A uniquely Singapore system based on first come, first served principle

May 29, 2011
 
Your letters

I am irked by people who question our uniquely Singaporean seat reservation system at hawker centres and foodcourts.

[And I am irked by your stupid letter and lack of comprehension.]

These places operate on a first come, first served basis.

[Ya, so I come first, see an empty space, go buy my food, come back and see packets of tissues "choping" the seats by people who came later than me.]

The people who find tissue packs placed on tables to reserve the seats are facing a fact: They have got there later than others. However, these latecomers refuse to accept this fact and, instead, start a flood of discussions and classify this seat-reserving behaviour as an embarrassment.

[So will you give up our tissue-choped seats to someone with a tray of food? Obviously if they have a tray of food, they were here earlier than you. Except that you plonked your tissue on the table first.]

In my experience, this tissue pack reservation system operates only in crowded places where there are insufficient seats available, such as in Shenton Way food centres during peak hours.

I seldom come across the practice in heartland areas like Ang Mo Kio.

I do not know if placing a 'reserved' card issued by the hawker centre will be any more acceptable to people who are against a reservation system. If they disagree with first come, first served as a principle, nothing will make them any happier - be it a card, umbrella, book or even bodies.

The tissue pack system is the cheapest to operate.

[But inherently rude and inefficient. If people got their food then look for their seat, there would be less space waste. As it is you see "empty" tables occupied by tissue packs while people with hot food unable to find a seat wander desperately about. This kiasu, kiaboh mentality is inconsiderate. But you don't see it, cos you are inconsiderate.]

If we decide that a First World country cannot practise such an 'unseemly' system and deem this an embarrassment, let's design one which includes issuing seat numbers and having a crowd manager. Then voila, we have a system resembling a restaurant.

Then my fishball noodles may cost $5 instead of $3.50.

But seriously, people should just live and let live, and let peace prevail.

Lam Wen-li (Ms)

No discounts needed if ministers' pay is set fairly

May 29, 2011
 
Your letters

I refer to last Sunday's report ('Ministerial pay to be reviewed'), which quoted Mr Gerard Ee, the head of a committee to review ministers' salaries, as saying that 'whatever we work out, the final answer must include a substantial discount on comparable salaries in the private sector and people looking at it will say, 'these people are serving and making a sacrifice''.

There is a jewellery shop here known for advertising huge discounts. But it is an open secret that its prices are highly inflated. The discount is only a marketing gimmick.

We do not need discounts if the salaries of ministers are set to fairly reflect the worth of their jobs. It is questionable to peg their salaries to inappropriately high pay, and then reduce these with 'discounts'.

One's pay should be commensurate with the job, and one should be held 100per cent responsible to deliver on it. We should have no qualms paying for performance, not because it is necessary to attract the right people, but because it is fair. What is currently lacking is the penalty when ministers fail to deliver. Ministers should have clearly publicised and closely monitored key performance indicators relevant to their jobs.

[With CEOs of corporations, where the bottom line is clearly profit, you can make such stupid, lame, seemingly intelligent statements with phrases like "pay for performance", "penalty for failure to deliver", "key performance indicators".  What the elections have show is that people want a more consultative government, which is not a KPI or if it were a KPI, would be subject to manipulation. Imagine, relentless consultation with the people and no decision or action. On the other hand imagine quick decisions and action but with complaints of no consultation. How do you balance such demands and reduce it to a KPI? or two contradictory KPIs?]

While the current pay formula already includes gross domestic product growth, it should also incorporate other economic indicators, such as inflation rates, housing price indices, employment figures and median wages of citizens in all income brackets.

These would better correlate the Government's performance, and thus ministers' salaries, with the well-being of the majority, rather than a small minority who benefit the most each year.

With the right salary formula, it will be bizarre to deliberately underpay ministers just so that people can see them as making a sacrifice - this makes a mockery of the meaning of sacrifice.

Chen Junyi

[But that is what the hoi polloi wants. And that is politics.]

Create cheaper class of flats

Peg price to three times median household income but with shorter lease, stricter conditions
May 26, 2011

Letter from Eric Tan Heng Chong

As the new Cabinet gets down to work pledging a fresh look at existing public polices and an innovative approach to policy-making, I would like to offer a proposal to address the Housing and Development Board (HDB) affordability issue.

The HDB should go back to its roots of focusing solely on providing affordable housing for the majority of Singaporeans, instead of the other current objective of asset enhancement of the flats as a financial asset for investment or retirement.

Firstly, we need to define affordability. The Government's definition of affordability is in terms of 30-year loans; a better definition would be in terms of a price that is pegged to three times the annual median household income. This suggests that a housing loan can be paid off within a 10- to 15-year time frame.

For example, a family with a median household income of about S$3,800 per month or S$46,000 per year would be able to afford a four-room apartment if it is priced at $137,000 (three times annual household income).

At this price, they can take a 15-year loan to pay for the flat and the family will be able to save for retirement, children's education and future medical expenses for the remaining 15 years of their working life. Currently, the average four-room HDB flat is priced at five to six times annual household income, which is in excess of about S$265,000, hence the need for 30-year mortgages.

To solve this problem, the HDB could create a new segment of flats similar to what we have done in the car market, where we have normal and off-peak cars.

For this new segment, the HDB could price its flats at three times the median annual household income of applicants but subject these flats to more stringent restrictions to reflect the price difference from normal flats.

These restrictions, which would be in additional to the conditions that apply to normal flats, could include the following: Owners of such flats cannot own private housing at all; no permanent resident can own these flats; no cash-over-valuation is allowed; and a shorter lease of, for example, 60 years.

In addition, owners could be allowed to sell the flat to upgrade but the prices would be set by the HDB, which would index the price increases to median income increases, to ensure the three-times ratio is maintained. The prices would go up if the median household income goes up.

[This measure to restrict the owner to selling the flat at the same price peg at the time of sale less wear and tear and other disamenities (if the owner had not taken care of the building) or with additional value that the seller may have invested is sufficient. So the owner can only sell it to another low income  applicant (pre-approved by HDB), just like a off-peak car must be sold as an off-peak car. No need shorter lease.]

This list of conditions can be expanded further to make it clear that this segment of flats is subsidised by the state for Singaporeans to live in and not intended as a financial investment for their retirement.

In short, Singaporeans would have the choice of buying a HDB flat at either a higher price based on the existing terms; or a lower price subject to more restrictive terms. This may not be the ideal solution but at least it helps to address affordability issues.

URL http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC110526-0000359/Create-cheaper-class-of-flats

[My concern is that these "subsidised flats" will become ghettoes. Because the owner can never expect to profit from property appreciation, he would not have the incentive to maintain the value of the flat. It would become run-down despite the best efforts of HDB and town councils.]

Accord minister's pay to leader of opposition

May 26, 2011

WHILE I am delighted to read that the policy on ministers' salaries is being reviewed ('Ministerial pay to be reviewed'; Sunday), the review committee may also wish to consider paying the leader of the opposition a salary.

In Britain, the opposition leader, who carries the title of the Leader of Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition in its Parliament, is paid a salary equivalent to a minister's, on top of his MP's salary.

He is also given a chauffeur-driven car whose cost and specification is equivalent to the vehicles used by Cabinet ministers.

Workers' Party secretary-general Low Thia Khiang could take on such a role here. In a way, he and his colleagues represent about 40 per cent of our citizenry. His responsibilities and contributions should be recognised.

With the increased number of opposition members in Parliament and with the formation of a committee to review political office-holders' salaries, now may be the appropriate time to consider allocating a salary for the leader of the 'loyal opposition'.

This would reflect the inclusive government that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong aspires to have.

I would like to emphasise the words 'loyal opposition' as I feel that Mr Low and his party have always believed it is possible to be in the opposition and yet remain loyal to Singapore.

Lee Tow Kiat

[Yes. We should pay Low Thia Khiang the equivalent of a Minister's pay for being the leader of the opposition. Nevermind if we don't know what he is supposed to do. In the UK the Leader of Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition is like the Alternative to the Prime Minister, and is a member of the Privy Council and advises the British Sovereign. The incumbent also runs a shadow cabinet precisely because he is supposed to be an alternative to the PM. We don't have a Privy Council, but we do have a Council of Presidential Advisors. Low can be a member!

So what if there is only 6 elected opposition MPs? There's 3 NCMPs! That's nine opposition MPs who can form a shadow Cabinet. Just double-hat a little.

Low as Shadow PM and Minister for Defence, Sylvia as Shadow Minister for Finance and Home Affairs, Chen Show Mao Shadow Minister for Law and Foreign Affairs, Pritam Singh Shadow Minister for Education and Manpower, Md Faisal Shadow Minister for Community Development, Youth & Sports, and Environment & Water Resources, Yaw Shin Leong Shadow Minister for National Development, and Transport. NCMPs Yee Jenn Jong as Shadow Minister for Trade & Industry, Gerald Giam as Shadow Minister for Information, Communication and the Arts, Lina Chiam as Shadow Minister for Health.

Entirely workable. And now there is a back-up plan (shadow cabinet) if the PAP fails.

And the next time Sylvia stands up to criticise the Minister's salary, Low will also feel uncomfortable.

I thought the writer of this was a pro-WP supporter, but I realise now, he is a scheming PAP-supporter who seems to be innocently pushing for more resources for the WP, but is actually laying the foundation for the corruption and downfall of the WP!

Incredible!]

Aljunied delay remains inexplicable

May 17, 2011

MEDIACORP'S reply last Friday ("MediaCorp explains why Aljunied result came after 2am") will surely assist voters and viewers alike to better appreciate or understand the constraints and limitations under which it covered GE2011.

But where the public is concerned, the question still remains unanswered.

If, as reported, Mr George Yeo himself was preparing to concede as early as 11pm, and his opponent, Mr Low Thia Khiang, too was already preparing to celebrate victory, what was it that stood in the way of an earlier public announcement of this crucial result by the Returning Officer?

One could reasonably expect the results of small constituencies with around 20,000 voters (like Whampoa and Yuhua) with clear-cut majorities to be among the first to be announced.

Admittedly, Aljunied is not in this smaller group, but the winning margin was convincing and unambiguous enough.

Why then the inordinate delay in making public the polling result of this particular constituency, which was so eagerly awaited by the people?

Hopefully, the official body supervising the election exercise will now offer its explanation to clear the air on the matter.

Narayana Narayana

[Looking at a pile of ballots after it has been sorted, a candidate can see which pile is higher, and which is lower, and you would be an unmitigated optimist to think that maybe the count will be in your favour when you consistently have the smaller pile. Except with very close counts (like in potong pasir) or with very mixed results (some wards going one way, and others going the other way), would an observer be unable to estimate the final result.

BUT the election process (counting) will have to continue. Surely we do not expect the RO to say, pursuant to my eyeballs, I hereby declare WP the winner of Aljunied, because any idiot can clearly see their pile of ballot papers is obviously higher than that of the PAP.

So the ballots still have to be counted to the very last ballot, the resulted checked and confirmed. And with so many votes to count, there may well be errors to correct, discrepancies to resolved, and finally results to be reported by each counting centre, confirmed and finally recorded and announced by the RO.

Delays happen for many reasons. Most are not for devious reasons. Did the delay caused the results to be different?  Did the unduly long delay lead to intolerable excitement causing one or more over-anxious voter to have a heart attack and die?

Does Narayana Narayana (so nice, they named him twice) suspect foul play on the part of the PAP? How? Maybe they were so shocked the asked the RO to delay the announcement so that they have time to write their concession speech? Or maybe the WP asked for more time to write their victory speech. Or to bring more supporters to the assembly area. Or the police asked for a delay to allow them to deploy more officers for crowd control. Or maybe there was a technical problem or some sort or other (Maybe the RO needed to practice saying "Aljunied" properly).

In other words, what was the big deal? Does Nara-Nara write in to complain to the Academy Awards for awarding all the meaningless little titles for 150 minutes before announcing the best picture, best actor and best actress awards? What's his problem? He explained on May 11:]

From ST May 11:
MR NARAYANA NARAYANA: 'Sunday's article on the keen contest for Aljunied GRC ('From political gamble to election history') starts by recalling that Foreign Minister George Yeo called his wife Jennifer about 11pm on Polling Day and calmly told her: 'We have lost.' The report further informs that an hour later, his opponent, Mr Low Thia Khiang, was preparing for what would perhaps be the sweetest victory speech of his career. So, it must seem obvious that the Workers' Party had clinched the critical Aljunied constituency. But the hundreds of thousands of viewers who were not privy to such information sat glued to the designated TV channels awaiting the crucial outcome, which was not announced until after 2am, by which time I had decided to call it a night. A few minutes afterwards, I heard cheers in the neighbourhood and guessed, correctly, that the opposition had pulled off the near-impossible. Viewers deserve an explanation for the long delay (three hours) in what was arguably the most eagerly awaited result of the election. With the winning majority of over 12,000 votes, even a call for a recount was hardly likely to have changed the outcome. Don't viewers and voters need greater consideration in such supposedly 'live' and 'on-the-spot' coverage?'

[Well, I guess, if it's not important enough for you to stay awake, it's just not that important. You can check the news the next day. Or do you expect the RO at the next election to say, Pursuant to Mr Narayana Narayana bedtime which was set by his parents as to be no later than 2.00 am, and to all those supporters standing in the fields with poor cardiac health, and poor bladder control, I hereby declare... ?]