377A: WP runs away from taking a position in contentious issues

 

The Whip is about the voting system. It in no way prevents any MPs from speaking their views.

MPs are free to speak their minds but when it comes to voting, they have to vote according to the party position. And the party position represents the policy direction the party has decided upon.

The PAP Govt had consulted various organisations and individuals over the years on 377A. There were more against repealing before until now where most are more conciliatory about it.

There is an urgency to protect our way of life with regards to a marriage between man and woman plus all issues surrounding it.

If the Courts came to a decision FIRST that 377A goes against our constitution or law, the Govt would not be able to stop what comes next.

So as a GOVERNMENT, the PAP has to MAKE A UNITED STAND on the repeal even though some of their MPs are against it.

Why?

Because a Govt has to make a firm decision and follow through. It cannot leave it to individual votes to carry out reforms or policy change that the Executive, having done all due diligence through engagements and consultations, have decided upon.

What’s good for Singapore cannot be based on an MP’s individual preference or bias. It has to be through studies and detailed considerations, devoid of extreme emotive and religious leanings. Hence the PAP MPs need to unite in their stand despite their differing opinions.

By lifting the whip, Pritam not only shows a weakness in his leadership of his team but also on his inability to make hard decisions for Singapore’s future. Imagine a WP Govt that leaves every policy decision to individual votes rather than an expertly considered direction already made. Singapore will no longer be nimble and decisive, and we will have an ineffective government. A stalled parliament is not a joke for a country with no natural resources.

Finally, if Pritam Singh had used the phrase “It’s your call” in this instant, we will all know that he meant it the way the dictionary meaning intended it to be.

Jamus Lim gets called out for blatant lying

 

We live in a VUCA world

We live in a VUCA world, so we should be careful which political party we elect to form the next government.

"𝐒𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐟 𝐰𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐢𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐨𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐝𝐥𝐲. 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞.
𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐚 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐞 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭.

𝐒𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐞𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐬.

𝐈𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞, 𝐬𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞.

𝐈𝐧 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐲, 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐲 (𝐕𝐔𝐂𝐀), 𝐰𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, able to offer Outstanding Leadership - Be Visionary, Understanding (the complexity and challenges ), Credible, Capable and Capacity to deal with known unknowns and unknown unknowns, and Adaptability." 

The WP wants more to spend today, less to save for tomorrow

 Like how the recycling of land makes for a fair and just Singapore because every generation of Singaporeans can own their homes, the equal division (50:50) of NIRC to spend on current and future generations is a fair way of taking care of all Singaporeans.

Not less is spend on current Singaporeans. Not more is saved for future generations. 50:50. Fair and equal.

The WP wants more for today. They want more than just 60% to 70% of NIRC. They also want land sale proceeds.

Constitution allows the government to spend up to 50% of NRIC. For the past few years, the Government HAS spent almost 50%.

Let's do some simple math.

For FY2022, the NIRC is $21.6 billion representing approximately 50%.

If $21.6 b is 50%, then 100% is $43.2 b

If we follow WP's suggestion of using 60% of NIRC:

that's equal to $25.92.

On top of this, WP also want direct use of land sale proceeds.

Sales of land for FY2022 is estimated at $11.2 billion.

So (11.2 + 25.92) = $37.12 billion

WP wants to spend $37.12 from NIRC and reserves (land) and leave $17.28 to reinvest for the future.

What if they want 70% of NIRC?

That will be $30.24 billion.
Add land sale of $11.2 billion.
The total they want to spend is $41.44 billion.

And how much of NIRC will be left to reinvest for the future? $12.96 billion.

This is what Leon Perera called 'slowing the growth' of reserves.

Slower growth means smaller returns. It's as simple as that.

You will have to pay higher taxes because you will have less from NIRC. 

You ask, so we retell. The AHTC saga was started by WP-appointed auditors and ended by WP-appointed Independent Panel.

This is one saga that has wearied Singaporeans for so long, we all wish to put it behind.

One Aljunied resident who had been overseas for 10 years asked many questions about what happened. This photo sums up the major events. It should be sufficient for him.

Briefly, it started with their own auditors flagging problems with account.

When the problems persisted, AGO audited their account and flagged problems of governance.

The court then directed the town councillors to appoint one of the Big Four to audit and fix problems.

WP appointed KPMG.

KPMG completed their report.

Through the courts, the town councillors were directed to appoint an independent panel to look into improper payment.

Pritam Singh appointed the independent panel to act on behalf of AHTC, saying it would be in the best interest of AHTC.

The independent panel reviewed the KPMG Report and then sued the 3 WP MPs who were the town councillors, along with a few employees.

So that's the story. It began with their own auditors flagging problems and ended with their own independent panel suing them.

Instead of answering so many questions in messages, we decided this is a better response because there could be others with similar questions.

50:50 division of NIRC takes care of both the present and the future Singaporeans in a fair way.

It is said that without a vision, the people perish. Visionary leaders take care of the present with their eyes on the future as well so that the people can be future-ready.

A 50:50 division of NIRC takes care of both the present and the future Singaporeans in a fair way.

PSP wants a 100% use of NIRC. The WP wants 60%, even 70% use of NIRC.

Today, the NIRC contributes more than $21.6 billion (FY2022) to the budget.

Our forefathers did not spend the NIRC.

𝐒𝐔𝐏𝐏𝐎𝐒𝐄 𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐄𝐅𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐑𝐒 𝐇𝐀𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐒𝐀𝐌𝐄 𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐃𝐒𝐄𝐓 𝐀𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐖𝐏

Suppose because they spent from the NIRC and as a result, today we have 20% less NIRC to spend.

20% of $21.6 billion is $4.32 billion.

The 2% GST hike is intended to raise $3.5 billion.

If our forefathers had the mentality of the WP, today, we will need to raise $7.82 billion instead of $3.5 billion because we have less in NIRC to spend.

The GST hike will have to be more than 2% to achieve $7.82 billion.

You will have to pay a hike of more than 4%.

You will be paying 11% GST or more instead of 9%.

This is what will happen if the WP's proposal to spend more from NIRC is adopted.

Spending more from NIRC means reinvesting less resulting in smaller growth (slow the growth, says Leon Perera) and therefore smaller gains for the future.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐏 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐮𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐚𝐱𝐞𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐝𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐈𝐑𝐂 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦.

𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬? They could be YOU in your twilight years. They are your children, children's children, family. relatives, friends.

𝐖𝐇𝐄𝐑𝐄 𝐀𝐑𝐄 𝐖𝐄 𝐓𝐎𝐃𝐀𝐘?

1. Today, 𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐟 of us working Singaporeans 𝐝𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐩𝐚𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐱.

2. 80% of us who do pay income tax pays 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝟒%.

3. With the Enhanced GST Voucher Scheme, the 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐨𝐦 𝟑𝟎% 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐲 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐆𝐒𝐓 𝐨𝐟 𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝟑%.

4. The 𝐞𝐧𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐒𝐓 𝐡𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝟓 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 for lower and middle income households.

You will not find another country in the world

- where their citizens pay low-to-no income tax, single digit GST,

- and enjoy the best in the world in terms of housing, education, healthcare, public transport

- a country where the Government puts in effort to provide intensive, holistic help to those from the neediest and vulnerable families (KidsSTART, UPLIFT etc)

- a country where the Government expends great effort to help prison inmates (I know because a friend of mine works in prison school) achieve their potential.

The future will come. It takes political courage to do right not just by the present generation of Singaporeans, but by the future generations as well.

𝐀 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞. 

Singaporeans are enjoying the best in the world while paying low taxes

And this is so true. Our income taxes are among the lowest in the world and yet, we are enjoying - easily - the best in the world.

We don't have to worry about water.

Primary and secondary education is free because each child gets an annual edusave amount that can be used to pay for miscellaneous fees.

People who have gone through the public healthcare system know that it is highly subsidised and affordable.

Our publics transport is among the top in the world with fares among the lowest in developed countries. By 2030, everyone lives within 10-min of an MRT station.

Our CPF fund is among the top pension funds in the world and Singaporeans now recognise how great it is as they voluntarily top up their CPF accounts.

Our public housing is like no other in the world because the government took it upon themselves to upgrade our flats 2 times (at 30th and 60th year) to keep them in liveable conditions.

Half of working Singaporeans enjoy all this and more without paying any income tax. 80% of the other half enjoy all of this paying less than 4% income tax.

Paying among the lowest income tax in the world to enjoy (among) the best in the world. 

How much reserves are enough for Singaporeans to feel comfortable with? WP must specify the amount so that they can be held accountable to that amount.

𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡? 𝐍𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐢𝐭!

The WP says that there is such a thing as oversaving. So we ask them to name a figure for the size of our reserves beyond which we are oversaving.

Based on the size of our economy, the demographic profile of our population and the changing global structure, name the size of our reserves that Singaporeans can be comfortable with, go to sleep at night with the confidence that come what may, we have the firepower to deal with it.

Don't speak in general, alluring terms. Tell us how much is enough.

Don't tell us you don't know because if you don't know how much is enough, if you can't put your finger to a figure, what is your basis for saying we are oversaving? Are you gambling with our children's lives and future?

The opposition and their friends have been throwing up a lot of figures, so we have only a simple request : how much is enough?

Name it!

How much does Singaporeans pay in personal income tax?

I am not a lawyer but I speak from facts, so I stand on solid ground.

Half of Singaporean workers do not even pay any income tax. Of the other half, 80% of them pay an effective tax rate of less than 4%.

How is that remotely close to 'beggaring the taxpayers'?

What is being (deliberately?) ignored by all who oppose the GSTis the fact of the Permanent Enhanced GST Voucher Scheme which reduces the effective GST rate for the bottom 30% of households to less than 3%.

This is a permanent scheme that costs at least $1 billion annually.

Some people ask: where did surplus go? Some of it goes to top up the GST Voucher Scheme to give back to Singaporeans.

The GST Voucher Scheme makes GST a multi-tiered system based on income. It ensures that those who pay less are truly those who have less.

The PAP has the political courage to do what is unpopular in order to ensure that social programmes are sustainable.

Endemic income equality problems?

The Government is taking a holistic, multi-ministry, multi-agency approach to help uplift families and children from the vulnerable groups.

This approach is taken because the problems faced by these families are complex. Complex problems do not have a simple solution. This approach is also resource-intensive but produces better outcomes.

How about we match our concern not with words but with actions? The GST hike will make resources available to help vulnerable people and narrow income gap.

Assurance Package.

The cry is: Delay the GST hike because there is inflation.

The Assurance Package does that. It delays it by 5 years for majority of people.

Now you've got your wish and you call it some kind of gimmick on an election basis? Come on lah.

By the way, the Assurance Package was announced during the previous term of government, not during this term.

This lawyer asked for his comment to be shot down. His wish is granted.

What's the difference between the Government's approach to using land sale proceeds and the WP's proposal?

Someone asks: what's the difference between the Government's approach to using land sale proceeds and the WP's proposal?

If you spend from your wealth, you will deplete your wealth. This is easy to understand.

Hence you need to create new wealth (new income) before you spend so that you do not deplete your wealth.

When you sell an asset (land) you are not creating new wealth. You are just converting a physical asset into a financial asset.

The asset goes to someone else and you get the money.

If you spend the money, then both the asset and the money is gone.

You now have fewer assets to invest and generate income. This means your power to generate new wealth is reduced.

Your remaining assets will generate a smaller new income.

If you keep selling your assets, very soon you will have little to generate new income or wealth.

What is just described is what the WP's proposal will do.

The PAP Government's approach is to put land sale proceeds together with Past Reserves and reinvest them.

The land goes to someone else. The financial proceeds remain and are reinvested. This creates new wealth.

50% of the (new wealth) investment returns under the NIR Framework are then used as government revenue for spending.

In this way, land sale proceeds are being used to generate a continual stream of income for sustainable spending.

The man who works hard to accumulate wealth knows that wealth creation is not easy. He looks at the wealth he has and ask: how can I use this wealth to generate a continual stream of income for sustainable spending?

The impatient man who comes into an inheritance, looks at the wealth and says: wow, I'm so rich. I can now relax and enjoy.

The effective GST rate for the bottom 30% of households is less than 3% after factoring in the GST voucher scheme.

You read correctly. The effective GST rate for the bottom 30% of households is less than 3% after factoring in the GST voucher scheme.

The full impact of the GST will be borne largely by higher-income households, as well as tourists, and foreigners who are based here. This is also the group that contributes the biggest share (70%) to net GST revenues from households and individuals.

𝟑𝟎% 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐭 𝐆𝐒𝐓 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐮𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝟖𝟎% 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐬. They include households earning good incomes.

In other words, 80% of households contributed around $1.7 billion in net GST revenue while tourists, foreigners and top 20% households contributed to $4 billion (2018 and 2019 data).

The Government gives $1 billion annually in GST Vouchers to lower and lower-middle income households.

Data in this post are data given in Parliament speeches and replies to MPs' questions.

Buy a 2-room BTO and be richer by $80,000

If your household income is $1500 or less, you can still afford a new 2-rm BTO in a non-mature estate.

You enjoy a maximum Enhanced Housing Grant (EHG) of $80,000 and the result is the BTO costs from $17,000 upwards (prices from Lakeside View).

To put it clearly, you are richer by $80,000. This is money gifted to you and stays with you even if you decide to sell your BTO later.

This is $80,000 of monetary wealth distributed to you.

If you fully understand housing policies, you will appreciate them. These grants do not just make homes more affordable, they are also a form of wealth distribution with more given to those with less so that everyone can own something in this city.

Panellists at the Institute of Policy Studies' Singapore Perspectives conference in Jan this year noted that Government's policies on land help to achieve redistribution of not just the land but wealth as well.

I thank everyone for your words of encouragement yesterday. I'm very grateful and appreciative.

When this page was started, my first posts were also on housing grants.

At that time, people were lashing at then Finance Minister Tharman for saying that Singaporeans who earn $1000 could afford a BTO. People were making fun of him as well.

Falsehood was spread that you had to return the grant.

Debunking falsehoods takes time.

This is because falsehoods are sensational. They grab attention and spread easily. Truth is often boring.

There's a saying that a lie can travel halfway round the world while truth is still tying it's shoelaces.

It’s not often that we have the luxury of time to sufficiently debunk falsehoods so that they lose their sting.

It is always possible for a people to vote in anger against the government before lies and falsehoods are sufficiently exposed.

This would be the saddest thing that can happen to Singapore.

My deepest desire is that you will not just stop at reading, but that you will also share what you discover with family and friends so that together, we can help remove unhappiness that are based on falsehoods.