PAP’s "Top Ten" Policies 2014 – Some Questions

There never has been a PAP ‘Top Ten Policy’ list – ever – in its history. So, why Top Ten? Why now?

It reminds one of David Letterman’s Top Ten List, a regular segment in his Late Show. If that was where PAP media managers got the idea, then the intent might have been similar.

‘The lists are usually given humorous topics’. For e.g., Top Ten (President) Bush Moments or Top Ten Rejected James Bond Gadgets. So, is PAP doing it to garner some laughs for what must have been an annus horribilis (horrible year) for them, their 60th anniversary notwithstanding.

Actually, if the intent is humour, I can think up of the perfect Top Ten Ways The PAP Can Improve Its Image (adapted from Letterman’s Top Ten Ways Osama bin Laden Can Improve His Image).

Drumroll, please… the list consists of only one entry: “#10. There’s no way PAP can improve its image. It’s a money-sucking, soul-less, bottomless pit.

But seriously, the need to trump one’s policies that benefitted Singaporeans when everyone knows that’s what any government is bound to do suggests what psychologists identify as ‘the need for validation’, or approval.

‘The common denominator that I found in every single interview is we want to be validated. we want to be understood. I’ve done over 35,000 interviews in my career and as soon as that camera shuts off, everyone always turns to be inevitably in their own way asks this question, “was that okay?” I heard it from President Bush. I heard it from President Obama. I’ve heard it from heroes and from housewives. I’ve heard it from victims and perpetrators of crimes.” Oprah Winfrey’s Harvard Speech, 25 May 2013.

So, it’s normal.

But, to not have to do so so overtly the last 59 years but only now and at a non-election time appears to suggest some serious slump in self-esteem or confidence. A loss of mojo. A prognostic sense that the trust built previously between party and people have dissipated or is dissipating fast.

To be fair, it could be a deficit on PAP’s part. Or, it could be rising expectations – as yet, unmet – of the electorate. Or both. But with PAP in dominance and all levers in their control, where should more blame be apportioned?

Let’s try to approach their Top Ten List with another psychological condition, a dose of healthy skepticism, which is a part of critical thinking. Hey, we are just trying to play our part to help make Singapore a smart nation, are we not?

1. Pioneer Generation package
Does a citizen have to wait till old and grey for one’s contributions to be recognised and recognised materially? Is there an ulterior motive for the PGP only to be introduced now? PAP’s analyses of voters’ numbers with a view to their votes, perhaps?

2. ASPIRE (Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE review)
Does the need for ASPIRE imply that the Poly & ITE syllabi and policies are behind the curve?
Why ‘enhance qualifications’ when a Khaw Boon Wan says, ‘You own a degree, but so what? That you can’t eat it?’

3. Skills Future Council
Again, does the need for such a Council imply that policy-makers – and citizens – are behind the curve and we are playing catch up? Worse, given that citizens are increasingly losing jobs to Indians, Chinese, Pinoys & other nationalities within our own country, does that mean that their systems of ‘education, training and career progression’ are superior to Singapore’s?

4. Enhanced public transport system
Why do taxpayers have to pay for buses to improve services so that private shareholders can justify their requests for higher fares from us? A case of being screwed and the paying more twice over to be screwed?

How does merely ‘announcing’ new rails lines in 2014 ‘benefitted Singaporeans in 2014’ when all we benefit now are more disruptions to our commute along roads where their construction is done?

5. More uses for CPF funds
Well, ok, thanks for the 5 years of annual CPF Medisave top-ups.
Meantime, how have Singaporeans benefitted in 2014 from this policy when the findings for such a policy has yet to be released, except in 2015?

6. Municipal Services Office for improved service
Misplaced fishball sticks have never been a problem of PMO (Prime Minister Office) proportion in any municipal for 49 years. Is it a ‘misplaced’ world first to house a Municipal Services Office in a PMO?

Why does London (1738km2, 8.2 mil population) vs Singapore (770 km2, 5.4 mil) pay Mayor Boris Johnson a salary of only £143,911 (S$288,000) per year, which is similar to that of a UK government Cabinet minister while little Singapore has to pay Grace Fu about S$2,000,000 i.e. 7X more, bonus not included? Oh, Grace Fu performs other duties…does that mean she has always been ‘under-employed’ and overpaid since she entered cabinet on 1 Aug 2012?

7. Lease Buyback Scheme enhanced
From 2009 to Jan 2013, only 471 while another 312 signed up after rules were further relaxed. That’s less than 0.36% of the total 220,000 eligible 3-room HDB units existing. Response has been described as ‘lukewarm’ (ST, 1 Sep 2014) or ‘poor’ (Today, 24 Feb 2014).