NSP View on ESC Report (FULL)

[Goh Meng Seng]

NSP's views regarding the ESC's recommendations
Fri, Feb 05, 2010
What is NSP's views regarding the ESC's recommendations?

In general, we appreciate the government’s effort in trying to deal with new economic challenges in the next decade. However we feel that ESC is trying too hard in dissecting economic issues without realizing that the model of economy is tightly linked to the social-cultural- political aspects of the Nation. These “software” of the Nation will mold the mindset of the citizens which in turn will impact on how the economy will develop in reality.

We need a more holistic approach instead of formulating quick fixes for short term gains. The U-Turn on the FT policy is a classic example on how such quick fixes applied in the past may just become irrelevant and worse, creating irreversible damage to our social fabrics.

For a start, we would like to see the government play their role in assuring adequate housing for every Singaporeans. While we take care of foreign workers and students’ housing needs, we should not leave our citizens living in the wild without a roof over their heads. Housing is a basic needs for citizens before they could work on upgrading their skill sets and contribute to the society.

Secondly, if we want our workforce to be more creative and innovative, an atmosphere of creativity, innovation and dynamic democratic vibrancy should be built based on a more open democratic system whereby diverse views are tolerated in schools, work place, civil service and the political sphere.

Which specific areas/aspects/ issues/recommend ations does NSP agree with the ESC? And why?

We have no issues with ESC’s broad direction as presented in their report although there is nothing specifically new. However we wish to highlight specifically the point on strengthening support for low wage workers and dependency on foreign workers which are more of a concern for these few years.

We felt that this is long overdue. Our low wage workers have their salaries depressed by the constant influx of these foreign workers, making their livelihood tougher by the day. While many of these foreign workers enjoy very low rent flats provided by HDB, many of our citizens have to manage life with a mortgage of higher amount. Sometimes, they are even deprived of a roof over their heads while HDB demanded them to wait for 30 months before they could rent a flat from it.

We have been expressing grave concerns about the government’s over-reliance on foreign workers since decade ago at every opportunity. We are finally glad that the PAP government, through the ESC committee, is finally taking heed to deduce this dependency.

On the other hand, which specific areas/aspects/ issues/recommend ations does the NSP disagree with the ESC? And why?

First of all, we are concerned about ESC’s suggestion to “Price energy to reflect real costs and constraints” on the household sectors. We would like to understand more in details and monitor the pricing implementation process to ensure households are not severely burdened.

Singapore’s energy pricing is already on the high side in this region. We should take care of implementing pricing policy that would affect our costing in living as well as doing business.

Secondly, we do not agree to ESC’s recommendation to look into nuclear energy as the alternative energy source. Singapore is too small a place to take the risk of having a nuclear disaster of any sort.

Thirdly, we feel that it is totally inadequate for ESC to focus only on labour productivity. We should be looking at Total Factor Productivity as well, which will include Capital Productivity.

While the government pays lip service in grooming local SMEs, our over reliance on MNCs and GLCs has impeded the growth of our local SMEs. A more relevant study should be done on the economic model of Korea and Taiwan. These governments play an active role in providing funds and facilities for technological research and upgrading their enterprises into Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) instead of mere vendors providing parts and services for MNC plants.

ESC has made bold vision about building Singapore into a Global-Asia City but we feel that Singapore should leverage more on its regional role. What is missing in this ESC report is the strategy of more integration in regional economies, creating an economic hinterland for Singapore. There is no mention about whether Singapore will work actively towards a more comprehensive Free Trade Zone in Southeast Asia or even Southeast Asian Economic Union. We feel that Singapore should start the economic integration with our closest neighbours and expanding to other ASEAN countries in the long run. We need an enlarged consumer base before our Nation could maintain continuous growth for decades ahead.

The focus on innovation and creativity should not be measured solely on dollars and cents spent in research. The cultivation of innovation and creativity needs a whole generation of mindset changed through our educational system as well as political climate. There is no way for a nation to depend solely on foreign researchers for their sustainable economic growth. Our people must be cultivated through their daily lives. Let’s start with our political climate.

Goh Meng Seng
Secretary General
National Solidarity Party

 

[commoner]

Dear Meng Seng,

First, it is a Economic Strategic Committee, so its function very clearly definied to look purely on economic impact disregard your holistic approach. If not, the committee will be too big and report may take another 52 years to complete.

1. Nuclear energy.... we can let a limpy terrorist escape, what makes them so sure they can protect a nuclear facility. If we had not sold our power plants, it could have been a different story. And we have a shorty home affairs minister who cannot see what's happening over a 6-foot wall.

2. Singapore not a global city yet? define what is a global city in definite terms.

3. Increase levy of foreigners? how does it improve productivity other than increasing cost of business here and government's coffer?

4. If FT left, MNCs will leave because of higher costs? The ministers want to compare cost of operation with china/malaysia/indonesia/vietnam? The MNCs stayed not because of FT. The government wants to claim credit for attracting MNCs here, they must also accept responsibility when they leave.

 

[Ramseth]

First of all, we are concerned about ESC’s suggestion to “Price energy to reflect real costs and constraints” on the household sectors. We would like to understand more in details and monitor the pricing implementation process to ensure households are not severely burdened.

Singapore’s energy pricing is already on the high side in this region. We should take care of implementing pricing policy that would affect our costing in living as well as doing business.

Secondly, we do not agree to ESC’s recommendation to look into nuclear energy as the alternative energy source. Singapore is too small a place to take the risk of having a nuclear disaster of any sort.

Firstly, nuclear power is very clean provided that radioactive wastes are disposed properly. Unlike fume and smog produced by burning oil or natural gas which dissipate into the air and is diffcult or impossible to control totallly, nuclear wastes can be 100% containerised.

Secondly, in terms of fear of accidents or terrorist attacks, a nuclear power plant won't explode like a combustible fuel power plant or oil rig. There's been numerous oil rig and oil tanker disasters causing huge death tolls and longlasting damages to the environment. Number of nuclear plant accidents on record through history is one and only Chernobyl.

Thirdly, a nuclear power plant is not and cannot blow up like a nuclear bomb, as many people mistakenly assume. Countries as small as (and as environmentally concerned as) Belgium and Denmark have many nuclear power plants. Even Japan, who suffered nuclear weapon attacks before, have many nuclear power plants.

Even a nuclear bomb can't detonate if one's not militarily and scientifically trained how to arm it. You can pour gallons of kerosene on a nuclear bomb and light it up. Only the kerosene will burn. A combustible fuel power plant needs only one lighted cigarette to be flicked at it.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It is not the explosion that we are afraid of. It is the radiation leaks that kills.

Goh Meng Seng

Firstly, nuclear power is very clean provided that radioactive wastes are disposed properly. Unlike fume and smog produced by burning oil or natural gas which dissipate into the air and is diffcult or impossible to control totallly, nuclear wastes can be 100% containerised.

Secondly, in terms of fear of accidents or terrorist attacks, a nuclear power plant won't explode like a combustible fuel power plant or oil rig. There's been numerous oil rig and oil tanker disasters causing huge death tolls and longlasting damages to the environment. Number of nuclear plant accidents on record through history is one and only Chernobyl.

Thirdly, a nuclear power plant is not and cannot blow up like a nuclear bomb, as many people mistakenly assume. Countries as small as (and as environmentally concerned as) Belgium and Denmark have many nuclear power plants. Even Japan, who suffered nuclear weapon attacks before, have many nuclear power plants.

Even a nuclear bomb can't detonate if one's not militarily and scientifically trained how to arm it. You can pour gallons of kerosene on a nuclear bomb and light it up. Only the kerosene will burn. A combustible fuel power plant needs only one lighted cigarette to be flicked at it.

 

[Ramseth]

It is not the explosion that we are afraid of. It is the radiation leaks that kills.

Goh Meng Seng

What radiation leak? Where?

There're thousands of nuclear power reactors around the world. Only one incident of accidental leak. Chernobyl killed less than 100, less than one Spyros oil tanker accident (Singapore) or one Alpha Pipa oil rig explosion (North Atlantic). There're thousands of nuclear Warheads on submarines and warships roaming around the world. What leak? Zero.

 

[Ramseth]

you scare this scare that, might as well ban all car on the road, then there will be zero accident:oIo:

Don't need to count also can imagine, the huge number of nuclear power reactors and nuclear warheads amassed in North America and western Europe. Number of accident = zero. Like that also scared?

 

[soIsee]

WHAT???? ESC came out with 1052 pages comprehensive report, NSP only 1 page? Whahahahahahahaaaa

Obvious isn't it.

That means NSP can give the actual answer in one page versa 1052 pages of bull shitting, wayang show and empty talk from the ESC.

 

[Perspective]

Don't need to count also can imagine, the huge number of nuclear power reactors and nuclear warheads amassed in North America and western Europe. Number of accident = zero. Like that also scared?

I think it is the stigma of the word "nuclear". In our young days, our history focuses alot on WWII because Singapore was a small country but big victim and then we learn about nuclear bombs which were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. We were told the Japan people in these cities suffered disastrous consequences that lasted for generations as if to alleviate and justify the sufferings of Singaporeans under Japanese, without understanding what "nuclear" actually it is. So everytime we hear "nuclear" we assume it easily goes off under our pants and turns us to elephant men. In reality it is an energy and although it produces radiation so does computers. The amount is what matters. Jurong Island could go up in smoke with just one mistake. That's energy for you.

Just like the stigma of the word "opposition". People equate the word to a guerilla fighting the Japanese.

 

[Ramseth]

I think it is the stigma of the word "nuclear". In our young days, our history focuses alot on WWII because Singapore was a small country but big victim and then we learn about nuclear bombs which were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. We were told the Japan people in these cities suffered disastrous consequences that lasted for generations as if to alleviate and justify the sufferings of Singaporeans under Japanese, without understanding what "nuclear" actually it is. So everytime we hear "nuclear" we assume it easily goes off under our pants and turns us to elephant men. In reality it is an energy and although it produces radiation so does computers. The amount is what matters. Jurong Island could go up in smoke with just one mistake. That's energy for you.

Just like the stigma of the word "opposition". People equate the word to a guerilla fighting the Japanese.

Yes, as I mentioned earlier, many people mistakenly assumed nuclear means can flatten Singapore, as we're told that Singapore's hardly the size of Hiroshima. My point is, a nuclear power reactor is not a nuclear bomb. Even after intentionally bombed with a nuclear bomb, Hiroshima is alive and kicking today with some of the longest lifespans in the world.

No, we don't want a nuclear bomb exploding in Singapore of course. It'd kill many people and take decades to recover. A nuclear power reactor is not a nuclear bomb. Anyway I've already pointed out, military use of nuclear power, accident = zero. Civilian use, accident = one (death toll 50+).

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Don't need to count also can imagine, the huge number of nuclear power reactors and nuclear warheads amassed in North America and western Europe. Number of accident = zero. Like that also scared?

Unless we have huge land mass and could afford a few kilometers radius of land surrounding the nuclear plants to be emptied, then we could consider such option.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Ramseth]

Unless we have huge land mass and could afford a few kilometers radius of land surrounding the nuclear plants to be emptied, then we could consider such option.

Goh Meng Seng

No need. Can build anywhere in Singapore. Best area is Tanjong Pagar GRC or Marine Parade GRC. Near ports. Can quickly and easily ship the wastes away. This is what practically all the nuclear reactor possessing countries do.

 

[Ramseth]

which prick came up with that nuclear idea?

build that beside the prick's home...see their family will drop hairs everyday...

I see most French are still hairier than most Singaporeans. They should have nuke reactors and bombs about or above 1,000 combined.

 

[Ramseth]

you look from the sides or from the top?

The Frenchie gals between the legs.

 

[Ramseth]

why are you such a staunch supporter of nukes?

I repeat. Because nuke is good. It's the safest source of energy. It killed less people than petroleum, natural gas, coal and whatever combined. In military usgae, it also ended a world war.

Why there's so much bad media publicity about nuke power to instill the idea that nuke power accident can blow out whole city? Because oil company commercial interests and they're rich, powerful and influential. Nuclear power is always political, i.e. national owned not commercial owned. The governments also have to give face to oil companies.

 

[Ramseth]

since you like nukes so much, would you mind nuclear power build directly beside your home?

I thought I've answered this question before. I don't mind if they build a nuclear power station at the hawker centre across the road or park a nuclear submarine carrying 10 nuclear warheads at the river opposite (but don't park at the swimming pool downstairs, otherwise no space to swim).

However, they won't do that in my area even if I or a lot of us appeal. It's not suitable area. The best is Tanjong Pagar or Marine Parade or East/West Coast.

 

[Rogue Trader]

In general, we appreciate the government’s effort in trying to deal with new economic challenges in the next decade. However we feel that ESC is trying too hard in dissecting economic issues without realizing that the model of economy is tightly linked to the social-cultural- political aspects of the Nation. These “software” of the Nation will mold the mindset of the citizens which in turn will impact on how the economy will develop in reality.
...
Thirdly, we feel that it is totally inadequate for ESC to focus only on labour productivity. We should be looking at Total Factor Productivity as well, which will include Capital Productivity.
...
ESC has made bold vision about building Singapore into a Global-Asia City but we feel that Singapore should leverage more on its regional role. What is missing in this ESC report is the strategy of more integration in regional economies, creating an economic hinterland for Singapore.

It seem that NSP rely on their feelings alot. if you want can replace "feel" with "recommend" , "find", "observe" . Can you write something that sound more scientific?