examine that question, we need to look at some of the goals again and address some of the responses I have received in my emails out encouraging people to join our positive action.

1. Clean the electoral roll
Simple enough really. There are more than a handful of cases where multiple people are registered in one address - an address they do not reside at even. Cases of phantom voters also include a disproportionate number of names of people over 100 years old (including one aged 118!)

Then there are migrated Malaysians who have given up their MyKads and passports at foreign embassies and still have their names registered as voters. And many more stories - just do a quite internet search for ‘Phantom Voters malaysia’ and see what comes up. In my case it was 2,210,000 search matches.

If you still haven’t figured out the problem yet, consider what would happen when phantom voters actually turn up to vote. Anyone who has control of or access to the system can abuse this issue by letting imposters (‘phantoms’) turn up on polling day and vote for a particular party.

Now I ask - what’s the point of taking the trouble to turn up to vote when your legitimate vote can be wiped out by 20 phantom ones? 

To be fair, no one I have spoken to has disputed this as a good, just and fair demand.

The full text of this demand is:
“The electoral roll is marred with irregularities such as deceased persons and multiple persons registered under a single address or non-existent addresses. The electoral roll must be revised and updated to wipe out these ‘phantom voters’. The rakyat have a right to an electoral roll that is an accurate reflection of the voting population.
In the longer term, BERSIH 2.0 also calls for the EC to implement an automated voter registration system upon eligibility to reduce irregularities.”

So let’s move on to number 3 and get it dispensed with as it is linked to this. I’ll get back to No 2 in a moment.


3. Use of indelible ink

Indelible ink is used elsewhere in the world to prevent, among others, phantom voters from turning up and casting the same vote 10, 20, 30 times, using different identities each time. It is simple, affordable, effective, and more importantly, it has been used elsewhere including Afghanistan, Benin, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Gambia, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon, Mauritania, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tchad, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

There really is very little argument against the use of the ink. It gets the job done, and done well.

The full text of the demand:
“Indelible ink must be used in all elections. It is a simple, affordable and effective solution in preventing voter fraud. In 2007, the EC decided to implement the use of indelible ink. However, in the final days leading up to the 12th General Elections, the EC decided to withdraw the use of indelible ink citing legal reasons and rumours of sabotage.
BERSIH 2.0 demands for indelible ink to be used for all the upcoming elections. Failure to do so will lead to the inevitable conclusion that there is an intention to allow voter fraud.”


2. Reform postal ballot
Due to various reasons I will not get into here, many, many, many Malaysians live abroad. And most cannot make it back to vote. They are, however, entitled to vote and a reform of the postal vote allows them the chance to exercise their democratic right.

Besides this, there have been claims of abuse of voting where uniformed personnel have had their votes cast by their superiors. Doesn’t take a genius to figure out what’s wrong with that, and the full text here then becomes quite clear.

Note that the reform means some who have not been able to vote before will now be able to do so, while others will experience tighter controls on their postal voting.

‘The current postal ballot system must be reformed to ensure that all citizens of Malaysia are able to exercise their right to vote. Postal ballot should not only be open for all Malaysian citizens living abroad, but also for those within the country who cannot be physically present in their voting constituency on polling day. Police, military and civil servants too must vote normally like other voters if not on duty on polling day.
The postal ballot system must be transparent. Party agents should be allowed to monitor the entire process of postal voting.”

Again, not much objection here from anyone I wrote to or spoke with.


OK, No 4 is interesting and some can’t understand the need for this.

4. Minimum 21 days campaign period
Malaysia isn’t small and in some areas we’re not any closer to being a developed country now or in 2020 than years ago when the objective was first mooted. There are parts of Sabah and Sarawak where it takes more than just a short drive to get to. 21 days means even the remotest villages get access to all the information they need to make informed choices.

There are well over 1600 polling stations for 71 seats in Sarawak alone - with ballot boxes sometimes being transported by helicopter and boat. Just imagine how remote some of these places are. The residents deserve to vote as much as any Peninsular-based Malaysian. And to vote, they need to know as much as they can about the choices they have, including, hopefully, meeting the people hoping to represent them.

21 days doesn’t seem that long now does it?

I did get a response which puzzled me. The writer claims that 21 days is too long and can lead to social unrest. I can’t figure this one out. On the one hand I can see some of the logic in that, but then I immediately think of the lead-in to the US presidential elections and how long that takes and can see no social unrest resulting from the protraction.

Therefore, the ‘unrest’ must come from somewhere else. Wait a minute… what about law-enforcement? I mean, the guys in blue who are supposed to keep law and order. What if they didn’t do the job they were supposed to, such as standing idly by while people threaten to burn down buildings and so on. Isn’t that more likely to be a potential cause of social unrest?

I say that if the guys whose job it is to maintain public order did the jobs they swore to do, we wouldn’t even be talking about this point.

Oh, and if they failed to do so (which, frankly, has been the case for too long) then I reckon it’s only going to take a day for ‘social unrest’ to happen.

Full text of demand:

“The EC should stipulate a campaign period of not less than 21 days. A longer campaign period would allow voters more time to gather information and deliberate on their choices. It will also allow candidates more time to disseminate information to rural areas. The first national elections in 1955 under the British Colonial Government had a campaign period of 42 days but the campaign period for 12th GE in 2008 was a mere 8 days.”

OK, more about the 8 points and our positive action in my next post.

Let Me Come Clean

Some time ago I was posting all sorts of stuff during the Singapore General Elections. Might have seemed strange to some especially since one hot topic then was the impact of foreigners. Of which I am one here of course. Thing is I understand the problems faced by average Singaporeans and I appreciate how their frustrations could be targeted at PRs and foreigners.

Some people asked why I was even bothered - more bothered (I prefer the term someone used - ‘engaged’) it seems than many Singaporeans.

The answer is simple. Almost everywhere we go, we interact with the society there. We cannot avoid this. Even if we choose to avoid greater society, our act of seclusion means we are interacting with that society - through being an uncontributing component. Think of it as a speed hump or rock-in-the-middle-of-the-road in that society’s journey.

I believe that when we are part of something, we have a responsibility towards that something. If you’re the passenger in a car being driven by someone else, you have a responsibility to do anything from looking out in dangerous conditions to engaging the driver to stave off sleepiness on a long journey.
Well, Singapore happened to be on a difficult journey to many, and it seemed too that the people who mattered had fallen asleep at the wheel. And that happens when society fails to engage fully with The People Who Make Decisions, not just the other way around. And so I needed to be a passenger in that car engaging with the driver - or, to stretch the metaphor even further, the other passengers for I could not vote.

So now we come to the Malaysian scene. Yes I have now lived away from longer than I have lived in Malaysia. However, I still have very strong ties and I still have our family home which some in my family still occupy, 54 years after they moved in. I carry my MyKad and Malaysian Passport with some degree of pride and of course there was my CelebrateMalaysia! bicycle ride of 2007.

So despite the 350km distance, I still feel very much a part of Malaysian Society, and thus the rationale applies yet again.

So, let me come clean. In fact, let me come Bersih.

Yes, I support Bersih. For these simple reasons:

Bersih 2.0 is an apolitical coalition of NGOs coming together to ask for 8 things which will ensure that every Malaysian - that's you and me - has a voice and a chance to vote for the people who will lead us.
This means that an UMNO supporter gets an equal chance to a DAP supporter. Everyone, who is of legal voting standing will get a fair chance - without intimidation or coercion, and without dealing with the imbalance of corruption - to cast a vote in favour of the candidate of their choice.

Now, I don't care which political party you support - I only care that you and I both get to vote in free, fair and clean elections.

This is why a few of us here in Singapore have set up Bersih 2.0 Singapore.

Over the last few days we’ve been busy signing people up for our positive ‘I (heart) Malaysia’ campaign. I’ll tell you more about this in the next post.

I’ll also deal with some of the responses I have received. You see, I sent out emails asking people to support what we are doing and some of the responses have not gone down too well with me. So, I will address them here in this blog and let you work out who makes more sense.

Stay tuned.

Singapore's New Cabinet - my thoughts

I was asked my opinion on the recent Singapore Elections and Cabinet appointments on the La Salle informal alumni mailing list  and decided my answer might be a good post.

The questions I was answering essentially were whether Lee Kuan Yew engineered the recent upheavals, whether Singapore is now truly on the path to being a true democracy in the internationally accepted definition of that or whether all this is just a face-saving move by the Lees.

My response follows (language censored for this post):

Allow me to paint a backdrop first by waffling for a few paragraphs on some history:


The new cabinet lineup was announced yesterday and threw up a few surprises which indicates the possibility the PAP is finally listening to the public.

Out goes Mah Bow Tan, Minister for National Development (inc housing) who has defended stoutly his policies which have culminated in housing prices rising meteorically (try 30% in 2 years!) and thereby making a 25-30 year loan inevitable for first-time home buyers. Mind you this means their entire CPF savings go into servicing the loan i.e. when they hit 55-60 and are getting ready for retirement, they have virtually no savings in their CPF accounts.

Housing is a complex thing here, a fact not helped by the lack of transparency in setting HDB home prices. Government claims HDB loses S$2 billion annually due to subsidies etc, but when one component of the price must be the land price which the government sets, the calculation becomes a little murky. HDB is supposed to be subsidised housing but flats are starting at S$280,000+ now so we all understand, painfully, that subsidised ≠ affordable housing.

Out goes Raymond Lim whom I dislike. An arrogant man, his Ministry of Transport completely failed to respond to immigration policy and Singapore's 1 million increase in population in the last 2 years (or roughly 20-25% if I am not mistaken). Public transport is inadequate (ha! never thought Singapore would have inadequate public transport, right?) and Raymond's solution has been to set up more and more Electronic Road Pricing gantries, the most expensive of which deducts about S$4. A trip down the Central Expressway from Ang Mo Kio to the the CBD at the wrong time (namely between 8:30 and 9:00 on a workday morning) can cost you S$8.50.

A couple of years ago, when oil prices had gone up slightly, Raymond Lim announced a rise in public transport fares claiming it impacted public transport operators negatively. When oil prices subsequently fell and he was asked why the fares did not come down in tandem, he claimed that oil prices were but a small component of operational costs. Then a year or so later, when oil prices and fares rose in tandem again, he was asked for clarification and he arrogantly challenged the attendees at the press conference 'You want free public transport? Can! I can give you free public transport! But then I have to raise GST to 10%. You want to pay 10% GST?!' If I was there I would have asked him how he, as Minister of Transport, could single-handedly influence the setting of the GST rate and also might have said 'That's a great idea, Minister! I would pay 10% GST anytime for that!'

He is also my MP and when the residents' committee organised a Raymond Lim Challenge soccer competition, I opined privately that if they painted his face on the footballs, they'd be overwhelmed by the response.

Out goes Wong Kan Seng who refused to accept responsibility for the almost comical escape of possibly the most dangerous terrorist in the region. Instead the supervisor and some guards got the sack while he just simply urged people to move on from this mistake. Not a peep of an apology.



And that is what marked out LKY's and GCT's time - no apology for screw-ups while they paid themselves top-dollar.

Besides the salaries they pay themselves, they also get a bonus tied to the GDP. Last year's GDP rose 14% or some astonishing figure like that which meant they all got about 8 months' bonus...

See this article for a good summary of the problems of incompetence and salaries.



So, in general terms, the public has been suffering and probably would have gone right on suffering quietly if not for a few things:

1.    Decreased accountability.
    The ministers mentioned above fucked up, and some did so big-time. None paid the price. This country got where it was because of the idea of accountability and transparency. Sadly, the former has not been in evidence recently. And people have just gotten fed up. Don't forget the Sovereign Wealth Funds Temasek Holdings and Government Investment Corporation lost a combined total of anything from S$90 billion to S$130 billion. We don't know, but we do know no one's head rolled - least of all Mdm Ho Ching's, the PM's wife who heads Temasek.

2.    Decreased Transparency.
    When former President Ong Teng Cheong, acting in his capacity of President and in charge of the national reserves, asked for a list of the reserves, he was given the runaround. For daring to speak up he was shunned and eventually when this much loved figure died (albeit after his presidency), he was denied a state funeral. Even LKY's wife got a bigger funeral...

3.    Increased arrogance
    LKY's statement that if the opposition won the Aljunied GRC tthey would have '5 years to repent' hit a nerve.
    Raymond's Lim's GST statement.
    and more...
    They all point to an arrogant ruling elite who think they know best and everyone else should just 'sit down and shut up' - if you want to know the origin of that quote, ask me - it's another long story...

Fact is the PAP had lost touch with the public and although they were extremely good to and with corporate citizens, at the end of the day it is Siti Bakar who votes, not Citibank.

I think there was no real tipping point here, just a confluence of a few things including the rise of alternative media, how close the average Singaporean is to the edge, clearly flawed government policies, and the very real pain felt by many in Singapore. Think of this: households in the lowest 10% of economy earn S$1400 per month. Households in the upper 10% average $23,700. If that's not an income gap problem I don't know what is.


There were many instances in the recent GE where it was clear the PAP's strategy and philosophy was flawed.

Vivian Balakrishnan, the Minister for Community Youth and Sports attacked an opposition member, suggesting he was a homosexual. This lost him the pink vote and amazingly, a lot of other voters as well who thought it was none of his business. He also trained his sights on an opposition politician's S$60 billion dollar Singapore Makeover plan, saying it was no small change, would take years to accumulate that amount etc. This coming from the guy who blew the S$104 million Youth Olympics budget by almost S$300 million. Yes, you read that right - it finally cost almost S$400 million. And he kept his job...

The PAP, in an attempt to appear young, put forward a 27-year old candidate, Tin Pei Ling who made waves for having a cutesy picture of herself with a Kate Spade shopping bag - instantly injecting Kate Spade into everyone's consciousness. And Pei Ling into everyone's vitriol-loaded sights. Her cutesy looks, foot-stamping antics and substanceless motherhood and apple-pie statements made her few friends and many dislikers. Did I just coin a new word there? Hey, this woman, in an interview, declared her greatest regret in life is not taking her parents to Universal Studios on Sentosa Island. Errr her parents are still alive... and did someone mention the poor and starving in Singapore? Or that Marital Rape is still not outlawed?

The opposition National Solidarity Party put forward an even younger candidate who blew everyone away. Nicole Seah belied her 24 years by speaking confidently, sensibly, visionarily and with great empathy and became second most popular politician in cyberspace after LKY.

See a comparison between the two.

Unfortunately, Pei Ling, contesting in a Group Representative Constituency, rode into Parliament on Goh Chok Tong's coattails and now earns S$15000 a month as an MP, while holding on to the Ernst & Young job. The team with Nicole Seah fought against the incumbent, GCT, and cut his margin to 50-something%. Remarkable.


This GE, the opposition fielded very capable candidates which seriously dented the PAP's claim to having an exhaustive, comprehensive, detailed recruitment and assessment process. The PAP also shot itself in the foot when one of their candidates withdrew at the last minute and was replaced by a virtual unknown who waltzed into parliament a day later as he stood in the only GRC that was uncontested. So much for careful, considered choosing.


On the other hand, some candidates from the opposition were high calibre (and in some instances, with proven track records) individuals - one even served as GCT's perm secretary for some years!



OK enough waffling....

Did LKY engineer this? Honestly, I can't see that. I think the old man is so full of himself he really can't accept that things have moved on. His speeches were a liability right through the hustings. Honestly, GCT's speeches were not much better either...

I suspect this is PM asserting himself finally. He has seen the mood on the ground and has been shocked by it. True the next elections is 5 years away and Singaporeans being Singaporeans, if times are OK by then, they will feel very little inclination to rock the boat.

Having said that, 60% is a very low approval rating. If not for pork-barrel politics (much of which didn't work this time around) and gerrymandering, the PAP would have lost more seats. Two constituencies were lost by a handful of votes and there were even rumblings of discontent with the apparent different standards of elections officers at different polling stations and so on.

For all his visionless steering, Lee Hsien Loong is not stupid. I think he senses this is the time to make his mark. And he has a good case - the old methods are clearly not working. If ever there was a chance for him to state his case, this was it.

Yesterday's cabinet appointments indicate that PM is willing to make sweeping and daring changes. Although they've spun it in a predictable way (3 of them wanted to resign before elections, my foot!) let's not take anything away from PM's appointments. There are a couple of questionable appointments, but on the whole we all hope this is an indication that the PAP is finally listening to the people.

Whether the new ministers will implement new policies which drive at solving some of the problems that have cropped up is something else.

Is this a face-saving move? I don't think so - I think it is indeed a calculated drive forward.

And is this a sign of a real democracy? Well, besides pork-barrels and gerrymandering, the media has been much more liberal, and the opposition has been able to get to the people in a way they couldn't previously, so yes, broadly speaking it bodes well. There's some way to go yet, but it seems there has been progress and we should be grateful for that.

At least for the immediate future.

Thoughts on Singapore Elections Compilation 2

OK a fair few days late, but here's the second of two compilations of status updates - most of these on the night of the elections as votes were being counted and results announced.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #13:
The problem with Goh Chok Tong is that his acronymed name is too hard to say. 'LKY' seems lubricated to roll right off the tongue. 'LHL' for some reason makes me almost laugh. 'WKS' is harmonically disjointed but expectorate well. 'MBT' - I think of cycling backwards for some reason. 'GCT'? My tongue gets twisted around each letter, much like his mind around each concept I think.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #14:
Just what exactly is Cooling Off Day and who is affected? I think it's a load of rubbish as the democratic process is an ongoing one. If, as it's intentioned, we are to make an informed decision, surely we need to continue to access information and opinion?

Singapore Elections Thoughts #15:
This GE has shown that political awareness is everybody's right and responsibility, and that the future can indeed be determined by individuals.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #16:
If ever there was an argument against the concept of GRCs, it is Tin Pei Ling's win.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #17:
The highest majority for a PAP GRC win so far is 66.5%. As expected, not a large margin. The days of dominance by one party seem definitely over.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #18:
The CNA coverage is atrocious with the hosts talking over each other often or having nothing very substantial to say when they're not.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #19:
Chiam out. End of an era. One warrior bows out. Wish 'the other one' would too.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #20:
Not only that Wong Can't Sing, he can't give a good victory speech either.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #21:
Oh, why not interview Tin Pei Ling, CNA? I would lurvvvvvvveeee to see her figure out what to say.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #22:
Hmmm Raymond Lim (the transport one) back in... OK the next time you have a football competition, please do print your face on the footballs - I will definitely take part. And I won't be sorry.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #23:
Wah, now Lim Swee Say's turn to say 'sorry'. How many more tonight? And will they even remember the word tomorrow?

Singapore Elections Thoughts #24:
Oh wow, Viv wins too. sigh...

Singapore Elections Thoughts #25:
Well done WP in Aljunied! Booo to CNA for showing George Yeo's speech first.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #26:
Can George Yeo can be a NCMP?

Singapore Elections Thoughts #27:
CNA, please tell your presenter that she's using the word 'contestation' wrongly. No one's disputing the result - they were just 'contesting' the seat.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #28:
Viv is thanking the volunteers. I wonder if they were fed better than the YOG volunteers.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #29:
A fresh-faced team from NSP still got 43% of the vote when up against the former Primer Minister's team. Well done!

Singapore Elections Thoughts #30:
That was close in Potong Pasir. Kinda wish it had been the other way. Rejected votes might have swung it.

Singapore Elections Thoughts #31:
I don't agree with the online petition to remove Tin Pei Ling. If you'd felt strongly enough you should have voted against her. If you were not in Marine Parade GRC, you should have persuaded voters not to vote her in. This is how democracy works.

Singapore Elections Thoughts Compilation 1

Been silent on both blogs for the longest time but slowly getting off my butt and inspired to write again.
Will start here by compiling some of my recent Facebook status comments on the Singapore Elections.

Singapore Election Thoughts #1.
Sometime ago my RC organised a Raymond Lim football competition. I think they would have gotten more participation if they'd had his face printed on every football.


Singapore Elections Thoughts #2:
I find it so strange that it's Vivian Balakrishnan who's making a homophobic fuss as when he first came on the scene (no pun intended!) I thought he was gay.


Singapore Elections Thoughts #3:
The Elections are bang in the middle of school exams. Seems the PAP is going to face a stern test too. What will be their grade I wonder?


Singapore Elections Thoughts #4:
Seeing as we're all expecting (even hoping for) many of the opposition to win seats, would a large PAP win therefore become the 'freak election result'?


Singapore Elections Thoughts #5:
wah, these buggers also got 'talent' what...
SDP Loves Singapore


Singapore Elections Thoughts #6:
Saw a PAP truck going around with speakers blaring and I was tempted to drive alongside sounding my car horn to drown out the cackle from their loudhailers. hmmmmm


Singapore Elections Thoughts #7:
The Worker's Party should design posters with their logo right on the bottom then place these posters just above the PAP ones so it looks like the hammer is hammering the PAP fellas... heh heh


Singapore Elections Thoughts #8:
So what the heck are you afraid of even if somehow your vote isn't secret and you vote for the opposition? It's your darn right to vote for whomever you please for goodness' sake. What could possibly happen to you? You pay higher GST? Already gonna happen, mate...


Singapore Elections Thoughts #9:
Gotta hand it to the PAP - they've done a great job screwing with everyone's minds and equating PAP = Government = Executive (Administrative) = Singapore. So many people I've heard/read confuse the roles of the Legislative and Executive branches of government and actually believe water will stop flowing from the tap if they vote in an Opposition MP. OK I exaggerate slightly...


Singapore Elections Thoughts #10:
Although not a big fan of using 'National Service' as the excuse or reason for all sorts of things, I do agree wholeheartedly that if you are old enough to serve the country, you would, by implication, be old enough to think about who you would like to lead your country.


Singapore Elections Thoughts #11:
A friend thought I am Singaporean what with my interest in the GE. Politics affects everyone personally and we have no choice but to be interested and involved. It is no different from studying for an exam, or doing research for a project, or even looking for the best Mee Siam stall - it affects you, it is your life, so find out more, get interested, and make an informed decision.


Singapore Elections Thoughts #12:
Thinking about the two incidents at PAP meet-the-people sessions. Wonder why the opposition MPs never had such incidents, especially since these opposition-held wards are supposed to be near-slums. Could it be perhaps these MPs are more engaging with their constituents? Just wondering...

Oi, Najis!

On the matter of the recent Sibu buy-election and the failed blatant bribery attempt by the PM, this is what I have to say to you, Najis Razak:
Pffffffffffffffffffftttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt