Singapore Democrats

Bloody fat chance!

You think he has got nothing else better to do then to care about the lives of us 'lesser mortals'

Despite all the signs and warnings that this (exhorbitant rent increase) will happen, Teo has applied Lim Swee Say strategy by being deaf to what people on the ground are telling him.

Now he's giving this incident a wide berth.

(BTW, someone brought this up before and don't know if it's true ---- Who is the relative of Sheng Siong's owner?)

What has he got to lose by adopting this strategy?

I wont be surprise if Teo would say that he has long been privately liasing with HDB with regards to this matter. Despite all that SDP has done so far, the MSM and HDB did not mentioned anything about SDP. Instead TODAY mentioned about Mr Seah (Marine Parade GRC) being concern about the matter and wrote to Sheng Song to reconsider the rent hike.

Two points:

Firstly, SDP seems to think very highly of itself (and its actions). It says that HDB has “responded to SDP's warning that Sheng Siong may be trying to get rid of the stallholders in order to convert the wet markets to supermarkets”.

However, HDB has since deliberately mentioned that it received feedback from the local advisors and residents. This is probably to preempt any other party (read, SDP) who might jump in to claim credit.

Anyway, SDP contradicts itself on this point. If it thinks that the party is having such a major influence on HDB, the agency in control here, then why is SDP asking to talk to Teo HP to “discuss ways of resolving this unacceptable situation”?

Surely we know the reason for this letter. A show.

Secondly, SDP had earlier reported that “a number of stallholders at Fajar Market .... (had) already given up their stalls”.

It also observed that “the place is almost half empty, causing great inconvenience to housewives who frequented the market for fresh produce and meats.”

The impression that SDP wanted to paint was that half the stall-holders have abandoned the market.

In contrast, HDB reported that “so far, 90 per cent of the stallholders have decided to continue renting the stalls for one year”. This puts paid to SDP’s perennial attempt to paint a false picture to achieve its political objectives.

PS. On an earlier letter to Teo HP, SDP pasted a picture of John Tan with a smirk-filled face. On this latest letter, the smugness has been prudently excluded.

SDP, well done in pressuring HDB but this is only a “show” and eventually, I’m sure, after the election Sheng Siong will be allowed to do and set up and convert the wet markets to supermarkets.

Sheng Siong has the manpower to man the stalls. So what if all the stall holders gave up. SS can employ Malaysians and PR to do it.

The 'show' in fact is on the HDB side.
I predict that eventually all the original stall holders will be gotten rid of by SS which will then install its own 'stall holders'. Do remember that the HDB condition is only that they remain wet markets nothing else.

Absolutely nothing to prevent SS from getting rid of the real stall holders and run the wet market like Kopitiam runs its food courts - every 'stall holder' is actually in reality an employee.

The distinction between a supermarket and a wet market made up of individual stalls is that transactions is directly between stall holders and the customers. What is to stop SS from giving each of its 'stall holders', in reality employees, this power to transact directly with customers without a central cashier system. If SS decides not to even bother with putting up this masquerade there is NOTHING to prevent it from operating like all its other premises, until the anger dies down.

BryanT,

Since I have 5 minutes to spare today I shall entertain you.

What is wrong with SDP claiming credit? They were there right at the start of the whole thing, visiting Fajar market, lobbying HDB and that PAP MP whom one of the WP people voted for last election. Why can't SDP claim credit? Are you sore SDP did the right thing? Ouch ouch!

SDP is right to talk to TEO H P regardless of whether it thinks Teo HP has the willingness or ability to resolve the issue. Teo HP is the MP for crying out loud. The burden of responsibility is on his shoulders. If Teo HP cannot flex his muscles to help his own constituents, SDP would have done them a huge favour by pointing out his impotence and incompetence.

HDB said the stall owners continue renting for 1 year. Question is did they threaten to vacate prior to the latest announcements? Was there any disruption in their service the past few months? Are the HDB owners renting under re-negotiated terms or some compromise has been made?

Without knowing all these details, you jump the gun and accuse SDP of misleading.

This is so easy.

Next please.

E-Jay

For those who don't understand Bryan speak here is a translation.

BryanT says: "Firstly, SDP seems to think very highly of itself (and its actions). It says that HDB has “responded to SDP's warning that Sheng Siong may be trying to get rid of the stallholders in order to convert the wet markets to supermarkets”".

In BryanT's world view, the word "respond" equates to be thought of highly. So I am responding to him now, by his logic he must think highly of himself.

BryanT says: "However, HDB has since deliberately mentioned that it received feedback from the local advisors and residents. This is probably to preempt any other party (read, SDP) who might jump in to claim credit."

He now says that HDB has responded but have deliberately chosen to respond because of other channels of queries. But he also admits that HDB might have done so because they don't want SDP to take credit. So by his logic, it would mean HDB itself thought highly of SDP. Clearly it is not a case of SDP thinking highly of itself but HDB thought highly of SDP. After all, if SDP is a nobody, why, according to BryanT logic would they go out of the way to avoid SDP claiming credit?

BryanT says: "Anyway, SDP contradicts itself on this point. If it thinks that the party is having such a major influence on HDB, the agency in control here, then why is SDP asking to talk to Teo HP to “discuss ways of resolving this unacceptable situation”?"

Now the classic BryanT logic. HDB has responded he equates to SDP he equates to the latter having an influence. So by BryanT's logic I have responded to his comment so now he has influence over me?

To Oxford dictionary: make sure respond == influence.

BryanT: "Surely we know the reason for this letter. A show."

Another classic BryanT pot calling kettle statement. By commenting here is it not a case of making a show? Or something more sinister that is to, using BryanT own word, "agitate (read violent)" against SDP?

To be fair to Dr. Chee S J, I analysis the phrase "HDB responded to SDP's warning" means SDP “pre-emptive warned” that there may be hidden agendas behind Sheng Siong's purchased of the wet market for certain purposes and the end result is that Sheng Siong exposed its “ill” intention and warrant HDB to respond according to SDP's warning. HDB is not directly responding to SDP but to the issue with Sheng Siong.

HDB will always and forever disregard the oppositions especially SDP to avoid complication with the despicable ruling party! The management of HDB always and will forever wants ITS “iron rice bowl” to be “perfect”, intact and plentiful without even a “hairline crack”!

Mind you, they are all steadfast cronies of the million-dollar contemptible miw, my dear! If not, in the first place if they are non-pro the ruling party, you do opine that they will not be in the top echelon of the HDB, don’t you?

In view of the above, I opine that SDP is not claiming credit for the Sheng Siong's issue!

This time round, Toe H P is non-responsive, non-cooperative and non-receptive to the stall holder’s pledge for assistance!

Teo Ho Peng is the MP who was elected by the people to represent Bukit Panjang constituency.Now there is a problem in that area,as an MP,he has to tackle the problem,HDB is a stat board, regulator,if we bypass the MP,then what is the use of voting him in,Yaw Shin Leong from Workers Party said Teo is a good MP, but when there is a problem, he plays Tai Chi and said this is between stallholders and SS.THis is the kind of MP our dear BryanT would like to see.He chose to attack SDP but keep mum abt.incompetency of Teo.

Come On BryanT, how much longer will it take for you to realise that your writings are so often marred with self-conflicting views. In fact, you have long lost all credibility as far as I am concern. If only you could spend more time dissecting your own comments as you would in that of SDP's, you would have realised long ago that you have been continually committing the "sins" which you have been accusing SDP of doing. In fact anyone who spends so much of his time actively trying to disprove whatever SDP is doing as you are, has definitely a more sinister agenda than what you have been unsuccessfully trying to make it out to be.

In this instance, what SDP has predicted and has been actively trying to PREVENT from happening (as compared to any PARTY in Singapore) has turned out to be true. So where is the credit that they deserve? Instead of voicing out the biasness in the way the news has been reported, you continue to pick on SDP's article. This only goes to show the kind of mentality and lack of integrity that you have.

Also just to remind your skewed and feeble mind, SDP is a political party, so what is wrong with having strategies? If you find them so disagreeable, then you should be having a busy time commenting on PAP and every successful organisations in the world..in other word, CUT THE CRAP BryanT, and get a LIFE.

SDP, seriously by now most of your readers and supporters would have noticed this 'REGULAR POSTER' by the name of BRYANT who's always spouting nonsense and scurrilous comments on you guys esp DR Chee & SDP.

Don't you (SDP) think its time to BAN his postings once & for all? I'm quite sick and tired of seeing his comments in almost all of your articles.

Pls do your readers & supporters a favor to BAN his (BRYANT) postings ONCE & FOR ALL. Why waste time to post his comments when we already know his objectives even before he post his comments in your articles.

Tell him to post his comments in our 143th world ranking msm. Am sure they (SHITTY TIMES) would most welcome his comments especially when its content is critical of opposition parties.

Stop letting the dogs out!!!!

Bryan T's method of religiously putting down a simple activity of Dr Chee doing its rounds in the wet market and speaking up for people (which is what an opposition party should be doing, no?) shows that he has a personal vendetta against Dr Chee and his party.

There is without a doubt the online persona Bryan T is the creation of activists from members of YPAP, whom which PM Lee recently divulged were tasked to "fight online battles".

YPAP activists know that Dr Chee's and his democratic principles is a grave threat to the ruling party and is doing its best to tarnish Chee's reputation.

I applause YPAP's online effort, but you can never fight morality head on without yourself looking like an idiot.

Quote: "And all this for Sheng Siong to make itself richer at the expense of the common folk."

I applaud the SDP for standing up to the government for the benefit of Singaporeans. However, I have some misgivings about some of the things mentioned here.

It seems to me the SDP thinks that making money or the desire to be richer is an evil quality. I beg to differ. I don't think wanting to be rich, or wanting to be richer is a bad thing, I think its a good thing. If you own property and you chose to rent it out for more money than the previous year, there is nothing wrong with that, in fact that makes perfect sense. As a landlord, you want to rent out the place for the best price and as a lessee, you want to rent a place for the least amount of money. Only in mutual agreement can you have the landlord and lessee agreeing on a price. If Sheng Shiong can raise its rent and there are people still willing to rent the place, then it is of no concern to the SDP that they raise their rent. Similarly, if you quit your job today because some other employer is willing to pay you more, the SDP should not be able to stop you from quitting.

What I think is happening is that we are seeing the effects of inflation, ie the value of our money is dropping. The price increase is merely a reflection of the loss of purchasing power of our money. We can see it more clearly if we measure the value of our dollar against other commodities like gold, silver and oil. Sheng Shiong is merely the company delivering the inflation. If it is not Sheng Shiong, it would be some other company, Shop and Save, NTUC, etc. Ultimately, the prices will rise and we will blame the company rather than blaming the true culprit, which is the monetary authority (MAS).

It's so obvious BryanT is a political troll - meant to spread negativity and tear down whatever good things come from the opposition.

If you notice, IT never comes up with anything constructive or positive. No good ideas, no genuine words of encouragement, no real compassion for anything or anyone. IT's sole purpose is to destroy.

And the best way to deal with these trolls? Just ignore it. Don't feed it!

1. There were 5 wet markets taken over by Sheng Siong but only the one in Fajar was single out by SDP. The reason is obvious.

2. There were 90% of existing stall holders renewed contract with Sheng Siong and the other 10% quitted due to various reasons at different locations. SDP chose to ignore THP's effort for requesting a wet market in his constituency in the early days and the operator had been a private one since then. In fact, those 90% chose to stay behind know HDB had explicitly stated their position and fully understood wet markets will remain as such. Again, SDP chose to ignore these facts.

3. SDP claimed that it was helping stall holders but merely talk and no action. Why? SDP is fully aware that those store holders who stay behind chose to enter into a private contract with the operator and hence, SDP nor other third-party is not able to intervene with a private business agreement. Also, SDP is fully aware there there were numerous discussions and negotiations with various stake holders before their contract were concluded. These are willing buyers and willing sellers.

4. SDP is fully aware that there is nothing they or any other third-party could have done. Thus, it chose the simplest way out - blame the incumbent for reason better known to themselves.

I see no reason why the incumbent needs to join SDP's wayang.

Why Wayang ? Because the incumbent is useless ? What he can do as an MP ? He can't bring down the cost.He said it is a private transaction.Then we consumers will suffer as a result of price increase.MP collects $15k per month, you die your business,at the most he can help you write letters to apply for P.R,write letter to the authority to settle your case,do some town council work such as foot path,senior citizen corners,tree planting....This kind of MP no need Dr. to run, Ah Seng, Ah Meng also can,waste our tax payer's money.And worse ,he used our Town Council money to gamble and lost.And this WP joker who stays in Bukit Panjang said he is a good MP.What the f***