Tan Jee Say: PAP’s economic policies will lead to ‘social disintegration’

Tan Jee Say: PAP’s economic policies will lead to ‘social disintegration’ - [Singapore Election 2011]

Former Principal Private Secretary to Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong Mr Tan Jee Say has launched a scathing criticism of the PAP’s economic policies in the last few years.

The 57 year old Mr Tan will be contesting in the coming general election as a candidate of the Singapore Democratic Party.....

Return of the SPP

Return of the SPP [Politics - Blog]

The Electoral Threat of the Workers' Party (WP)

The Electoral Threat of the Workers' Party (WP) - [Singapore Recalcitrant]

TODAYonline | Voices | Governance, a serious business

TODAYonline Voices Governance, a serious business [TODAY - Letter from Eric Tin Keng Seng]

The onus is not only on the parties and their candidates to prove that they are deserving and trustworthy of the people's mandate.

The onus is also upon those of us who can vote, to presume nothing but exercise our own judgment and right of universal suffrage reasonably, rationally and responsibly in the best interests of this place we call our home.

TODAYonline | Voices | WP proposal reflects ground sentiment on costlier housing

TODAYonline Voices WP proposal reflects ground sentiment on costlier housing [TODAY -Letter from Maureen Foo]

An illegal raid on the reserves? Mr Mah Should Explain About Ballooning Land Costs

Mr Mah said that :-

the Worker's Party's proposal to lower flat prices by paying less for the land is an illegal raid on the reserves.

Mr Mah had written a series of special articles for TODAY and compiled them into a handbook. But many are still astonished by the "ballooning" cost of land he used to price his HDB flats.

Perhaps, Mr Mah should explained to the Electorate how lands that were cheaply acquired  in the early 1970s for the HDB, and in the Govt's land bank; through the Compulsory Land Acquisition Acts, could balloon to its current market value "according to objective market conditions and established valuation principles".

Let me also take visitors of this Blog a step back into history of Singapore. Not history about Lanfang Republic or the Sultanate of Demak by PAP new candidate MG (Ret) Chan Chun Sing. They are extinct. Singaporean voters are alive. You can view a video of his "army-styled" speech (100 years and beyond for Singapore) here and a verbatim written copy here.

I managed to dig up some interesting old information and it is available here [the interested parties' names had been blanked out for confidentiality]. It shows the actual land cost the HDB / Govt had paid for a plot of land for the "Development of Clementi New Town" way back in June 1975.

Amount paid by HDB for the acquisition of Freehold Land : S$360,000.

Title : Freehold

True Area of the Land : 12 A 0 R 03.00 P [ 12 Acre, 0 Rood or Rod, 03.00 Perch ]

I was not conversant with the Imperial Land Area units and did a quick check here (See Reference #02 below). The true land area could be converted to square foot (sq ft) as follows :-

12 acres = 12 x 43,560 = 522,720 sq ft

0 rood = 0 sq ft.

03.00 perch = 3 x 272.25 sq ft = 816.75 sq ft.

Total Area = 523,536.75 sq ft.

Cost paid by HDB for land acqusition = S$0.6876 per sq ft (psf) or nearly 70 cents per sq ft (psf).

So what HDB paid for a 523,536 sq ft Freehold piece of land in June 1975 @ S$360,000 can only buy you a 5 Rm HDB 99 year Leasehold flat today. And imagine HDB is building higher and higher, 30 to 40 storeys high, at gross plot ratio of "greater than 2.8". You can refer to the "Table: Revised GPR / Storey Height Typology" here. [This could have been raised further for a bigger population and density].

So if you allow only half of the above plot 523,536 sq ft for building HDB flats and half of it for open spaces, roads,  carparks, etc, - half  for actual building area = 261,768 sq ft X gross plot ratio 2.8 = GFA of at least 732,950 sq ft or equivalent to at least 619 nos. of 5-Rm flats @ 1,183 sq ft.

Hence, S$360,000 divide by 732,950 sq ft = S$0.49 psf GFA or $580 for a 5 Rm flat. If land cost had appreciated 25 times since 1975, then for a 5 Rm flat present value of land = $580 x 25 = $14,500. Not forgetting that HDB flat is just Leasehold and not Freehold.

As a trained pro QS I believe a construction cost of $150 psf GFA is fair and achievable for a high rise HDB block. Hence for a 5 Rm flat, construction cost is about $150 x 1,183 sq ft = $177,450.

Total Cost for 5 Rm unit = cost of land (@25 times 1975 purchase price) + construction cost = $14,500 + $177,450 = approx. S$191,950.

But the HDB is selling a 5 Rm HDB flat (BTO) to you at S$360,000 or a mark-up profit of about 46%.

So what does Mr Mah means by "current market value according to objective market conditions and established valuation principles". Does it mean current market condition is to earn a profit of about 46%.

Even if I allow land cost at 30 X 1975 prices and construction cost at $200 psf, the total cost of a 5 Rm unit is only 580 x 30 + 1,183 x 200 = S$254,000. At sale price of $360,000, the mark-up is 29%.

So what has HDB and the Govt subsidised you?

If the Worker's Party's proposal to lower flat prices by paying less for the land is an illegal raid on the reserves, then Mr Mah could have raided your pockets for the past decades or soon to raid. No wonder MG (Ret) Chan Chun Sing ended his speech to his PAP comrades, "100 years, here we come - united as one!"

MG (Ret) Chan Chun Sing  also said, "The shared perspectives/values must include what our forefathers have practice - that we put the interests of the country and the people before our own - always".

Yes, indeed. Our forefathers had ceded their land rights cheaply to the PAP Govt.

To quote our 4G-core Minister-to-be or even PM-to-be, MG Chan; again,

"I am not pessimistic or fatalistic."

"With gumption and creativity, we will stay together, stay alert, stay alive and overcome the odds of history".

Please overcome these odds of history - By not raiding our pockets and those of our future generations legally. Not forgetting the PAP's manifesto is "Securing Our Future Together".

Reference #01

Abstracted From :-

CNA 20 April 2011

GE: WP's proposals on public housing raise serious concerns, says Mah

..........~~~.........

Finally, Mr Mah explained that the Worker's Party's proposal to lower flat prices by paying less for the land is an illegal raid on the reserves.

Under the Constitution, after every general election, the new government is required to manage its expenditure based on its current revenue during its term in office. It cannot use assets which have been accumulated under previous governments, unless the Elected President agrees.

Mr Mah said: "These assets are reserves protected by the EP for future generations of Singaporeans. This system was put in to prevent a profligate government spending money which it had not accumulated. State land forms part of the reserves protected by EP.

"When the government takes state land from the reserves to use, for example for public housing, it has to pay the full value of the land back into the reserves, to replace the land which it has used. This land value is determined by the Chief Valuer, according to objective market conditions and established valuation principles.

"In this case, it is valued for public housing, which is already lower than for private housing. The govern­ment cannot arbitrarily price state land higher or lower as it pleases. Nor can it appoint a Chief Valuer to do its bidding, because the Chief Valuer's appointment is protected, and subject to the approval of the EP."

And paying less for land to build flats was not a casual matter of "left pocket to right pocket" but of raiding the reserves meant for future generations.

Reference #02
Imperial units - Land Area

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_units#Area

Acre - This article is about unit of area measure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre

Reference #03

Optimisation of land use through innovative legislation in Singapore

Reference #04
YPAP March 15, 2010
MND COS Debate on Affordability of HDB flats

Diary of A Singaporean Mind: GE 2011 : Time for change....

Diary of A Singaporean Mind: GE 2011 : Time for change....

The Toxic Assets of Mah Bow Tan

The Toxic Assets of Mah Bow Tan (Singapore Notes)

A welcome wind of change

A welcome wind of change - (ST Forum - Letter by Lee Seck Kay )

Personal attacks on WP's Chen will 'backfire' .....

"Personal attacks on WP's Chen will 'backfire': Analysts" - ST Online

THE People's Action Party is unlikely to go 'full guns blazing' or step up personal attack on Workers' Party candidate Chen Show Mao, said two political analysts.....the MSM reported.

Will the PAP poison its own water?

We need more candidates with Chen Show Mao's "calibre" to help face the threats of globalisation from the external environment. At least, PMETs should endorse him for their own "future".

As a PMET, I could not see how PAP's manifesto and new "home-grown" candidates from Ms Tin Pei Ling to even MG Chan Chun Sing could help "Securing Our Future Together" .....

I wrote in this Blog on 29 Mar 2011 the piece " Sugar Coating of New PAP Candidates Part 2 " :-

THE People's Action Party (PAP) chairman Lim Boon Heng said at the unveiling of the party's third batch of candidates that a key issue the party will fight on in the coming election is "the kind of future" Singaporeans want for themselves and their children. He said,

"Given the environment surrounding Singapore and the competition it faces, what kind of future do we want?"

He sounded as if he was speaking as the Chairman of an Opposition Party.....

I think the answer to the outgoing PAP Chairman's earlier question is not just "what kind of future do we want?". It is the counter view, "Who can bring about this CHANGE?". And I think Chen Show Mao's candidacy is WP's belated answer "in action" to him.

DPM Teo Chee Hean said Singaporeans have to consider whether opposition parties can deliver on the "laundry list of things" they have laid out in their manifestoes, as reported in MyPaper on 20 April 2011.

He said even if certain items in the opposition parties' "laundry list of things" are similar to those of PAP's, it is "the PAP has shown it can deliver with implementation and execution".

The PAP could not blame the opposition parties yet on "implementation and execution". It is the PAP that is incumbent and in power as the Govt. The PAP had even tilted "implementation and execution" in its own favour such as for HDB Lift Upgrading.

And don't forget what PM Lee had said before in reply to CNN International Asia-Pacific managing editor Ellana Lee's question on what he would have done anything differently on hindsight for the past decade during a dialogue session as part of CNN's 30th anniversary celebrations. PM Lee said :-

"I think if we had known how quickly the pace of change would accelerate and how much our people would be under pressure from globalisation, we would have prepared them for it earlier."

Two past PAP manifestoes had failed to address and solve the common Singaporeans' future for the last 10 years in the face of globalisation, do you expect to see any "difference" to come from new PAP candidates, in the like of Ms Tin Pei Ling to even MG Chan Chun Sing, who are groomed within the "closed" warm PAP "cocoon" and political culture; to initiate a change while under the tutelage of SM Goh and MM Lee?

An intelligent Electorate should be looking at "a new shopping list for a better detergent" and Chen Show Mao could be just that "detergent" Singaporeans are looking for.

"Legacy Of SM Goh"

"Legacy Of SM Goh" - Singapore Notes.

Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong was asked by China's CCTV if he had inherited his legacy from his predecessor Lee Kuan Yew, just as Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong inherited his. Goh Chok Tong said LKY never talked about his legacy and "I never talk about my legacy".

The Million Dollar Salary Syndrome - Why PAP Could Not Work Like "a Bolt of Lightning" Anymore?

Has the ruling PAP become a ridiculous party and political system? While it is capable of putting a "lightning rod" like Ms Tin Pei Ling to attract "a Bolt of Lightning" without an Election battle, its Ang Mo Kio "A- Team" is certainly not able to foresee and prevent the accident at AMK MRT Station in which a Thai girl lost both her legs.

Recent critics in ST Forum had commented on "Why an opposition 'A' team may not work?". This is very much a fictitious argument. An existing A-Team from the ruling PAP might not work effectively, so why be bothered to cast aspersions on an Opposition 'A' team which is not even given a chance yet?

In reality, what that affects the common people on the ground is not easily visible to so called A-Teams within the ruling PAP. Even if it is visible, it may be given a "blind" or "secondary" eye at the expense of general public interest due to "commercial" reasons. I cited the accident at the AMK MRT Station as an example because we have existing A-Teams overseeing it. - an A-Team each from the PAP AMK GRC, the Ministry of Transport and the SMRT. The AMK MRT Station is a very crowded station and these A-Teams could not use their "common sense" to see to the priority to get the barriers installed there first.

You may recall the current installation of safety barriers was initiated only after many complaints from the public. The top management of the SMRT was more concerned about upgrading shopping experience at the MRT stations to collect more revenue. It took a long time to deliberate on the decision to add on protective safety barriers due to additional cost issues. If accidents had not become too often to disrupt MRT traffic and caused greater economic losses, do you think the SMRT would emarked on the upgrading works? Would the Ministry of Transport have taken actions? Not for many years with these controlling A-Teams.

Conversely, upon the completion of safety glass barriers works, SMRT was very fast to reap advertising revenue. You see these double standards of the current controlling A-Teams? Not when it has to spend money to safeguard public safety at their own costs?


Photo : Singapore MRT - Safety Barrier for elevated station platform. Note : Advertisement put up immediately.

 

Photo : Singapore MRT - Undeground station platform at Bishan. Note : Advertisement on glass panel.


Despite what PMO Minister and Second Transport Minister Lim Hwee Hua said that 'commuters would be worse off with nationalised transport system', I had a pleasant experience travelling on the Nanjing Metro MRT while in China.

Although the Nanjing Metro was built later than our MRT lines, it was fast to put in safety barriers in the interest of public safety, although having design fault such as a wider gap between the platform and train. Singapore MRT had overcame this design fault but allow a greater "fault" at the expense of passenger safety and cost savings which ignored a potential "legal" issue in the laws of "equity" or "natural justice".

However, SMRT was so fast and efficient to reap "advertisment" revenue after putting in barriers.


Photo : Nanjing Metro - Glass safety barriers at Yuantong Expo Centre Underground Station.
Note : No advertisments



Photo : Nanjing Metro - Glass safety barriers at Andemen Interchange. Above Ground Station
Note : No advertisments / Train glass was reflecting nearby buildings.



Photo : Nanjing Metro - Train Internal View,  Note : No advertisments on wall and floor.



Photo : Nanjing Metro - Signage at Andemen Interchange. Note : No advertisement.

Photo : Nanjing Metro - Map at Yuantong Expo Centre Station.
Note : Jiang Xin Zhou is the island near the Olympic Station where
Singapore's GLC had purchased some land rights but had
faced clearance issues with local grape farm owners.

Photo : Nanjing Metro - Use token instead of ticket at gantry. Note : Payment by cash : RMB 2~3,
Payment by Nanjing Citizen or IC Card : RBM 1.80.

Photo : The Nanjing Olympic Stadium MRT Exit at Hexi.

Do you see the difference in mindsets between our public and private sectors? Do you see the difference in mindset between our competitive system and the nationalised public transport system in China? Do you see any difference in efficiency? There seems to be a "Million Dollar Salary Syndrome or air" with the PAP Ministers and top public servants which make it easy for them to dismiss issues which they lack competency and interest. In politics, PAP believes in a "nationalised" system to favour PAP. But in transportation they don't believe in a "nationalised" system. Do you see the irony and double standards? 

This could explain why more well qualified scholars (including ex-public servants) are now joining the Opposition Parties and the PAP is finding it hard to recruit such high calibre candidates from the private sector.

PM Lee reminded his PAP audience these key points when he launched the ruling PAP manifesto during the Young PAP's 25th Anniversary Rally,

Never forget that we are servants of the people,

Always maintain a sense of humility and service,

Be as strict with ourselves as we are with others.

During Election time, the PAP is subservient to the interests of the people as "servants of the people" but when the Election is over, the PAP is subservient only to MONEY which put public interests at the mercy of the PAP policies.

A discerning Electorate should pick up arguments which are given as a matter of convenience by politicians simply to disparage ideas from the Opposition. I observed that letters published recently in the MSM had  echoed such  views by the PAP Ministers which treated the Electorate as if they are ignorant and ill-informed "servants", and the PAP Ministers and supporters as if they are "colonial masters".

I hope Nanjing is not taking a lesson from Singapore on how to budget for the next YOG in 2014.

[Note :- Nanjing’s population in Year 2000 Nov Census was almost 3.78 million. (Singapore 4.02 million then including non-residents, and comparable). I do not have the latest statistics as the population census was just completed last year end , but unofficial figures for Nanjing’s population for 2009 was 7.7 million, compared to 5.07 million for Singapore last year based on census. The land area of Nanjing is about 9.5 times Singapore’s area.]

Reference #01

ST Forum Apr 9, 2011
Thai teen's tragedy: Will SMRT help her?

I AM saddened by the photograph of Thai student Peneakchanasak Nitcharee yesterday ('I want to see my family').

The 14-year-old's hopes and dreams have been shattered by a horrific accident, which should not have happened had appropriate safety measures been taken swiftly on the Ang Mo Kio train station's open-deck platform.

Her parents, whom I gather from yesterday's report are from a low-income background, have stated that they are not in a financial position to pay for the hospitalisation costs.

While I have no doubt that kind Singaporeans will rally to assist them financially, as they have so often done, I am curious to know whether SMRT will do likewise - if not from a point of legal liability, which has never surfaced in all the past fatalities, at least because of a strong tug at the heartstrings in this case.

Ralph S. Lesslar

Reference #02

ST Forum Apr 15, 2011

Why an opposition 'A' team may not work

IN LAST Friday's report, 'Why calls for two-party system won't go away', Ms Lydia Lim states that there are more qualified and credible opposition candidates this upcoming election and that the 'new candidate with the most impressive academic credentials' could belong to the opposition.

While I agree that this might be true, it does not address the fact that there could be insufficient talent to form two governments in Singapore. What she cited refers to the distribution of the talent pool among the different parties. In fact, we see the opposition having trouble fielding candidates to contest a few group representation constituencies, which is indicative of its ability to form an 'A' team for this election.

Her second argument for the opposition lies in having alternative viewpoints in Parliament 'to scrutinise and critique government policy'. However, if such critiques come from a minority party without veto power, it will not be able to make an impact on policies. Thus would the inclusion of opposition in Parliament really result in the checks and balances envisioned?

Finally, Ms Lim used Apple and its iPhone as an example of how world-beating innovations tend to come from 'the second party'. Can we be sure that the opposition parties we see today are the equivalent of Apple in the political scene? As the late founder of Ford Motor Company Henry Ford said: 'You can't build a reputation on what you are going to do.'

We need to consider whether the opposition parties have shown themselves capable of forming an 'A' team and providing checks and balances in Parliament.

Goh Ching Soon

Reference #03

TODAY Apr 16, 2011

Commuters 'would be worse off with nationalised transport system'

SINGAPORE - The Government has considered the idea before but it did not think a nationalised public transport system was feasible, Second Transport Minister Lim Hwee Hua said on Friday.

And in rebuttal to the transport proposal in the Workers' Party manifesto, Mrs Lim said commuters would even be worse off.

"I presume the underlying motivation for nationalisation is because it's cheap. But nationalising in a lot of other countries has led to inefficiencies. Ultimately, you get cheap transport but it doesn't quite work out for the residents," she told reporters on the sidelines of a community event .....

Reference #04

AsiaOne Apr 16, 2011

Man arrested for attempting suicide at MRT station

A man has been arrested for attempting suicide at Sembawang MRT on Friday night.

The man, in his mid-30s, had fallen onto the train tracks at Sembawang MRT station. The Singapore Civil Defence Force and Singapore Police Force said they received a call at about 11.35pm.....