Singapore is nanny state because the people want this?
- Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posted: Thu May 12, 2005 2:36 pm
Singapore is nanny state because the people want this?
CDCs: We do our best to help
May 12, 2005 Print Ready Email Article
THE New Paper on 29 Apr reported the situation faced by Madam Lee Kum
Len, 64, and her husband in its report 'So who can help them?'.
We agree with your reader, Mr Norman Tan, who said in his letter, 'A
little help can go a long way' (TNP, 4 May) that children should take
care of their parents, unless the children are themselves needy.
This is the operating principle the Community Development Councils
(CDCs) adopt to determine if families or individuals qualify for
Before this case was brought to our attention by Bishan East Citizens'
Consultative Committee (CCC) in March, the CCC was already helping
them with supermarket vouchers and a modest cash grant.
In addition, the Residents' Committee also visited Madam Lee when she
was hospitalised and arranged with the Town Council to help tidy up
When our social services officer visited the couple to ascertain how
best we could help them, she found that they have six children, and
five are able to support them.
In such cases, which do not qualify for financial assistance, the CDCs
go further, by working with their families, and enlisting the help of
voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) and grassroots organisations,
and other government agencies.
We liaised with the VWO handling the case to offer home help services
to Madam Lee's husband.
Last month, we also invited the children to come for a joint family
discussion, but regrettably, they declined.
We want to continue to work with the family, but they must be willing
to do their part.
Your readers may rest assured that CDCs make every effort to
understand the circumstances of the needy, and will help them
financially if they qualify.
If they do not, CDCs will go the extra mile of working with families,
and other agencies which might be able to offer other forms of assistance.
- Patrick Han,
CDC Planning & Development Division,
for Chief Executive Director,
S'poreans should stop whining
I HAVE come to the conclusion that it is the people who have made this
country conservative, and not the Government, as popularly believed.
Over the years, letters to newspapers have complained that the
Government is conservative and is not as open as the US, for example.
At first, I agreed, but when I read letters calling for bans on
smoking in public places, or eating while driving a vehicle, I know it
is Singaporeans who ask for tougher laws.
I also find that parents tend to pass the burden of responsibility for
their kids over to the Government.
An example is the call by parents for the Government to educate their
children about sex and Aids. Don't they have a part too?
Lately, many also demanded that casinos not be built lest gambling
ruins lives here.
At the end of the day, the people, not the Government, must be
responsible for themselves and their children.
If Singapore is a nanny state, it is because the people want this.
- Jaidev A Nanwani
You can view it in the context of the entire discussion by going to:
Forum: the Sammyboy.com's Alfresco Coffee Shop � Forum
Subject: Change or Perish- PAP must advice itself
DateTime: 16/04/2005 09:28:24
We have been hearing so often from the great leader
that Singapore has to change, stay relevant, move with
the times, remain engaged with the world etc.
" Nothing is cast in stone " The PAP leadership likes
to keep baying to the people over and over again.
It looks like the whole world has changed, moved on,
regimes that stayed in power for over half a century
have collapsed to give way to democractic way of life
Even the peasants in Singapore have changed.
Their outlook to life, the craving for more liberty,
unemployment blues have all made the mark on the
society in Singapore.
Except the PAP itself.
Its dogma of leadership , meritocraqcy has become irrelevant,
obsolete and downright stupid. It is an ossified dogma that
tells itself it is the best for Singapore.
But somehow the party's backbone of mental intellectual
efforts are still with the 82 year old chief, while the others just
wag their tails calling themselves second generation leaders.
What leaders are they?
They are not leaders at all in any sense of the word.
They are imposed on the people by the big chief whose
dogma for selecting potential leaders is solely based
on their tail wagging ability to the structured power pyramid heap.
The faster you wag your tail, the quicker you nod your head
in agreement, the lesser you offer dissenting views, the
earlier you accept the dogma of the big chief, are all
necessary pre-requisites to establish your meritocratic
credentials in the party. You are also honoured as an elite
if you happen to have a Phd on top of the above intangible
It looks like there is only one thing that needs change.
The change in thinking at the top of the pyramid heap.
They have to realise that their dogma has failed, failed
miserably and is downright out of sync with the rest
of the world trend.
But the problem is - that a bull headedness of a stubborn
big chief is so immense that he refuse to discrd his now
worthless dogma, which he keeps insisting will deliver
the goods as it did years ago.
One example - What good is a dogma that took 13 years to
realise that the economy was going down hill and yet kept
the KAYU as the headman to preside over the downhill slide ?
DelphiForums.com: Home to the Web's most vibrant
online communities. Explore more than 100,000 Forums
or create your own at http://www.delphiforums.com