Singapore GE Results 2011 -- Insights and Lessons learnt

First time in history, the dominant governing party of my country has the lowest average votes percentage about 60.14% since Independence. (http://www.mysinchew.com/node/57221)

If you go by Cambridge O levels grading, this percentage has just made it to a B4. Interestingly, almost one third of the votes went to the contesting parties, even in my area, Pasir Ris, where there is hardly any publicity.

In a country with heavy emphasis on productivity and efficiency, this is the grade, the country as a whole rated the governing policies implemented from 2006 to 2011. This is their end-result, their scores, their rankings.

Yet, if we choose to look pass this "rating" and look at the "processes" "attitudes" during GE rally period, how the leaders choose to respond during rally and after that, you will rate it pretty much differently.

First, the apology from PM Lee Hsien Loong.

(http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC110504-0000411/We-have-made-mistakes--PM-Lee)

How each one might perceive the sincerity of his apology is really very much subjective.

How each one might perceive as a last attempt to garner votes, is also very much subjective.

Yet, one cannot deny that an apology has been made.

The courage to say it "We have made a mistake" cannot be denied.

A leader, who is always high above the others. Very very very very rich. A leader, who most probably never been belittled or chided before, takes the first step to apologize and assume the responsibility of the past 5 years' "not so good" decisions made.

I have met leaders who, when the team screwed up, he/she blamed it on the bad team members he/she had.

I have met leaders who, when the team screwed up, he/she pushed the team members up front to get all the "rotten tomatoes and pies", while he/she quietly stay behind, maintaining his/her image.

So if you ask me, PM Lee being a leader assuming mistakes, and be the one to acknowledge it, definitely has gotten an A1 for that of the others to follow.

Of course, then again, one can always choose to disagree.

Second: End of George Yeo's political career

Had dinner with husband's ex-colleague, who cited to us the achievements of George Yeo had in regards to free trading with US and setting Singapore to have a Cultural and Arts icon. Among all the Ministers, he is a Minister who had made significant achievements in which ever area he was posted. Thus, the outcry of "why does it have to be him?". "Why doesn't Workers' Party pick on XXX or XXX?"

Sounds cruel, but the best has to be picked for "battle". Or a decent opponent, worthy, has to be challenged. For example, if you are good in chess, you would like to challenge the best to play chess with you. If you win, that means something worthy. Unfortunately, that is what Workers' Party need to do, to make a "point". Unfortunately, this is what majority of citizens vote to make this "point". The "point" that is so important, that something decent, good has to be the sacrificial lamb. And thus the choice of George Yeo.

So what is the "point" that is so important??? That has to be made through drastic outcomes???

"No matter how good or efficient you are, if you do not listen, it doesn't matter." Someone wise told me this evening.

This hit me hard. Ya, no matter how good you are as an administrator, a boss, a leader, in terms of skills, intellect, achievements, if you do not listen, you will not have followers or change.

No matter how good a doctor you are, in terms of knowledge, skills and expertise, if you do not listen to patients, you are not healing.

Same for nursing, no matter how good I am as a nurse, technically, with colourful credentials, if I do not listen to my patients, I'm not nursing.

The "downfall" of George Yeo, is a lesson for everybody who prides yourself to be efficient in achievements, and who, with time, have lost the quietness to listen around you.

Instead of "how good are you in your nursing career?" I will start asking myself "how good are you in listening to your patients' needs?"

Third and the last: Response to the GE 2011 voting results

I thought, with a 60.14%, most probably, things will be continuing as usual, there will not be big changes. Don't get me wrong, but the dominant governing party really doesn't need to do anything much at all, cos we don't even dare to spit or litter along the roads. Nor do we really dare to chew gum and stick on the MRT trains. Of course vandalizing is out of question. Needless to say, to go on strike. So really, they really do not need to do anything at all. Yet they did.

Again, everybody can have their own opinions to the resignations of MM Lee and SM Goh. However, the fact is, if they want to stay in their chairs, hey nobody dares to ask them to leave. Yet, they choose to leave, resign or retire. They can have the power for another 5 years, yet they choose to leave.

PM Lee took all the changes very seriously and form the new cabinet. Of course, when alot of people see the list, sigh of reliefs and exclamations of joy can be heard. People are generally satisfied with the changes.

The impact on me, is not what steps PM Lee has taken above or is going to take. But the attitude of not been satisfied with a B4!! He is not satisfied at all with a B4!! And one can definitely sense his "fighting spirit" in getting an A next term :)

If any administrators want to grab this chance and tell their employees, that it is already a great achievement if 60% of you are satisfied with your working conditions (benchmark against "national" standards).. you are so so wrong and missing a big big point.

Which also spurs me not be happy with just 60%.

Insights and tough lessons learnt, ramblings from a nurse who cannot sleep.

Impact on Nursing and Healthcare -- Singapore General Elections 2011 reflection

General elections is just round the corner.

Honestly, I am pretty excited, because from the age of 21 till 32, I did not have a chance to vote.

This year I'm 33, I'm praying that I have that chance to vote for my country.

Some of you might start to wonder, why would a nurse blog about politics in her nursing blog? What has politics have to do with nursing professionalism?

Nursing and politics shouldn't be mixed at all.

From age 8 to 19: I sang "Majulah Singapura" and cited Singapore pledge with pride. Really I remembered those moments, especially during national day, there would be this stirring pride in my heart. I'm serious -- I was very proud to be a Singaporean, and knew that our independence and development hadn't been easy.

I was excited to see open-topped cars with loudspeakers, PAP logo and yes, usually a man wearing white waving down the streets of Ang Mo Kio and even the early Bishan. As a child, my family mattered the most, having a roof over my head, good living conditions, able to attend schools, no wars and no riots. Under the safe and loving environment, I grew up aspiring to be a nurse to serve my own country.

Age 20 to 24: I started working as a staff nurse in a restructured hospital. I gradually understood the healthcare system within a ward, within an organisation and as a system providing healthcare needs to Singaporeans. Anybody working as a nurse in Singapore, at one time or another will dread this system and want to give up nursing. I had my fair share. That time, I think little of been a Singaporean, nursing in other countries are much more professional. The policies governing their education, development, welfare, safety concerns -- are more detailed and well-thought. 3 basic things: Nurse-patient ratio, Nurses' basic education standard and Nurses' professionalism (pay pegged to level of recognised professionals e.g. teachers).

Even though with 4A1s in both Pure Maths; Pure Bio and Pure Chemistry in O Levels, I forsook the expected JC path and enrolled into Nanyang Polytechnic for nursing diploma. With no local universities offering nursing degree course, when other professions can have the simpler route from JC to local universities, I tediously saved money and travelled to Australia to pursue my own nursing degree. I was envious. Truly envious of Australia, Canada and US nursing system. Neighbouring countries like Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Philippines and Thailand have universities with nursing faculties. I seriously don't like to mention at that time I'm from Singapore. Pride as a Singaporean, well I had forgotten how it feels like. Though at present, there is a local university that has nursing faculty, my heart goes out to the polytechnic graduated RNs who have the potential to do their degrees and yet need to fork out higher costs to pursue their nursing degree education.

Age 25 to present: Having returned from Australia, I had the privilege to experience primary care to tertiary care especially in the area of diabetes care. I'd personally seen and attended to patients having difficulty financially, till they would rather not seek treatment or stop their medications. Patients who are visually challenged, needing to draw their insulin, and we had difficulty finding social help for them. Patients staying under bridges, and temples, "homeless" from one children place to another. The list of medications in standard list that allow for subsidising is often limited and unbalanced versus the list of "new" medications that proven to help the diseases. Our MSWs are swarmed daily but are often limited by governing policies.

I finally realise System, system, system, at the end of the day, is still the system.

Micro system ruled by macro system governed by national system.

That is why I am resigned. Resigned to the "it's like that", "Singapore is like that" mentality.

-- How is country run, what values does it emphasize?

-- How does a country value health?

-- How much money does a country want to put to healthcare sector?

-- How much money does a country want to put in to help those who are needy with established diseases?

-- Does the country want to emphasize local nursing education development or earning from foreign universities based in Singapore?

-- Does the country want to emphasize on local healthcare people development or earnings from agents recruiting foreign nurses/ healthcare personnel?

-- Does the country want to re-look at nurse-patient ratio, nursing hours, nursing pay in comparison to local professionals like teachers, police, regular SAFs, etc. and drawing comparison to overseas nursing pay rank among professionals to retain our own nursing local talents?

Please do not say that this will inflate healthcare costs and transfer the guilt to tender nursing hearts, because it is mooted by the same argument of not charging citizens for low crime rates, and not charging citizens for the hefty costs of defence, not increasing school fees because rising costs in education while providing affordable quality education. This is only true if the budget for healthcare remains constant and poor allocation of financial resources.

Does the country want to do the above to attract locals into nursing for our future generation?

The road of status quo is like palliative care. Whatever additional changes are like "comfort care". As long as underlying basic policies of funding to healthcare and areas of emphasis are not changed, nothing will change for the better. No matter how much I yearn to be 8 again, seeing nursing itself and politics as something else, is wishful thinking. Politics influences healthcare tremendously; the needs of my patients and unfortunately, nursing. I'm resigned because it is politics, and 'nothing to do with nursing'. If I am given a chance to vote, at least, I can vote for a hope. Like a patient with a terminal illness, anything else represents hope.