March 4, 2010
After being embarrassed in Parliament by WP MP Low Thia
Kiang’s demolition of the labor movement’s ineptitude to help lower
wage workers in Singapore, one would expect Minister Lim Swee Say
and NTUC Secretary-General to come up with a robust argument to
counter him.
Instead, he used an unheard fable about a “kingdom of frogs” to
brush aside Mr Low’s criticisms.
“The story goes that in a kingdom of frogs, the tallest
tower in the world is built for an annual competition. And when the
event is held, many aim to become the champion by making it to the
top, but fail as they are discouraged by the audience, who warn
that the climb is too dangerous. All except one frog who did reach
the top. And when asked afterwards why he ignored the crowd, the
frog said: ‘I’m deaf. I can’t hear them’”, he said.
The gist of Mr Lim’s message: Despite criticisms from Mr Low,
the labour movement will continue to address problems faced by
low-income Singaoreans.
“We never give up. We are like the little frog. We are deaf
to all these criticisms. So instead of telling us that low-wage
workers are having problems, why not be part of the
solution?,” he was quoted as saying in the Straits Times.
As expected, the Straits Times tried to portray Mr Lim as the
“victim” and pinning the blame on Mr Low for criticizing without
offering solutions.
Being paid almost $2 million dollars a year, Mr Lim ought to
realize that it is the duty of MPs to ask questions and criticize
if necessary in Parliament as in all modern democracies in the
world. If he cannot stand the heat in the kitchen, he should get
out of it!
The onus is on Mr Lim to answer the questions posed by Mr Low
and not to counter-challenge him to be “part of the solution”. The
key role of the opposition is to check on the ruling party and to
hold it accountable for its words and actions and not to do offer
solutions for it to govern the nation.
If Mr Lim wants Mr Low to offer solutions, then he should be
prepared to give Mr Low a job in NTUC or other government
committees and pay him a salary commensurate with his services.
Mr Lim also reminded Mr Low that “the government always paid
special attention to low-income earners and had introduced
programmes like Workfare to supplement their income”, but the fact
remains that low wage Singaporeans are still struggling due to
direct competition from cheaper foreign workers.
Furthermore, Mr Low did offer a solution to scrap the foreign
worker levy and to refine the dependency ratio to moderate the
inflow of foreign workers.
Mr Lim’s attitude epitomizes a wider problem pervading the
entire PAP – the inability to listen to others and accept feedback
and criticisms in good faith.
As the recent parliamentary sessions had shown, the PAP MPs are
completely out of touch with the ground. It will be apt to describe
them as a “kingdom of frogs” living in their own wells.
