Monday, 3 January 2011

GE is around the corner and what is required to cover the ground?

It is of no surprise that not many people or voters are aware of the amount of effort and time required during campaigning period. This could be due to the lack of information or voters could not be bothered.

With GE around the corner, I re-revisited the book from Dana Lam, 'Days of Being Wild'. I came across this segment and I thought it would be good to share this with everyone who is reading this. This book was written and published after GE 2006.

I've summarized the segment below:

Campaigning

"We always tell people who join us, we must be a respectable party. People must see the meaning and find it meaningful to join the WP. So you must take the correct approach to politics. We serve Singapore by having people who were concerned, like-minded citizens to come forward and get on board and we provide the people with a choice. And for Singapore to move towards a First World nation, this itself I think was a national service to Singapore. Whether you were elected or not, was something else. But it must be something meaningful for you to do,' Said Low Thia Khiang.

Campaigning was tedious word, exacting mental and physical endurance from each individual. It was highly labour-intensive. What the party did not have in numbers, it more than made up with the individuals' willingness to put themselves on the line. As Low said, 'We have small group of people doing a lot of things. And we depend a lot on the individual stretching, even over-stretching himself or herself on the job.' Here are some of the roles in an election campaign.

1) Election Agents (EA)

Every candidate was assigned an EA whose function included seeing to the collection and filling of the candidate's nomination papers. He or she also kept track of the election expenses of the candidate. In a GRC, a Principal Election Agent (PEA) was elected from among the EA to represent the group.

EA to ensure all necessary forms for candidates were collected in person before Nomination Day. Forms had to be signed and signatories must be present on Nomination Day at the respective centres.

Permit to hold rally was issued to EA. EA is made responsible for everything that happened at the rally. He or she is the main liaison with the police on law and order issues from traffic and crowd control to how and where the stage was set up. A list of names and particulars of speakers was submitted to the police beforehand.

EA also arranged for transport and catering of dinners for the candidates and their helpers. All EA had to take an oath of secrecy which meant they were not allowed to divulge what they know.

2) Proposer, Seconder, Assentors

For every candidate, there had to be a proposer, a seconder and 4 assentors who had to present themselves with the candidates at the respective nomination centre. Assentors had to be residents in the respective constituency.

3) Proxies

2 things were necessary for holding a political rally; a rally site and a police permit. Rally sites were designated by the police who cited law and order concerns for designated open fields for the purpose. But these areas were hard to access! Consequently, stadium venues were considered choice sites because of available seating, shelter, lighting and easy access. Candidates were not allowed to use the PA system in the stadium -- for law and order reasons. Limited opportunities for a choice site was what drove political parties to deploy 'proxies' to queue overnight at the Police Complex at Cantonment road.

Sites and permits were issued only the day before the rally. This meant that for about 8 nights (9 days to campaign) between Nomination day and Polling day, the party had to find people who were willing to spend the night at the Police Complex. This day-to-day application process also explained why it was virtually impossible to have a calendar of rallies and their times and venues in advance.

4) Marshals/ Helpers

Required by police regulations, they ensured that people attending the rallies were orderly and knew where to go. These helpers got to be aware of what is allowed and what is not.

5) Polling agents

Tasked with watching over the procedure at polling centres, they were sworn to secrecy and could not divulge what they knew. Generally, they tried to see to it that voters were not intimidated or unduly influenced by any party present.

6) Counting agents

These were also sworn to secrecy. Generally, they had to have a keen eye and were tasked with watching over the counting of votes.

Apart from the above mentioned, there are a lot more manpower required!!!!!!!
I was both Polling and Counting agent in GE 2006 and I have to say that I'm glad that I volunteered myself for it. The experience was wonderful and how many 5 years do you have in your life to take part in experiences like that?

In conclusion, as a true-blue Singaporean, what role would you like to take on for the up-coming GE?

Saturday, 1 January 2011

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Here is wishing everyone good health, wealth and prosperity!


Monday, 20 December 2010

HGCC Annual Xmas Carnival

What's so different this year was, the WP choir sang!!!!! Hahaha! The WP choir had 3 practices and 1 rehearsal on actual day before the performance.

We sang a total of 7 songs. I must say we sang beautifully :)

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!!!!!!!!!!!


Thursday, 11 November 2010

Chinese at it's best :)

现代名句精
‧ 樹多必有枯枝,人多必有白癡。

‧ 君子報仇,三年不晚。小人報仇,一天到晚。

‧ 帥有個屁用!到頭來還不是被卒吃掉!

‧ 就算是Believe 中間還是有個 lie。

‧ 就算是Friend 最後還是會有個 end

‧ 就算是Lover 最後還是會 over。

‧ 就算是forget 也要先 get才行。

‧ 樹不要皮,必死無疑。人不要臉, 天下無敵 。

‧ 懷才就像懷孕,時間久了才能讓人看出來 。

‧ 青春就像衛生紙。看著挺多的,用著用著就不夠了。

‧ 幸福離我們很近,但我們都忘了靠近。

‧ 天底下沒有所謂複雜的事情,是人的思維和感情把它複雜化了 。

‧ 福利不是問題,問題是沒福利。錢不是問題,問題是沒錢。

‧ 今日事今日畢,過了今日就不必。

‧ 皮夾裡的發票永遠比鈔票多。

Wednesday, 27 October 2010

Contradicting or me?

Khaw Boon Wan's latest blogpost, 'Keeping Umbrellas Strong', mentioned that he paid only $8 for a Heart By Pass surgery. All thanks to his Medishield and a private Shield supplement. Medisave took care of his co-payment.

I'm confuse by both his blogpost and MOH Spokesperson's facebook response on how Khaw paid only $8. To me, there is a slight contradiction between the two.

This was extracted from MOH facebook (http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=500175045389&id=154909330630&ref=mf)

I'm going to dissect this paragraph:

"Health Minister’s total bill for his bypass surgery came up to about $25,000; of which $20,000 was paid by insurance, and $5,000 by Medisave. Minister had subscribed to Basic MediShield (since it was launched in 1990) and topped it up with a private Medisave-approved Shield which covers Class A and private hospitals. He did not have any riders. The insurance premium for someone in his age range (51-60 years old) is about $330 - $662 for a Shield plan targeted at Class A hospitalisation. Presently, one can use up to $800 per policy per year from Medisave to pay for Medisave-approved Shield plans."

His total bill is $25, 000 ( I believe this is a round off figure).

He has a Medisave-approved Shield plan or what is better known as an Integrated Shield plan. This is a combination of Medishield and a private Shield. There are 5 companies in the market that provides this.

The Medisave-approved Shield reimburse $20, 000. Again this could be a round off figure.

All Medisave-approved Shield comes with deductibles and co-insurance. Since there is no mentioned of which company his Shield plan was bought from, I assume that his deductibles is $3, 000 and co-insurance is 10% (adopted by most Insurer).

The claim should look like this:
Total bill : $25, 000
Less deductibles: $3000
Balance: $22, 000
Less Co-insurance: 10% of $22, 000 = $2200
Balance that Medisave-approved Shield plan will reimburse (less exclusions or pre existing, if any) = $19, 800

The total amount of both deductibles and co-insurance is $5200.

He did not have any riders that is the extra plans that private Insurer offer to cover both deductibles and co-insurance. Like what is mentioned on facebook, can I assume that the $5000 from Medisave was used to finance both deductibles and co-insurance?

But his blog post states this, 'Medisave took care of my co-payment of the bill'.

Co-payment is used as a separate term from deductibles in the MOH website.

Click on this link, to see how the website separates co-payment from deductibles. If co-payment comprises of both deductibles and co-insurance then it should not separate the two terms.

If co-payment does not include deductibles then according to the statement above from his blog, Medisave only took care of $2200 not $5000 that was reflected in facebook.

And if my assumption is right, Medisave-approved Shield plan reimburse $19, 800. Medisave was used to pay his co-insurance or co-payment that is $2200. How did he pay for deductibles of $3000? How did he only pay $8?

Is there something wrong with the way I interpret the two?

I hope to have someone to enlighten me on this.

I've nothing against the scheme, in fact, I think that one should not opt out from Medishield and according to one's budget or hospitalisation preferance should buy a Medisave-approved Shield plan because Medishield has its flaws.

Medishield comes with per event claim limits and annual limits. That is to say, every item that is claim comes with a limit, one don't get to claim full. It is when a Medisave-approved Shield is bought then this claim might be claim in full because most of them are 'As-Charged', excluding pre-existing conditions and exclusions. Medishield is only good for hospitalisation in C or B2 ward. If one chooses to stay in a different word, pro-ration factor will kick in.

Since one can either use money in Medisave for hospitalisation charges or pay the premiums for Medisave-approved Shield plans, I think it makes more sense to use it to pay premiums for a Medisave-approved Shield plan. This is because with the current ceiling allowed for Medisave which is $39, 500, this can easily be wiped out for any treatment or surgery of catastrophic disease in Singapore's expensive healthcare treatment :(

Thank you for visiting leelilian.blogspot.com