Opinions

Recently, the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) issued two notices to the Jurong-Clementi Town Council (JCLTC) due to infringements the SCDF encountered during a fire-fighting operation at Blk 210A in Bukit Batok. 

According to the SCDF, the fire-hose compartments were padlocked and there was no water supply to the hoses.

In an update on his FB page, Murali Pillai, MP for the area, shared that the town council has taken disciplinary action against the town council (TC) officers responsible for locking-up the fire-hose compartments. They had purportedly locked the equipment to prevent cases of vandalism.

With regard to the lack of water supply, Pillai informed that the contractor responsible, JKeart Pte Ltd, has disputed the findings and has come forward with its own video evidence of the water supply working on the same day. The parties are still looking into the matter.

SDP Secretary-General, Dr Chee Soon Juan, who came up against Murali PIllai in the previous General Elections (GE), has taken a keen interest in the events.

Dr Chee took umbrage at the explanation that Pillai provided and questioned if the PAP treated Singaporeans lives so cheaply, and if they were too focused on their profit-oriented approach.

Quite separate from the sheer callousness of the act, the incident raises a bigger question: Does the PAP treat Singaporean lives so cheaply? So what if a few fire hose reels are vandalised (which the authorities have not provided any data on: How many were vandalised, what’s the frequency, how much to repair them, etc?)

Are the authorities saying that it would cost more to repair the vandalised equipment than the lives of the Goh family or, for that matter, the average Singaporean? (It’s hard to believe that such padlocking is confined to one block of flats in BB. The photo on the left was allegedly another fire hose cabinet padlocked at Punggol.)

The matter reveals the mindset of the PAP, one that is all about the cold calculation of dollars and cents even when the people’s lives are literally at stake.

Indeed, this is a valid question that the PAP has to ask of themselves. 

What are their priorities? Is managing cost due to vandalism a more pressing concern than the safety of their residents?

Since then, netizens have come forward with allegations of similar practices in other TCs.

Netizens alleged that these locked firefighter inlets were found  at Tampines blocks 937 and 146. They also claimed that there are others that were also locked, although they did not provide photographs for those.

If these allegations are true, then the relevant TCs responsible must similarly take action against those responsible for locking-up access to the firefighting equipment.

All TCs, regardless of whether they are under the PAP or WP, must conduct an immediate review to ensure the serviceability and accessibility of their firefighting equipment.

The Bukit Batok incident must serve as a wake-up call to everyone to not be complacent and take people's safety for granted.

The PMD issue, suffice to say, has divided Singaporeans. Opposition politicians and parties have not been spared by this. Yet, this should not be taken as a sign of a divided opposition.

On his FB page, leader of the Workers' Party (WP), Pritam Singh responded to a CNA article that reported on a meeting between PAP MP Lam Pin Min (LPM) and PMD riders. While Lam criticised Goh Meng Seng for his "irresponsible and abhorrent" actions.

Without directly criticising the purported actions of Goh, Singh reiterated the WP's stance on the role of opposition parties, while seemingly lamenting the onerous task of attaining and maintaining opposition unity.

Singh elaborated that the opposition is an important part of parliamentary democracy, playing a critical role as a check-and-balance on the government of the day. The WP thus does not set out to destroy political opposition.

On the PMD issue, Singh shared how one of their residents had eventually passed away after being involved in a collission with an illegally-modified PMD. Some others, have suffered injuries from similar accidents. Yet, WP continues to recognise the utility of the PMD, especially for those from the lower-income group. Singh reiterated his belief that the PMD will make a return in the future if infrasructure and regulations are enhanced adequately.

In what appears to be a thinly-veiled swipe at Goh, the Singapore People's Party (SPP) echoed the sentiments of the WP in a press statement signed-off by its Secretary-General, former NMP, Steve Chia.

SPP also underlined the importance of Singapore opposition parties being the voice of the people, and acting as checks-and-balances against the government. To that end, the SPP believes that it is "vital for the opposition to be loyal to Singapore and fellow Singaporeans" and adopt in an honest, constructive, and harmonious approach to politics.

Are these statements signs of a divided opposition?

To the extent that different political parties have different world views, objectives, imperatives, and approaches - yes. No two parties are the same. Such differences can only benefit Singapore

However, if this means that the opposition are not focused on ending the PAP's hegemony, the simple answer is 'no'. Now, more than ever, the opposition understands that the PAP is fragile and its confidence has diminished. The ground is ripe for the opposition to create history in the next GE.

The fact that different opposition parties have criticised the government's handling of t]he PMD issue speaks volumes about opposition unity.

Singaporeans who want a change should not be alarmed by this. On the contrary, Singaporeans should celebrate that there is diversity in opposition.

Lam Pin Min is pushed into the spotlight after the 5th Nov overnight ban of PMDs on footpaths. Because of this ban, many PMD riders have been assembling at multiple meet the people sessions around Singapore.

The biggest turnout during a meet the people sessions was yesterday, 12 November, when more than 300 pmd riders turned up for the session with Lam Pin Min. However, in the supposed dialogue session, Lam Pin Min continuously reiterated his words. The ban is here to stay. You have a $7 million grant to trade in for PMAs. Blah blah blah.

The riders were not given the mic to speak. When asked by reporters about the ban, he continued to say the same things. One can only wonder if these ideas was from himself. And if it wasn't, did he even think it through before approving them? Also, why is our taxpayers money being spent so easily? Who approved for our hard earned money to be used in this way?

There are definitely better ways of banning the PMDs on footpaths overnight. How many of such riders would complain about having their rice bowls taken away from them, their lifestyle. Obviously being in the ivory tower, he does not think about the citizens living below. About the repercussions the riders would have if they gave up their PMDs.

Lam Pin Min is unoriginal and has no empathy. Citizens vote ministers in to help with their lives. But here they are taking their livelihood away.

As we all know, our MPs only appear once every four to five years. So what is happening now? After the PMD ban, so many of them are meeting with the PMD riders.

They usually do not care about the citizens of Singapore. They do not listen to our complaints and worries. Yet suddenly, they are actually 'paying attention' to the riders! Some noticed that them the timing of them appearing to appease the riders are coinciding with the four to five years hibernation. 

While it is good that someone is trying to listen to those undergoing this plight, we can't help but wonder if it is sincere. Are they doing this just to wayang again? They ban the riders and then act like they actually care for them. If it is all an act, we should not fall for it. These people in white are known for their underhanded tactics in winning elections. Who knows if this is just one of them?

Do not be manipulated by them. Fight for our rights. But always remember that they are the ones who banned us in the first place.

DPM Heng called for a motion to remove Sylvia Lim and Low Thia Khiang from financial responsibilities in AHTC. Of course, 52 PAP MPs and Nominated MPs voted in support of the motion. Two NMPs abstained from voting while nine WP MPs and Non-Constituency MPs voted against it.

Pritam Singh called the motion "hurried and premature" as WP is reviewing the case and is expected to appeal against it. Therefore this is still a 'live case'.

Now doesn't it all seem like the PAP MPs are just doing their best to get rid of their competition now before the elections? Time after time, it seems like the PAP is using underhanded tactics to get rid of their biggest competitors. The most recent issue was of the ramp which took seven years in AHTC to be approved and built.

PAP should rethink their ideas. Us Singaporeans have eyes to see that they are being underhanded. They use their power to play all of us and the opposition to stay in power when they could be using the same power to help us Singaporean citizens. Of course them being in power is more important to them than us Singaporeans. They rather have new citizens from India like Ramesh who would vote for them. Enough is enough. They do not deserve our votes at all.

The youths in Singapore is its future. They are the agents-of-change in-waiting. However, the extent to which they have been brainwashed with PAP propaganda led a concerned netizen to lament the future.

Detailing further in the HWZ Forum, the netizen pointed out that brainwashing of our youths begins in our schools where the learning of Social Studies (SS), through the prism of national education, is mandatory for all upper secodary school students.

SS has the ability to shape and mould the socio-political culture and preferences of our youths. In Singapore, unfortunately, this translates into conformity. According to the netizen, letters by youths published in local media regurgitate the same arguments and thoughts brought about by years of brainwashing in the education system. The netizen added that, "Anything the government throws on them, they will be accepting them gladly and not question".

Apart from SS taught in schools, the propaganda and hegemony of the PAP is also spread or reinforced through various other means.

For instance, the netizen explained, top students are normally awarded with prizes that are handed out by PAP-linked constituency grassroots advisors. There is a also a general deference towards, and the want to be seen to be associated with the PAP as it gives them a sense of false -prestige. Some may become more motivated to join the PAP.

This has left the netizen very concerned, wondering how the opposition will win anything in this decade with people who are conformists.

Dp you think the netizen has the right to be concerned? Are Singaporean youths apethetic and incapable of standing up for themselves?