Still, the PM earned more than $2 million and this is a substantial amount to the heartlander who most probably cannot amass $2 million in their lifetime let alone in a year. This is an emotive argument that is hard to dispute and the PAP ministers cannot easily beat that kind of spin by its detractors.

However, what many people missed the forest for the trees is that ministers’ mysterious complex formula for its pensions are also to be replaced with the transparent CPF contribution scheme. This is the real essence of the ministers’ pay cut in the long term, not a pay revision per se however impressive or weak it is to the PAP fan or critic.

It is one thing to pay someone in his office, but it is another thing altogether if they are continued to be paid after they left office and retired. With that broad stroke of taking away the pension, it is by itself the saving grace of the entire recommendations of the review committee. More on that later.

According to the PAP which is falling over itself trying to do damage control, Jason Neo has resigned from the YPAP which he just joined in June, and the photo was taken earlier in February this year. The vigilante who exposed Jason Neo’s seditious remarks, Noor Firdaus Abdul Samad (Firdaus Venezio in Facebook), is a NSP member.

So there is an entertaining context to this vigilante fracas. Jason Neo made seditious remarks and should be investigated by the police and a prison, fine or community service sentence is likely given the recent trends under those charged with the Sedition Act over the years. Noor Firdaus scored political points in this political game. That the photo was taken in February meant he hunted Jason Neo’s Facebook album for any old photos to opportunistically score political points for his NSP at the expense of PAP. All is fair in love, war and politics and credit should be given to NSP for this internet boxing.

SDP’s Chee Soon Juan is also trying to score belated cheap political points piggy backing on NSP’s efforts without doing any work. However, WP has gentlemanly kept itself above the fray and does not want to demean itself in kicking the PAP on the ground when the PAP is doing a good job of stumbling by themselves.

Jason Neo obviously did not learn from Tin Pei Ling’s humbling humiliating Kate Spade experience. Don’t ever put any photo in one’s Facebook that can be exploited for political ends. Too bad for Jason Neo and the PAP if they didn’t learn from past mistakes and history. Nonetheless, the PAP internet brigade is out for tit-for-tat vengeance probably and NSP members like Noor Firdaus better edit their Facebook content like albums and wall postings as they might be next in line in this internet boxing.

Jason Neo apologises to kindergarten over offensive caption
Former Young PAP member who posted picture with offensive caption requests visit
By Tessa Wong

The former Young People’s Action Party (YP) member who posted a picture of kindergarten pupils with an offensive caption has sent a written apology to the school.

He has also asked for permission from the school, Huda Kindergarten, to visit so that he can apologise in person.

Mr Jason Neo sent a copy of the letter to The Straits Times on Saturday. The police is currently investigating Mr Neo for posting on Facebook a photo of Huda Kindergarten pupils in a school bus accompanied by an offensive caption.

The caption caused a furore online and resulted in several police reports lodged against Mr Neo, who resigned from YP last week. In the letter, Mr Neo says: ‘I wish to offer Huda Kindergarten, its students and their parents or guardians my utmost sincere and unreserved apology. I had no intention whatsoever to cause any hurt or offence to your school, or to the members of any race or religion.’

Credit to the PAP MPs who set up the game, specifically Teo Ser Luck who with one stroke, recovered from his horrific GE gaffe in a viral Youtube video . This set a new tone for the new parliament, whatever cynics of the PAP would think. Pritam’s witty retorts in his Facebook commentary on the game is also funny and insightful. Pritam is left-leaning, true to WP’s original roots, but the WP is now generally seen as centrist by some in the PAP. A compliment to the WP as it reflects balance in his positioning.

Pritam also qualified that he can be right-wing. Whether he meant it as his views on xenophobia, foreign policy or security, typical expressions of right-wing politics, he did not elaborate.

Football, and sports in general, can unite and parliament is metaphorically described as a team Singapore in this friendly match, scoring for Singapore together while each team member has his own quirks or loyalty to a different club. Reminds me of Tan Cheng Bock, ever the street-wise politician who participated in Eat Curry Day without officially endorsing it and who in his PE campaigning promised for sports to unify Singaporeans. He knew right away what could make Singaporeans stand together against the Other as the Kallang Roar demonstrated years ago.

Workers’ Party (WP) MP Pritam Singh was bearing down on goal during the inaugural Parliament versus media football match when he was fouled.

The referee pointed to the spot and awarded a penalty. Minister of State for Trade and Industry Teo Ser Luck – the People’s Action Party MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC – handed Mr Singh the ball.

‘I told him he should take it because he won it,’ Mr Teo said.

Said Mr Singh: ‘I agreed to take it when he asked me to.’

Singapore Parliament Team
by Pritam Singh on Saturday, November 5, 2011 at 1:56am
Sometime in August this year, MOS Teo Ser Luck invited the WP MPs to be part of a parliament soccer team comprising PAP MPs and parliament staff (solid players our parliament staff). The team came together last night for its first “competitive” fixture against a combined Singapore media team. Faisal Manap and I represented the WP. For all the team’s industry and number of chances created, we unfortunately lost 1-2.

The game was played in good spirit and friendly banter. Before the game, I informed MOS Tan Chuan Jin I was a leftie (both in terms of my kicking foot and my general ideological leaning) and that I would be happy to play anywhere on the left side of the pitch. He responded noting that the WP appeared generally rather centrist, to which I agreed to play in the centre if need be, but not before adding in jest that I could be “right-winged” on some matters. A round of laughs ensued. On the bench at the start of the second half, Ag Minister for MCYS MG Chan Chun Sing jokingly noted that if the Parliament team won the game, the media probably would not report the story since we were competing against a combined Singapore media team. I jokingly retorted that such non-reportage would prove the mainstream media was biased! Speaker of Parliament Michael Palmer in good humour, promised me an extra minute of speaking time in Parliament after I scored a consolatory penalty.

But the evening was not just about a friendly football game. After the game, some MPs attended a briefing conducted by Singapore Sports Council (SSC) CEO Lim Teck Yin and his staff, who proceeded to outline the SSC’s strategic direction for Singapore sports over the next 20 years – Vision 2030. While it was a very broad-ranging exchange, very strategic in outlook, I could not help but to get the sense that the SSC wants to be even more deliberate in encouraging Singaporeans to turn to sports in a purposeful way, not just at the national level, but at the community level as well.

The other take-away from the briefing was a desire to encourage bottom-up involvement and also to bypass bureaucracy in sports (e.g. a willingness by the authorities to explore the usage of unused land for sports etc.) This bodes well for Singapore and I hope Singaporeans explore possibilities with the SSC and work with them to overcome hurdles and turn to sports to make it a central part of their lives. After all, keeping active through any sport is a great way to keep the mind and body healthy.

Some pictures of the event from MOS Tan Chuan Jin’s facebook page:

Compared to the Workers’ Party speeches, where each had their own steady firing arc to cover, Lina Chiam’s maiden speech was full of motherhood pleas and flimsy rhetoric. As a sampler, this was one sweeping style of many in Lina Chiam’s opening speech in parliament, and it seems lifted from a PAP 10-year series on public rhetoric as it is just as bad.

“Besides increasing workforce in large quantities,Singapore needs to grow our resourcefulness and creativity in order to compete in the global arena This means we may have to reshape our educational system as well.We also need to embrace diversity in society,accept new age social media to be able to live and work together in harmony, respect each other’s beliefs and ideals. And to be gracious and compassionate to each other’s community by helping one another.“

And then she attempted to go into the nuts and bolts of policy making, or policy shoot-in-the-foot.

“The Government should be less prescriptive when designing policies affecting citizens’ lives with its social engineering agenda. The decision to restrict the purchase of HDB flats only when Singaporeans get married or are over 35 years old may no longer be appropriate. I urge the Government to reconsider this restriction and allow Singapore born citizens to buy their first HDB flats simply when they reach the age of 21. We understand the sky rocking HDB prices.By the time a citizen reaches 35 years old to obtain a flat , the price of the flat may have tripled and be out of a persons reach.We want to emphasize that it has become the right and aspiration of each and every young Singaporean a desire to own an HDB flat as soon as possible at a reasonable price. Expectedly many divorces in our society today can be blamed on the HDB’s policy on this matter.”

So she wants to loosen the criteria for HDB ownership and allow citizens who turn 21 to buy HDB flats. Would this not already push upwards pressure on HDB prices, new and resale, as the pool of buyers has increased? This goes against her logic that “we understand the sky rocketing HDB prices”. Obviously she and SPP does not understand as they are worsening the problem by spurring demand. Supply already cannot keep up and more demand for flats is going to make the housing problem acute.

There is more to SPP’s weak grasp of problems to solve in parliament soon. Lina Chiam has fielded some questions for the ministers and most are downright questionable in terms of her and SPP’s political stewardship in parliament.

One opportunistic question was whether the PUB can prevent such accidents and suicides in reservoirs. Anybody discerning would know that the Bedok reservoir is an open public place, and there is little one can do to prevent copy cat suicides. Fencing up Bedok reservoir would not solve the problem, it would only displace it to Pierce or another catchment area reservoir which is virtually impossible and unthinkable to fence up. Asking such a question in parliament only shows how shallow she is.

Then there is another question on how many foreigners commit suicide. Frankly, with foreigners competing for Singaporeans in housing and transport, I doubt this is a burning question that Singaporeans bother about.

There is also a question asking for the names of those detained under the ISA. Anyone who watched the local film Sandcastle or have common sense would realise that some people want to be left alone and the publication of all those detained under the ISA would put them on the stand, not the PAP government. The PAP government can withstand public scrutiny, but those particular individuals might feel shamed and victimised. Again a political naive question from Lina Chiam.

A question that underscored SPP’s municipal focus rather than national agenda was one about the market and food centre at Blk 210 Toa Payoh Lorong 8. Lina Chiam and SPP’s first round in the ring and they are asking about a market in their former Potong Pasir turf. Yes the residents in that area are affected and might be curious, but most of us would not bother. Instead of asking if NTUC Fairprice or Kopitiam is threatening the wet market and koptiam small family businesses across Singapore as a whole , she wants to ask about a Lorong 8 market. Nothing wrong, but its small focus is disastrous if SPP wants to gain credibility as an opposition party, not as an estate management company.

SPP with Lina Chiam as the NCMP is out of its depth. From the way she carried herself in rally speeches, the CNA forum  and now her parliament speech and questions, I really doubt Lina Chiam has the intellect and panache to defend herself in parliament when the PAP decides to run rings around her. I won’t have much sympathy for her either as being a NCMP, it meant that she was not even elected by her people in the first place.

Workers’ Party Sec-Gen Low Thia Khiang, the Teochew from Hougang and risked all to stand in Aljunied, closed the WP’s position on its plan in the 12th parliament. He questioned the PAP government’s version of trade-offs with regards to welfare, housing, healthcare. That is what policy-making is all about – constantly evolving trade-offs and balance. He also stressed that despite the political odds against them but with the people’s support nonetheless, the WP would turn parliament into a First World one.

The heartlander issues of housing, education, transport, healthcare, welfare and social net resonated in speeches of the majority of the WP MPs and NCMPs. As a WP apologist and so you know where I am coming from in my bias, I have nothing but compliments that WP is mostly on the right track in terms of these core concerns, despite the realistic difficulties of trying to please all members of the public although it is impossible to do so.

WP tried to strike a chord with all constituents – those who are interested in the mundane but pressing problems like jobs, bills, schooling, costs, house; and those interested in the esoterics of governance like happiness, freedom of information, values and ideals. While there are certainly overlaps in these topics in the speeches, I felt that the heartland issues were dealt more by Low Thia Khiang, Chen Show Mao (education and healthcare), Gerald Giam (transport, housing, healthcare), Yee Jenn Jong (education, SMEs and jobs) and Yaw Shin Leong (foreign workers, jobs, CPF). The lightweight fluffy issues were addressed more by Sylvia Lim (happiness), Muhamad Faisal (social ills) and Pritam Singh (media and information). Hence, of the 8 WP speakers, 5 focused more on livelihood while 3 dabbled more on lifestyle.

Whether the right balance was achieved is subjective and again there is no pleasing everybody.

From the Hougang days, WP has always banked on its image as a disciplined party rooted in heartland issues – being employed, safety net and those who fall through the cracks, a roof over the head, food on the table and efficient cheap commuting.  However with a larger beachhead now from 1 MP and 1 NCMP in the 11th parliament to 6 MPs and 2 NCMPs in the 12th parliament, WP can afford some political capital to capture the imagination of the younger generation of voters. The same voters who might pull away from SDP and NSP to vote for WP in the 13th parliament. The same voters who are blissfully ignorant relatively about OA, SA, MA and minimum sum in the CPF, the difference between Medisave, Medishield and Medifund, about foreign worker levy, quota and the S Pass etc. They are the important voters that all political parties have to pamper more and more – the Strawberry Generation whose hilarious self-centred, self-righteous, superficial views are typical in the Facebook comments in TOC and TR.

There is also something else underneath the WP speeches. Yaw Shin Leong’s speech is heartland in orientation, suggesting that WP wants to retain that image of a low-middle income pull and not risk going into the fluffy issues in Hougang. Not wise for Hougang’s new MP for his opening salvo in parliament if he is going to talk less about work and welfare. NCMP Gerald Giam and Yee Jenn Jong’s heartland pitch, also suggests that in the inexorable march to win hearts and minds in East Coast GRC and Joo Chiat SMC if the boundaries are the same in the next GE, WP had to flash the image that these NCMPs know what are the main concerns of heartlanders. Aljunied GRC MPs Sylvia Lim, Muhamad Faisal and Pritam Singh then had the riskier onus of giving a softer side of WP as a calculated move to compliment Chen Show Mao and Low Thia Khiang’s heartland messages.

The first shots were fired and WP is now officially skirmishers in the PAP-dominated parliament. The years ahead would allow us ample opportunities to see if WP remains true to its bread and butter focus, or they would lose their way in trying to meet the aspirations of the Strawberry Generation new media mob. There is a trade-off there too for the WP.

Crudely measured, crude oil barrel price jumped up by 22% from 1Q 2010 to 4Q 2011, from S$99.38 to the current S$121.68. Tariff has jumped by 17% from 1Q 2010 to 4Q 2011, from 22.87 cents/kwh to 26.98 cents/kwh.

The weird thing for us to understand is why the high oil cost is affecting our electricity tariff. Singapore’s electricity is generated from natural gas, not oil. Already in 2006, 78% of the electricity generation was from natural gas imported from Malaysia and Indonesia.  That figure would have increased since then.  EMA’s explanation is that  the price of natural gas is pegged to that of oil and so if oil goes up, the cost of gas would also go up.

Another confusing bit for someone like me uninitiated in exchange rates is how the cost of oil, which is in USD, has become cheaper over 2010-2011 as the SGD is stronger but yet tariff has climbed over the last 2 years, albeit slowly. With possible appreciating USD compared to SGD in 4Q2011 and generally increased demand in oil as winter approaches pushing price of oil upwards, tariff might go up again in 1Q2012 after this brief respite in 4Q2011.

From EMA, tariff and weightage of component costs

SP Releases

4Q2011
For the quarter 1 Oct 2011 to 31 Dec 2011, electricity tariffs will decrease by an average of 1.2% as lower fuel oil prices resulted in lower power generation costs. The average fuel oil price over the last three months (1 Jul to 15 Sep 2011) has decreased from S$125.16 to S$121.68 per barrel.

The electricity tariff for households will decrease by 1.1% (or 0.3 cents per kWh) from 27.28 to 26.98 cents per kWh. On average, families in four-room HDB flats will pay about $1.24 less a month.

3Q2011
For the quarter 1 Jul 2011 to 30 Sep 2011, electricity tariffs will increase by an average of 6.8% as higher fuel oil prices have resulted in higher power generation costs. The average fuel oil price over the last three months (1 Apr to 15 Jun 2011) has increased by 13.8% from US$88.63 to US$100.84 per barrel. As the Singapore dollar has appreciated vis-à-vis the US dollar, the increase in S$ terms is 10.4%, from S$113.37 to S$125.16 per barrel. The formula for electricity tariff is based on the average fuel oil prices in the preceding quarter. The objective of this approach is to smoothen out fluctuations in the fuel oil markets.

The electricity tariff for households will increase by 6.6% (or 1.70 cents per kWh) from 25.58 to 27.28 cents per kWh. The increases in the average monthly electricity bill for households will range from $2.13 for 1-room HDB flats to $6.71 for 4-room HDB flats.

2Q2011
The average fuel oil price increased sharply by 14% from S$99.45 to S$113.37 per barrel over the last three months. At the same time, there was an annual review of the grid network cost or the cost of transporting electricity through the power grid, which resulted in network charges being lowered by 3% for the year ahead. The significant increase in fuel cost, however, more than offsets the reduced network charges. As a result, electricity tariffs will increase by 6.5% on average.

For households, the electricity tariff will increase by 6.1% or 1.48 cents (S$0.0148) per kWh to 25.58 cents (S$0.2558) per kWh. On average, families in four-room HDB flats will pay about $4.85 more a month for their electricity based on the new tariff.

1Q2011
The average fuel oil price over the last three months has increased to $99.45 per barrel. Hence, the average electricity tariffs will increase by 3.3% for the quarter 1 Jan 2011 to 31 Mar 2011.

The electricity tariff for households will increase by 0.76 cents ($0.0076) to 24.1 cents (S$0.241) per kWh. Families in four-room HDB flats will on average pay about $3.15 more a month on electricity charges.

4Q2010
The average fuel oil price over the last three months has decreased to $95.41 per barrel. Hence, the average electricity tariffs, including that for households, will be reduced by 3.3% for the quarter 1 Oct 2010 to 31 Dec 2010.

The electricity tariff for households will be reduced by 0.79 cent per kWh to 23.34 cents (S$0.2334) per kWh. On average, families in four-room HDB flats will pay about $3 less a month.

3Q2010
For the quarter 1 Jul 2010 to 30 Sep 2010, the electricity tariff for households will increase by 2.42% or 0.57 cents (S$0.0057) per kWh to 24.13 cents (S$0.2413) per kWh. The average increase in tariffs across all customer categories for Jul to Sep 2010 will be 2.42%. On average, families in four-room HDB flats will pay about $2.33 more a month.

The average fuel oil price over the last three months remained stable at about S$102 per barrel. However, the non-fuel components of the tariff have increased due to higher capital and operating costs of power generation. The tariff also includes an adjustment for under-collection in the previous quarter.

2Q2010
The fuel oil price has continued to increase since the electricity tariffs were last reviewed in Dec 09. The average fuel oil price over the last three months has increased from S$99.38 to S$102.95 per barrel.

The electricity tariff for households will therefore increase by 3.02% or 0.69 cent (S$0.0069) per kWh to 23.56 cents (S$0.2356) per kWh for the coming quarter 1 Apr 10 to 30 Jun 10. On average, families in four-room HDB flats will see a $2.47 increase in their monthly electricity bill for the quarter.

1Q2010
For the quarter 1 Jan 2010 to 31 Mar 2010, the electricity tariff for households will increase by 5.4% or 1.18 cents (S$0.0118) per kWh to 22.87 cents (S$0.2287) per kWh. The average increase in tariffs, across all customer categories, for Jan to Mar 2010 will be 5.5%

The increase in tariffs in the coming quarter is due largely to higher fuel oil prices. The average fuel oil price over the last three months has increased by around S$7.35 to S$99.38 per barrel. This is 8% higher than the S$92.03 per barrel used in setting the tariffs for the current quarter.

Besides the novelty of the first ever night race and putting Singapore in the international map with that feat, did Singapore bring in much vaunted tourism dollars with the F1? We don’t have the figures yet and hopefully the government can reveal a bit more about the dollars and cents in this world class act. It is all about money after all, and taxpayers money for that matter since the Singapore F1 is a venture between the government and tycoon Ong Beng Seng.

The government is footing 60% of the bill supposedly and we want to know whether it is money well spent so far in terms of return of investments, granted that the years since 2009 has been slightly unstable as far as the global economy is concerned and pulling in big global money now is an uphill task. While we can do our own sums, Thoughts of a Cynical Investor has already done the maths on tourism (albeit not specifically F1 tourism) and the returns do not look promising.

 

Government mulls F1′s future in Singapore
By Evelyn Choo | Posted: 25 September 2011 1824 hrs

SINGAPORE: The Singapore government has engaged independent consultants to review the value proposition of continuing with the Formula One Night Race here.

Giving an update on contract negotiations, Second Minister for Trade and Industry S Iswaran said authorities are hoping for a “mutually-beneficial agreement, sooner rather than later”.

And if Singapore does decide to go forward, it will do so “decisively”.

The five-year contract for the Singapore Night Race ends next year.

On many counts, the night race has been good for Singapore, says the government.

And the benefits are mutual, with F1 chief Bernie Ecclestone declaring the race to be “the jewel in the Formula One crown”.

But all eyes are on the pivotal agreement yet to be made by two important parties – the Singapore Grand Prix organisers and the Formula One administration.

Mr Iswaran said: “I’m hoping it doesn’t have to be too late, and we have obviously till the fifth year of the race for it to actually be concluded. But if we can find a way to take it forward, and I think that is also Mr Ecclestone’s interest in this matter and also SGP (Singapore GP), then I think we should be able to work something out sooner.

“But I don’t want to put a specific timeline on it, simply because I think we should allow the parties involved to do their work and come to the right conclusions.”

Under the terms of the current contract, Singapore could host the race for a total of seven years.

Mr Iswaran explained: “We have a five-year contract in the first instance with the extension of five years, which is at the option of the Formula One administration. So in other words, the Formula One Administration has to exercise the option for another five years.

“Now upon that, we have the option which is through SGP, the race promoter, the opportunity to then continue for five years or to say that we’ll just give two years notice and stop. In other words, there’ll be a minimum of seven years because of this structure but we can potentially go beyond that.”

Mr Iswaran added both parties should be given time to come to the right conclusions.

The government is doing its own preparations, embarking on a comprehensive review of the race.

Mr Iswaran said: “What we have on the government side (is), we have engaged independent consultants because we want to make sure that going forward, we have a clearer idea of what is the value proposition of the F1 for Singapore for all those dimensions I talked about – from the tourism point of view, the broader economic spin-off point of view, and social point of view.

“So we want to see what is the platform that it creates for us, how we can potentially get better value for it, how it will be situated in the context of a broader tourism strategy and complement our economic strategy. So that’s the scope of the studies that we’re doing.

“So as you can imagine, quite a few aspects to it. My own sense is that we need to have some kind of closure on this – certainly before next year’s race.”

The event has raked up some S$100 million worth of tourism receipts annually, and Mr Iswaran expects this figure to remain strong.

Visitor numbers have also been favourable – with more than 110,000 unique visitors coming to Singapore just for the race, over the past three years.

But like the Marina Bay street circuit, it does get a little bumpy – some retailers in the vicinity have long complained of the dip in shopper traffic during the race due to road closures.

Mr Iswaran said the logistics team has tried to deal with this consistently since 2008.

He cited a strong engagement programme with stakeholders, and will be looking at how else the situation can be mitigated.

What is the ISA really?

There is a lot of political baggage behind it rightly or wrongly by bleeding heart activists and opportunistic politicians particularly since the infamous 1987 Marxist Conspiracy. The ISA is a law, like any law, that can be abused, simple as that. Defamation laws are necessary in modern societies. But they can be abused. Public entertainment licences are useful to regulate performances. But they can be abused. Similarly, the ISA is a useful security tool to deal with real enemies of the state in terrorism, espionage or sabotage, but it can be abused.

There are lots of misconception that detention under the ISA is indefinite or there is “detention without trial”. The devil is in the details. In fact, detention is up to a maximum of 2 years, although the sentence can be renewed. There is a trial, not by open court but by an advisory board, or in fact, a tribunal since ISA cases are heard by a Supreme Court judge and 2 prominent citizens. Evidence is presented and those arrested have lawyers to defend them. Some of the JI members detained had criminal lawyer Subhas Anandan to defend them. The advisory board can choose to release those arrested and can make such recommendations to the President. Hence, the executive can call for the arrest of individuals but the tribunal and the president can overturn it. Nevertheless, to our public knowledge, no arrests by the ISD have been overruled by the advisory board.

Should Singapore follow Malaysia’s lead on in abolishing the ISA? The important issue is not whether the ISA is discarded or not. The important issue is whether there are special laws to secure Singapore, special laws to arrest those who plan to carry out terrorist attacks but fortunately have not carried it out yet.  The ISA’s main power not covered in the penal code is to arrest individuals before they commit a crime.

Thought crime as far as the cynics go. And that is a philosophical question. Is planning of a crime itself a crime as no crime has been carried out? At which point in the planning a crime has been committed, to permit preventive detention? Preventive detention under limited scenarios is arguably better than punitive detention since there are no victims. In crimes against the state e.g. terrorism, we should not wait for a bomb to explode and then arrest the terrorists. They should be arrested before they allow the bomb to explode.

The government is left with many options on what to do with the ISA after Malaysia’s bold and politically astute move, besides not doing anything now. One of them would be to reform the ISA, and retain the spirit of the law to protect people and property. The other option is Malaysia’s one. Be politically savvy and make the public contented by repealing the ISA, and with low fanfare introduce new specialised but equally tough laws to deal with terrorism, foreign sabotage and espionage. Old wine in new bottle, more or less.

There should be tough laws with preventive detention, closed door trials etc that are palatable to the public. The balance is hard to achieve but the path to it is reforming, not removing, the ISA.

Tan Cheng Bock is calling out to the moderates among the 2,274,773 eligible voters. The make-up of so-called moderates would be those who want change, but who do not want it too drastic, who want someone that would not be confrontational but yet bold enough to put his foot down. These same moderates would see through the rhetoric of candidates like Tony Tan and Tan Jee Say as an extension of the spin of the PAP and the SDP. They do not want someone to be the proxy for either the PAP or the opposition. They understand that the president should not polarise politics, and neither should he simply be a puppet. Tan Cheng Bock is the all-rounded candidate.

He has experience in parliament and performed excpetionally in his past GE as a PAP candidate at Ayer Rajah. No doubt his contributions as a MP were not spectacular, but neither was his performance dismal. From the last presidential broadcast on TV on Friday night, he appeared sincere and did not have the fake plastic smiles of Tony Tan and Tan Jee Say.

His acknowledgement of his wife’s important role in his personal and political life is a nice touch, just like his “thank you” in the the four official languages and Hokkien. The doctor from Amakeng showed his experience that he has not lost his political instinct to engage people. The use of the sign language interpreter  during the rally was also a first class move to score political points especially among the disabled. He reminded voters that this doctor knows what to bring to the show. His other big sell during his campaign was his emphasis on multiracialism and this was something that the other candidates did not give much attention to in comparison.

The results of the PE would be a good map of how Singaporeans view politics in what is essentially a by-election. Voters know that the PAP is already in power and now is the opportunity to show their support for a particular kind of politics ahead. The attractiveness of moderate politics can be determined roughly from how well or dismal Tan Cheng Bock performs.