tan kin lian remove from NTUC chief
-
somehow i feel his removal are related to his blog to challenge the PAP policy on foreign workers, taxes, welfare and etc.
i feel sorry for one who dare to voice out but has to pay a penalty.
singapore is really becoming a facist state whereby only ppl who agree with the PAP can survive.
-
it was his mistake that he didn't put his voices in the AGM.
-
I thought he was removed a few years back. I heard rumors that it was caused by a big claim case which Income lost.
-
tats sad.
he used to write letters to me regularly.
-
"Speaking out for the silent majority
INSIGHT DOWN SOUTH
By SEAH CHIANG NEEWhat the average Singaporean wants is more licence for public debate of policies harmful to him – particularly among establishment figures.
AT A time when troubled Singaporeans need more sympathetic elite figures to voice their unhappy feelings against the government along comes the state’s retired top civil servant.
He is 70-year-old Ngiam Tong Dow, a prominent member of Singapore’s founding generation, who has delivered a series of remarkably biting messages for the leadership, young and old.
Singapore is not known as a place where influential people openly discuss government shortcomings, let alone criticise these.
Many do not speak out even when they feel things are not going right for fear of upsetting the leaders, particularly Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
An exception was Ngiam, who said in a recent dialogue that most of today’s younger ministers come from well-to-do or upper-class families.
“So they 'really do not know' the impact of, say, a policy such as a 10-cent bus fare rise on ordinary families,” he said.
“If you’re from a poor family like my generation, you’ll know very well (the impact) if the bus fare goes up by 10 cents, multiply by three or four times, 50 cents for the whole family.”
His suggestion: top civil servants should first start by doing ‘nitty-gritty’ work on the ground before being slotted to make policies.
On a previous occasion he warned against bureaucratic inertia.
“The greatest danger is we are flying on auto-pilot. What was once a great policy, we just carry on with more of the same, until reality intervenes,” he noted.
Then arrogance! “There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in,” he said. “Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews (without earning our spurs).”
Ngiam speaks with the knowledge of an insider. He has served in the elite Singapore Administrative Service for more than 40 years, and played a major role in transforming Singapore into a textbook case in development economics.
A lesser mover is Tan Kin Lian, the former chief of Income, the insurance arm of the official National Trade Unions Congress.
Tan used his web-blog to campaign against his former company’s move to restructure bonus payouts for life policies that works against holders.
And two years ago, Lee Kuan Yew’s daughter Associate Professor Lee Wei Ling went public to criticise Singapore’s multi-billion dollar biomedical research strategy as being badly misdirected.
It was spending large sums on cancer, heart disease and stem cells, with the setting up state-of-the art laboratories and pulling in top brains from around the world.
Lee, who is Director of the National Neuroscience Institute, said it was pointless to compete with the top Western research centres doing the same thing with bigger budgets and longer experience.
Instead, she said, Singapore should concentrate on niche areas with relevance to Asia, like hepatitis and head injuries.
When the government rejected her call, Lee vowed to carry on her fight for change. “We’re talking about billions of dollars in taxpayers’ money,” she said. “I will not let this mistake continue.”
It was a rare public debate of top policy-makers. Few, however, believe that Lee’s daughter will get into trouble for speaking her mind.
Most other disagreements within the establishment are almost always kept within the four walls, away from the public.
What the average Singaporean wants is more licence for public debate of policies harmful to him – particularly among establishment figures.
There has, however, been a gradual opening up in the past decade.
To the younger citizens, however, Singapore’s “soft authoritarianism” is less than what they want or what a creative modern city should be.
All these years the ruling People’s Action Party and the civil service have laid claims – through super high salaries – to some of the state’s best educated.
The majority settle into their careers without wanting to rock the boat, even when they disagree with a government policy.
In the course of the years, however, there had been a few exceptions of outspoken government people.
Three years ago, East Coast MP Tan Soo Khoon accused the government of waste in spending billions to build new luxurious buildings, which he termed the “Seven Wonders of Singapore”.
Likening seven new lavish offices to five-star hotels, Tan asked whether these ministries and statutory boards were competing to see “which can be better than the Four Seasons Hotel”.
During the years of strong growth, money was easy to come by and it was easy to spend. “Only now, when it has become difficult, we begin to sit up and take notice,” Tan chided the government.
In the 2006 election, 33% of the votes went to the opposition, but it managed to win only two seats – or 2.4% – of the 84 seats in Parliament.
With such a lop-sided representation, it is imperative that this large opposition bloc has public figures to speak up for them outside the realm of politics.
Being from the inside, retired or current members of the government are best suited to contribute meaningful discussions because of their inside knowledge.
Ngiam’s act of speaking out is widely admired. He says what many Singaporeans want, if they could.
Asked in an interview whether Singapore would survive Lee Kuan Yew, he said, “Yes, provided he leaves behind the right legacy.”
And what is that? Ngiam was asked.
“It’s for him to say, but I, a blooming upstart, dare to suggest to him that we should open up politically and allow talent to be spread throughout our society so that an alternative leadership can emerge,” he replied."
-
PAP will soon be left with yes man, and high paying one too.
-
come on... give up lah... it's hopeless already lah...say what also useless....
-
Originally posted by Uncle Ver SG:
"Speaking out for the silent majority
INSIGHT DOWN SOUTH
By SEAH CHIANG NEEWhat the average Singaporean wants is more licence for public debate of policies harmful to him – particularly among establishment figures.
AT A time when troubled Singaporeans need more sympathetic elite figures to voice their unhappy feelings against the government along comes the state’s retired top civil servant.
He is 70-year-old Ngiam Tong Dow, a prominent member of Singapore’s founding generation, who has delivered a series of remarkably biting messages for the leadership, young and old.
Singapore is not known as a place where influential people openly discuss government shortcomings, let alone criticise these.
Many do not speak out even when they feel things are not going right for fear of upsetting the leaders, particularly Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
An exception was Ngiam, who said in a recent dialogue that most of today’s younger ministers come from well-to-do or upper-class families.
“So they 'really do not know' the impact of, say, a policy such as a 10-cent bus fare rise on ordinary families,” he said.
“If you’re from a poor family like my generation, you’ll know very well (the impact) if the bus fare goes up by 10 cents, multiply by three or four times, 50 cents for the whole family.”
His suggestion: top civil servants should first start by doing ‘nitty-gritty’ work on the ground before being slotted to make policies.
On a previous occasion he warned against bureaucratic inertia.
“The greatest danger is we are flying on auto-pilot. What was once a great policy, we just carry on with more of the same, until reality intervenes,” he noted.
Then arrogance! “There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in,” he said. “Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews (without earning our spurs).”
Ngiam speaks with the knowledge of an insider. He has served in the elite Singapore Administrative Service for more than 40 years, and played a major role in transforming Singapore into a textbook case in development economics.
A lesser mover is Tan Kin Lian, the former chief of Income, the insurance arm of the official National Trade Unions Congress.
Tan used his web-blog to campaign against his former company’s move to restructure bonus payouts for life policies that works against holders.
And two years ago, Lee Kuan Yew’s daughter Associate Professor Lee Wei Ling went public to criticise Singapore’s multi-billion dollar biomedical research strategy as being badly misdirected.
It was spending large sums on cancer, heart disease and stem cells, with the setting up state-of-the art laboratories and pulling in top brains from around the world.
Lee, who is Director of the National Neuroscience Institute, said it was pointless to compete with the top Western research centres doing the same thing with bigger budgets and longer experience.
Instead, she said, Singapore should concentrate on niche areas with relevance to Asia, like hepatitis and head injuries.
When the government rejected her call, Lee vowed to carry on her fight for change. “We’re talking about billions of dollars in taxpayers’ money,” she said. “I will not let this mistake continue.”
It was a rare public debate of top policy-makers. Few, however, believe that Lee’s daughter will get into trouble for speaking her mind.
Most other disagreements within the establishment are almost always kept within the four walls, away from the public.
What the average Singaporean wants is more licence for public debate of policies harmful to him – particularly among establishment figures.
There has, however, been a gradual opening up in the past decade.
To the younger citizens, however, Singapore’s “soft authoritarianism” is less than what they want or what a creative modern city should be.
All these years the ruling People’s Action Party and the civil service have laid claims – through super high salaries – to some of the state’s best educated.
The majority settle into their careers without wanting to rock the boat, even when they disagree with a government policy.
In the course of the years, however, there had been a few exceptions of outspoken government people.
Three years ago, East Coast MP Tan Soo Khoon accused the government of waste in spending billions to build new luxurious buildings, which he termed the “Seven Wonders of Singapore”.
Likening seven new lavish offices to five-star hotels, Tan asked whether these ministries and statutory boards were competing to see “which can be better than the Four Seasons Hotel”.
During the years of strong growth, money was easy to come by and it was easy to spend. “Only now, when it has become difficult, we begin to sit up and take notice,” Tan chided the government.
In the 2006 election, 33% of the votes went to the opposition, but it managed to win only two seats – or 2.4% – of the 84 seats in Parliament.
With such a lop-sided representation, it is imperative that this large opposition bloc has public figures to speak up for them outside the realm of politics.
Being from the inside, retired or current members of the government are best suited to contribute meaningful discussions because of their inside knowledge.
Ngiam’s act of speaking out is widely admired. He says what many Singaporeans want, if they could.
Asked in an interview whether Singapore would survive Lee Kuan Yew, he said, “Yes, provided he leaves behind the right legacy.”
And what is that? Ngiam was asked.
“It’s for him to say, but I, a blooming upstart, dare to suggest to him that we should open up politically and allow talent to be spread throughout our society so that an alternative leadership can emerge,” he replied."
Is this from a malaysian newspaper?
If this is it is surprising that they should know and care so much abt singapore politics....Whereras we singaporeans already have given up...
-
So much for freedom of expression yeah..... in the end, u get the sack....
Open ur eyes pap supporters....
-
LKY is incredibly condescending when you ask him just about anything. He thinks youngsters are idiots, to put it even mildly. There was a transcript of his speech at NUS some years ago. Gosh... that really made my blood boil.
Wonder if anyone has a copy of that transcript.
-
He thinks youngsters are idiots, to put it even mildly.
Lee Kuan Yew was the one who depoliticise the society and produce unthinking people, now he criticise his own handiwork.
He is an odd person, this Lee Kuan Yew.
I hope he dies soon.
What a bastard.
-
Originally posted by reyes:
somehow i feel his removal are related to his blog to challenge the PAP policy on foreign workers, taxes, welfare and etc.
i feel sorry for one who dare to voice out but has to pay a penalty.
singapore is really becoming a facist state whereby only ppl who agree with the PAP can survive.
dear discerning fellow singaporeans of our good country,reference to the topic opened by this TS, i am completely flabbergasted and dismayed by yet another blatant attempt to mislead our pple......
tan kin lian remove from ntuc chief???? if this is not a blatant lie then what is? since when was tan kin lian the ntuc chief? all along i know was that he was the ceo of ntuc income and not the head of ntuc (group).
somehow i feel his removal are related to his blog to challenge the PAP policy on foreign workers, taxes, welfare and etc.
i feel sorry for one who dare to voice out but has to pay a penalty.
i went through briefly his blog and website and i found this statement at the beginning of his blog:
I retired from NTUC Income on 28 February 2007, after completing 30 years as the chief executive.
if this is not straight from the horse mouth, then what is?? as far as i can remember too, he stepped down personally voluntarily and certainly not removed!! on further scanning through his massive blog and website, i could not find anything substansive to lend weight to what this TS is claiming that Tan Kin Lian is challenging the pap policy on foreign workers, taxes, welfare etc prior to his stepping down. In fact, almost the entire blog and website are talking about financial matters and insurance, as that is where his experience lies in..... in fact, the only thing of political element was his few paragraphs of personal view on "performance and pay of leaders" which to me does not have a provocative nature to it.
in fact, i admire Tan Kin Lian for his knowledge on financial matters and certainly his fight against the present management of ntuc income for higher payouts from insurance policies for the holders. As far as i remember, i do not hear him on politics much.
so, based on my desire to find the truth, i have to look for evidence. This is certainly a weak lie again to attempt to discredit our good government to further their own agenda!!! To all my discerning fellow singaporeans and readers here, i urge u not to be swayed by all the massive propaganda floating here but to have the courage to seek the truth by conclusive evidence. It is certainly not cool to go around criticising our good government to pump up own ego basing on hearsay and propaganda. But it is certainly cool to have yr own personal view after seeking out the truth amidst all the filth and lies in this forum.
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/
-
Bentsb05,
I agree with you that Tan Kin Lian has been one of our elites. In our particular political environment, where leaders are too self-centred about their own ego or abilities we have produced a society where ordinary people are resigned to their fate of leading a life of slavery while elites are merely looking after their own self-interests in terms of career and opportunities so what do we do.
If we have only one elite like Ngiam Tong Dow who was prepared to risk his own standing with the power that be to speak out how do we treat such elite.
In my personal view, we should support such elites and rally around them and not send the wrong signal to people or our leaders.
If we do not encourage good elites who dare to speak up on wrong policies of government then what kind of future will we have?
So on this note, I am for Tan Kin Lian speaking up and if there is any vendetta to discredit him we should put things right and rally around him against any petty persecution or whatever as being done so often in our political sphere.
Let us have a sense of civic mindedness among people to do what is right and not split hair over minor or petty issue.
We need to have more civic mindedness among the people who are prepared to speak up on negative aspects of government policies or wrong attitudes of government towards its people.
This to me is a larger issue facing Singapore for many years and today. Such an apathy existing among the elites currently is overwhelming as someone put it in this forum and this state of citizen-versus-citizen criticising themselves in pro-government versus anti-government camps is not good for our society if we want to aspire to higher goals.
If we want to believe leaders' scolding of oppositions for telling of lies or untruths, we must have the courage to tell the government not to use its huge propaganda machinery like the MPs, Ministers and all the Media and grassroot to stop telling lies about NKF hiding the reserves-versus-patient subsidy or MOM mixing up unemployment figure to hide unemployment data among citizens.
Let us be clear what we the citizens want and not believe in lies or untruths on the part of government.
Ask for a clean government which will tell truths and not cover up problems as has happened in NKF for years until finally exposed due to public concern.
The root cause of our many problems from NKF to Mas Selamat is lack of government accountability. Solve this no. 1 problem first the rest will take care of themselves.
The day when citizens including many who are here understand this truth that will be the day we will have a good government as people are higher than the government and all propaganda and lies will then stop and there will be no longer any need for leaders to keep debunking the people many of whom are merely trying to expose untruths in all the government propaganda.
That day will be the day government finds it unnecessary to call people liars or going against active citizens or enlightened elites like Tan Kin Lian.
-
Has the Political Talibans arrive into town ?
Is a Rose by any other name no longer - a Rose ??
Has it now bcome a crime to call a Spade what it truly is - nothing more then simply a Spade ?
With all the honest innocence, someone has already asked:
"Does that mean that if — heaven forbid — the judiciary 'really' becomes corrupt and partisan, Singaporeans would be sent to jail if they question its integrity ?"
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Has the Political Talibans arrive into town ?
Is a Rose by any other name no longer - a Rose ??
Has it now bcome a crime to call a Spade what it truly is - nothing more then simply a Spade ?
With all the honest innocence, someone has already asked:
"Does that mean that if — heaven forbid — the judiciary 'really' becomes corrupt and partisan, Singaporeans would be sent to jail if they question its integrity ?"
This whole episode about questioning integrity seems so farce.
You can tell a man to backup his words or else....In the words of LKY, there is "crossing of swords".But if you tell a man to not question your integrity or else...You already assasinate your character in the hearts of others. No unsheath of sword, no need for sword in the first place.
Don't they get it? Libel is for the other party to proof it. Integrity is for the involving party to live it up for other to see.
In the words of LKY, this kind of stuff involves "battling for the hearts and minds". And such battle cannot be won using a sword. -
Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:
LKY is incredibly condescending when you ask him just about anything. He thinks youngsters are idiots, to put it even mildly. There was a transcript of his speech at NUS some years ago. Gosh... that really made my blood boil.
Wonder if anyone has a copy of that transcript.
Have you watched the CNA programme on his session with the young adults a couple of years ago? After the session, there were negative feedback from the young adults. Anyone who has eyes saw how he was so defensive in the way he interacted with the youngsters. Through this programme, one could see the ugliness of lky "live". -
Originally posted by 00011000:
This whole episode about questioning integrity seems so farce.
You can tell a man to backup his words or else....In the words of LKY, there is "crossing of swords".But if you tell a man to not question your integrity or else...You already assasinate your character in the hearts of others. No unsheath of sword, no need for sword in the first place.
Don't they get it? Libel is for the other party to proof it. Integrity is for the involving party to live it up for other to see.
In the words of LKY, this kind of stuff involves "battling for the hearts and minds". And such battle cannot be won using a sword.Well said. For his own interests, he will resort to any possibility.
-
Anyone who stands up and speaks on behalf of the scared & naive is worth respecting and supporting.
-
Originally posted by Lin Yu:
it was his mistake that he didn't put his voices in the AGM.
I like to assume that he is a man who have conscion.He could have kept quiet and retire in peace.
This speaks something about the integrity of the man.
-
singapore elite, let stand up against the facist state!!
-
singapore elite, let stand up against the facist state!!
They have too much to lose, the Singapore elite.
It is up to the poor and middle class.
But yes, PAP hegemonic rule in Singapore must be destroyed.
This is quite clear.