Insight: Down South
By SEAH CHIANG NEE
Middle class Singaporeans are giving the government the thumbs down
despite Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yews prediction of a golden era
in the coming years.
A SUCCESSION of unpopular policies incredibly ill-timed, if not
ill-planned has reduced the governments public popularity to the
lowest level in many years.
It is ironic because the economy and the job market are on a roll,
which should have resulted in a high level of optimism and improved
feelings for the ruling Peoples Action Party.
Instead the opposite is happening.
The sentiments among middle class Singaporeans have reached one of
their lowest points despite Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yews
prediction of a golden era in the coming years.
Four recent factors have caused the plunge in public
unhappiness.
(1) Cabinets 21% pay rise
The decision to raise the salaries of Cabinet ministers, already by
far the highest in the world, by a whopping 21%, could not have
come at a more painful time for Singaporeans who are struggling
with widespread price increases.
(2) GST increases
The July increase in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) from 5% to
7%, led to an orgy of price increases covering most goods and
services in Singapore.
The current inflation, the worst in 12 years, is partly imported
but is blamed on the government because it has been increasing
public fees, ranging from healthcare to stamps.
(3) Abandoned annuities scheme
After a public backlash, the government had to redraw a plan that
would have Singaporeans put a part of their CPF (Central Provident
Fund) into an annuities scheme that will pay S$250-S$300
(RM575-RM690) a month until death or when they reach 85.
It was hugely unpopular because of the late drawdown (only 60,000
Singaporeans live that long) and, if the holder dies before 85, the
unused money goes to others in the pool, not to his estate.
It was arguably one of the worst ideas from the PAP government and
was abandoned. A new scheme is being considered to replace
it.
(4) Shortage, over-crowdedness.
The gathering foreign influx (which has pushed the population to
4.68 million) is beginning to cause resentment mostly against the
government as well as over-crowding and some shortages.
Singaporeans are likely to continue to have to bear and grin it
since, like inflation, it is likely to continue into future
years.
Shaping into the hottest topic is, however, the Cabinet pay rise
the second in two years which would have brought down a
government in most other countries.
It raised the Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loongs annual salary to
S$3.76mil (RM8.64mil) and President S.R. Nathans to S$3.87mil
(RM8.89mil), while Cabinet ministers start at $1.96mil (RM4.50mil)
a year.
(By comparison, US President George W Bush earns an annual salary
of US$400,000 (RM1.3mil) or one-seventh of what Lee gets).
Despite their compliant nature, Singaporeans have reacted angrily
to the way their leaders pay themselves, feelings that I have not
encountered in 25 years of reporting Singapore.
Even PAP supporters are wondering why their political leaders have
embarked on such an obviously politically dangerous course.
The question is why? Why would people, very smart and talented
people, with all the money in the world to spend, money they are
not likely to finish spending in their whole life, still crave for
more money? a blogger asked.
Another said: Actually if they can justify it well, I wouldnt
mind them getting more pay, but where is the justification? Many
people here earn in a month less than what a minister gets in just
half a day.
The year-end vibrancy of the top leaders who are benefiting from
the windfall, contrasts sharply with a despondent mood among the
poorer heartlanders badly hit by rising prices.
More people have been asking their members of Parliament for help.
Reports of rising poverty have prompted one minister to say: In
Singapore, no one needs to starve.
For months Singaporeans have felt pressured by the growing impact
of the increasing number of foreigners here, including
over-crowding and shortages, not to mention a reduction of
opportunities.
For the government, this souring of the electorates mood is
worrying because it is over major bread-and-butter matters
prices, retirement savings, jobs which can erode its power
base.
One of Singapores most admired writers, Catherine Lim, has added
her voice to the public criticism on the way Singapore is
heading.
A climate of fear that stops citizens from speaking out against the
government could eventually lead to the decline of Singapore, she
said.
Lim praised the government for its economic achievements but said
its Achilles heel could be its suppression of criticism, using
defamation suits against opposition politicians as well as bans on
protests.
A compliant, fearful population that has never learnt to be
politically savvy could spell the doom of Singapore, Lim told
Reuters in an interview.
The 65-year-old Malaysian-born author said the worst-case scenario
would be for a future leader to get away with corruption because
of the ingrained, unquestioning trust of a fearful, overly
dependent people.
Lim said: You could have a case of younger Singaporeans creating
unrest because they do not have an outlet.
What Singapore wants is managed creativity. So, not only would
those really creative people not want to come, but those who are
here want to get out.
