I concur with the opinions of those interviewed about the ministerial forum (Everyday concerns not addressed at forum, October 18).
It’s a pity that there are bubbling questions on how “ordinary Singaporeans” are defined.
Although globalisation has been termed either a threat or an opportunity to the middle-class and educated Singaporeans, little has been said of the hardworking but neglected men and women on the street.
Perhaps it was because the discourse was set for an audience of tertiary-educated students who already have the potential to seek out the opportunities of globalisation.
But most “ordinary Singaporeans” may have no hope of tapping into this global network—they are too bogged down by family commitments, rising cost of living, perceived competition from foreign labour and talents, and the like to realise such aspirations.
One reason why the forum was somewhat of a letdown was the way the minister tried to politicise the issues presented.
As rightly pointed out by some members of the audience, there is a strong survivalist streak in his words last night that sums up the situation as do-or-die.
When Shan, a second year political science student, asked Dr Balakrishnan about Singaporeans who were affected by the mini-bond fiasco, the minister in turn asked her whether he should approach the problem as an economist or politician.
Her simple reply—to look at the issue from the eyes of an “ordinary Singaporean”—won the applause of the audience.
No doubt many, if not all, of the issues raised during the forum have some impact on the political governance of Singapore, but Shan pointed out the more direct and critical link: the ones affected are ordinary unpoliticised Singaporeans.
Seah Ru Han
Third-year Political Science undergraduate
National University of Singapore
Vacuum State
says:October 21st, 2008 at 1.13am
Isn’t a shame that when you start paying million dollars to Ministers, they stop thinking like ordinary Singaporeans? :)
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Daily SG: 21 Oct 2008
says:October 21st, 2008 at 11.15am
[...] an ex-private banker – Diary of A Singaporean Mind: Low : Be More Proactive MAS! – The Enquirer: Minister shouldn’t have politicised forum – Xtralicious: The highnotes/ minibonds issue – difference between HK and Singapore – Bad News on [...]
puni
says:October 21st, 2008 at 6.58pm
“The upside to a signed letter is that it is more prominent and credible compared with an anonymous comment tagged to the end of an article.”
I reserve the right to disagree with you.
http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2008/10/message-and-messenger.html
There is no logic to your statement and I formally challenge you on its merits.
I have also forwarded this to the brotherhood.
puni
says:October 21st, 2008 at 7.04pm
I did not say anything offensive. I did not in any way impute any wrong doing on your part. But if my post is censored for any reason, I would appreciate it, if you can give me a good reason why.
Many thanks.
I have already sent a copy to the brotherhood. They will act accordingly perhaps to even cancel the final report to AIMs, I hope not, but if they do, the Enquirer will be famous, I think.
clarence
says:October 22nd, 2008 at 2.21am
‘the brotherhood’??!
OXO
says:October 25th, 2008 at 10.38am
“The upside to a signed letter is that it is more prominent and credible compared with an anonymous comment tagged to the end of an article.”
I believe what these brotherhood folk may be try to say here is this; if you come into a new neighborhood and you start to impose your beliefs on others, then how far do you think, you are going to go?
Personally, I don’t think that statement concerning credibility was warranted or even required.
If you want people not to be anon, just tell them your requirement and criteria. You dont even have to give them a reason. This is after all your project, you have every right but please dont preach and attempt to impose your understanding on others, where I come from, civilized people consider it rude and inconsiderate.
As it is this is a very bad start. You will all need plenty of luck.
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Weekly Roundup: Week 43
says:October 25th, 2008 at 11.39am
[...] “When Shan, a second year political science student, asked Dr Balakrishnan about Singaporeans who were affected by the mini-bond fiasco, the minister in turn asked her whether he should approach the problem as an economist or politician. Her simple reply—to look at the issue from the eyes of an “ordinary Singaporean”—won the applause of the audience.” The Enquirer [...]
Kway Teow Man
says:October 26th, 2008 at 11.39pm
From reading your post, I am completely baffled by your claim that the Minister has politicised the Forum. Just how has he politicized the issue?
When he was asked the question, he actually made a very valid point because there are two different perspectives of the crisis depending on where one was standing and he is able to put on two different pairs of lenses.
Vivian Balakrishnan is not your ordinary Singaporean and if you get to talk to him, you should try to get HIS perspectives – and he is telling you he has two. You want the perspective of the ordinary Singaporean, you just go down to the kopi tiam and ask an ah pek lah.
What have they been teaching you in the Political Science Department? I’m seriously unimpressed.
mom
says:October 27th, 2008 at 7.03am
Politician or economist, the core of their subject is still the ordinary man.
Perhaps, that explains why Singapore’s economy and political state is in such dire straits.
They forgot who they serve.
mom
says:October 27th, 2008 at 7.04am
Vivian is definitely no ordinary man. He can survive on 290 dollars a month.