Tuesday, 27 August 2013


Poor Singapore
Gini Ratio from 1980s to now.
Pap Finance Minister, Mr Tharman noted that the Gini Ratio was 0.44 in the 1980s and escalating until 0.48 in the 2007 [link]. In other words, the problem is not new. Yet, there was never a deliberate attempt by pap to correct or even mention the problem until the 2011 elections. I am unsure how the the Gini Ratio is done, but the website Heart Truths has done an outstanding analysis of the Gini Ratio [link].

Good Governance Vs Bad Governance

An outstanding government is one who is able to recognize imminent issue and prevent it from become full blown. It is like the head of the household noting that a flame in the kitchen is a fire hazard. A good governance will noted that there is an oncoming issue, attempt to solve it, but is only able to reduce the damage. An average government fails to notice the upcoming issue, but is able to solve to quickly when the issues become full blown. A bad governance is one when the issue is presented, is unable to deal with the issue. A terrible one is one that fails to solve the issue and blames it on everyone else. This is akin to blaming the household members for not noting the flame when it eventually becomes a fire that engulf the whole house (and it is worse when the household members are already making feedback on the flame in the 2000s, but was ignored!)

Leadership of current pap government?

There are 3 generations of pap leaders [see link for definitions]. From the 1980s till 2010s, pap failed to recognize the polarization of the rich-poor gap. Instead, pap was concerned with the economy and importing more FTs to sustain the economy. At a recent survey, 50% of the respondents wanted less FTs even if it meant a slower growth compared to 28% wanting the opposite[link]. As the rich-poor gap is now causing issues in our daily life, all the current pap leadership seemed to do is blame the past leaders for not identifying the Gini ratio problem earlier.  It is like the head of the household blaming the grandparents for not noting the flame which eventually become a fire! Likewise, they have mentioned once again that Singaporeans have been living in such problems since the 1980s! Once again, this is like the head of the household telling Singaporeans that the flame that burnt down the house is our fault as we have been living with the flame for a long time.

Top dollars for such Leadership?

The pap ministers are the highest paid ministers in the world [link], even after the so called pay cut. Was the pay cut a wayang just like Prince William visit [link] or their own crowd at the election rallies [link]? Eventually, it is undeniable that they are the highest paid. As such, it is inevitable that with such a pay, an acceptable quality of service and solutions are required. Otherwise, why pay top money for poor leadership and a lack of therefore?


Has pap identified the social impact of the rich-poor divide? What other issues have they missed? Are they concerned about the living conditions of the Singaporeans or rather their votes in 2016? Will you trust a government who will only look into existing issues only when Singaporeans threaten with their votes? Will you prefer alternative parties who are already raising the issues before elections and coming with plausible solutions?  Who is more sincere and genuine in wanting to solve the rich-poor gap? With our highly paid pap ministers, and claiming that they are the chosen from the best, will they be looking after Singaporeans or their votes?
Do you still trust pap?

I leave it to Singaporeans to decide. Please vote wisely in 2016 or it may be Singaporeans last chance to do so as the 6.9 million- population will change the demographics of the voting citizens.

Time for a regime change in 2016?

Source: Anson Be


We have read and experiences all sorts of problems besetting Singapore. It is not a matter of if but when Singapore will fail.
All previous PAP policies have lead us to the state we are in now. And the present PAP leaders are coming up with hare-brain stop gap solutions to plug up these policy failures; These failed policies which has in fact been ingrained and inculcated in all of us true-breed Singaporeans, especially the baby-boomers and those who are now in their 50s and 60s.

The notable doomed to failure major policies unilaterally imposed on us by PAP’s LKY are;
1) The stop at two policy – this needs no further discussion, except to add that our fertility rate is a mess now because of this hare-brain policy.

2) The Graduate Mother Policy – Another hare-brain policy by LKY – who does he thinks he is – GOD! Perhaps he can make his son marry whom he chooses but marriage is Made (or broken) in Heaven. It was a failed policy from the word go by an atheist.

3) Meritocracy – The first question we need to ask is – ON whose merit? Of course by PAP’s definition its – on PAP Merit. Every dumb hare-brain soul knows that for a certain job the person chosen is based on the merits required by the job. The PAP merit is anyone who can score straight As in the exams is merited to be able to do anything and everything in high office -BULL SHIT!

4) Meritocracy has lead to Autocracy – When the Study smart (merited) person is placed at the top of the pyramid. He automatically thinks he is the best brain to run the show, the people below him will perpetuate this believe. And so only top knows what to do and what is best. And because he doesn’t really know what everyone believes he knows; he uses wayang and cronies to show him to be what he is not. In the end the company or department he runs is doomed to be inefficient and ineffective – what we are all seeing now.

5) Creativity will never bloom in an autocratic organization because anything out of the box makes the boss uncomfortable because they become more insecure. It not in the rules and regulation. Its not possible. Its a stupid idea. This is the reason Singapore’s Economy is not able to ride the creative bandwagon like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, even Malaysia ..I dare say.

6) Controlling the ability of Singaporean to upgrade to Degree level and making it very hard for capable Singaporean to upgrade their educational qualification within Singapore. Yet we know for a fact that Singapore needs to capitalise on its human capital to the maximum.

7) Last bit not least, the hare-brain mass importation of FT to boost the economy, a very myopic stop gap solution that will cause massive non-repairable and irreversible damage to this beloved country of ours Singapore. Damage will make this Nation of ours FAIL BIG TIME.

For that good citizens of Singapore – Singapore will be Doomed to failure…unless we collectively do something by 2016.

I implore all Voting Singaporeans to think hard for the sake of out future collectively to DO THE RIGHT THING FOR OUR BELOVED HOMELAND – MAJU LAH SINAGPURA!

Source: VJ Kumar

Saturday, 24 August 2013


Singapore Beautiful
Books about Singapore usually praise its achievements or criticise its authoritarian rule. But few ever probe its widely publicized claims that it is a brilliant success that other countries should follow.
Singapore’s workforce productivity is often mediocre and well below that of the West and Asian economies such as Hong Kong.

The so called Singapore miracle was not due to creativity and innovation but based on manpower mobilization and brilliant marketing to attract foreign investment during the early days. As any detailed economist can see, this is no miracle, but basically it was about “getting the house in order”. Unlike elsewhere in Europe or any Nordic countries, creativity and innovation is not found in Singapore
The city state also displays endemic inefficiencies and mediocre performance at both macro and micro economic levels. The performance of  financial, research, education construction and service sectors is second-rate compared to the west.

The entire Singapore economy is “run like a casino”. A “Gambler’s Economy” where price inflation, manipulation of demand and supply, low wage labor exploitation money laundering and socio economic ponzi schemes fueling profits rather than innovation and creativity. With such setup, unscrupulous or mediocre enterprises have crept their way into Singapore’s economy further fueling socio economic problems.

Singaporean workers work the longest and are most stressed in the world. In Singapore, the cost of living which is a expensive as some western countries is not proportional to one’s income and working hours. In other developed countries, one can easily afford a car and home even if she or she is a cleaner.

Singaporeans students one again come up top as the most stressed students in the world according to certain indicators but. The education system puts emphasis on rote learning and paper qualifications rather than critical thinking. It also does help one realize their own dreams and aspirations but follow the state economical ideals. Many Singaporeans even though hardworking are unable to secure a place in university due to overwhelming completion and limited places. Moreover, Singapore’s educated are unfit for employment any creative or innovation driven enterprises.

Singapore’s Economy as one may call is a “freak” economy. It does not have natural resource input and depends on the tide of world economy. Singapore has gone through various economic recessions in the past years. Lack of laws regarding employment results in unfair termination and wage payments by companies resulting in grief even for competent workers.

Today’s problems have their roots in PAP decisions made decades ago. These decisions were made on the run with Yes-men with group-hugs under an illusion that it is one solution that fits all problems
Scholars and highly paid mandarins prized their pride and status above nation progress. Any criticism by commoners about their failures are constantly downplayed, and polticial critics  of the government are sued for defamation or locked up in prison.

A closer look as Singapore is a country, one may notice the  city state has 2 systems.

1) The leadership work under a system that are designed to protect themselves and in the process, deadwood and weeds gather and clot the oxygen needed for advancements.
2) The masses work in an exploitative system that keep the leadership fat and bloated.
As one can see this system is based on stone age medieval or dynasty rule where peasants serve the rulers, elites and kings.

However in recent years the two systems had been marred with problems like corruption, inefficiency, social problems and unfairness. The effect of this is far reaching often reaching the capability to completely screw the whole setup. Everyone is seeing the clear effects of this in today’s Singapore.

There are other countries, committed to open, democratic processes that have been spectacularly successful in creating economics that are both dynamic and fair — with far less inequality and far greater equality of opportunity than in the United States.

The economic achievements of the Nordic countries are in large measure a result of the strongly democratic nature of these societies. There is a positive nexus not just between growth and equality, but between these two and democracy (the flip side is that greater inequality not only weakens our economy, it also weakens our social stability). Many countries that have such problems have fallen into social anarchism where the system has failed and skewed towards a favoring single side.

Singapore is still living in the past and would slowly fade into oblivion as the developing countries progress and overtake it. Its best days are over and certainly not a miracle as they would want you to believe.

Source: Wee from Down under

Education Minister Heng Swee Keat shifts education blame to parents

What this article is about -

This article takes a look at the Minister of Education’s advice to parents to have “mindset shift” towards education. Little does he realise that it is PAP’s policies that sets the tone of the mindset of parents today. Shouldn’t he address the ailment (ie PAP’s policies) instead of the symptoms (parents’ mindset) instead?

Heng advises parents without looking at the root of the problem -

Isn’t this so typical of PAP? When their past policies don’t work out well, and when it starts to affect citizens adversely to the point the feedback isn’t good, the PAPpies do what they do best – shift the blame back to the citizens. As always.

In the latest fiasco, we have the Education Minister who is apparently oblivious to the stress students and parents face. Heng tells parents to moderate their expectations. Never mind that it was past PAP policies that led to the high pressure mode in the education system, expecting the best out of students, that’s the cause of the high expectation among parents in the first place. What crap talking this minister now?

Heng Swee Keat, Minister for Education. Tells parents to moderate expectations, but is totally oblivious to the fact that it is PAP’s policies that started the high pressure cooker system in the Ed system that is the cause of the stress and expectation in the first place. Don’t PAP ministers and MPs say the darnedest things?

The ‘shift the blame to parents’ report -

Here is the report from the Straits Times.
Parents’ mindset key to education change: Heng

THE shifts in education policy announce in last Sunday’s National Day Rally (NDR) must catalyse mindset changes among parents or they will have no impact, Education Minister Heng Swee Keat said last night.
“If parents’ mindsets don’t change, whatever changes we make will not have any impact,” he said, rounding off a public forum on the Rally held by government feedback unit Reach.
About 180 people – ranging from grassroots leaders and unionists to business representatives and students – attended the forum at Rendezvous Grand Hotel.
Some of the 21 participants who spoke were sceptical about the effectiveness of proposed moves, such as replacing the T-score for Primary School Leaving Examination results with broader bands of grades.
Though Singaporeans are used to thinking about schools only in one dimension – grades – being a good school is about helping children develop in their areas of strength, which might be in arts or sports. Parents cannot expect all children to leave their schools with all As, he said – and if that is the measure, then not every school can be a “good school”.

Note the expectation of a “good school” tied to grades. So Mr Heng wants parents to moderate that and extend the definition of “good school” to go beyond good grades. Wait a minute here… wasn’t it because of MOE’s policies that caused parents and students to link good grades to good schools?

Didn’t MOE announce the top students of PSLE, O levels, A levels annually etc? Don’t we have top elite schools for top elite students? Don’t we have the situation where PAP keeps saying that the education system is one of meritocracy, then they put top grades as the Number One criteria that is measured to gain entry to top schools?

So when students and parents respond to all the above yardstick and benchmark, set up by none other than the PAPpy guys, this minister now says that we need to “shift mindset” of parents? Hellooooo? Shouldn’t it be the PAPpy guys who need to shift their policies to make it less stressful for students and parents in the first place, if they truly want to make it less stressful?

Real goal is the coveted Uni degree -

There are so many points that could be talked about in the education system that puts on the pressure for both students and parents. But let’s for the moment just talk about the final goal every student and parent would like to see – a uni degree. Isn’t that what the real chase is about?

There lies the problem. We have had PM saying that we can’t afford too many grads, lest we end up with unemployed grads in the streets. Funny thing that doesn’t jive with the govt’s idea that we need “foreign talents”, such that we accept them in droves due to labour shortage. I mentioned that ridiculous contradictory argument over here – PM Lee, if we need to control varsity intake to prevent jobless grads, why then the liberal immigration policy?
So fine, PM wants to limit the varsity intake. Never mind that they have allowed many foreigners into uni placements, depriving our own citizens. Funny he expects us to believe there would be “many unemployed grads” then.

Trickle down effect of restricting varsity places -

Now comes the rat race. To get into the limited varsity places, you need to be in the top JCs because it is shown that most of the unis in Singapore accept top students. By statistics, it is shown you stand a better entering university if you are from top JCs.

The trickle down effect goes further. To stand a better chance to be in top JC, you need to be in top Secondary Schools. Better still if you get into the through train IP schools.

The trickle down effect does not stop there. To be in top Secondary Schools, you will stand a better chance if you are in top Primary Schools. Again, the stats prove that. That about explains the mad, mad rush by parents to get their children into top Primary Schools. That’s because the chances of getting into top Secondary Schools will be higher. Which will mean that the chances of getting into top JC will be higher. Which will mean that the chances of entering uni will be higher.

Isn’t all this because of that one silly PAPpy policy, that is to DELIBERATELY restrict the number of varsity positions for locals?

I don’t buy the argument that we would have to end up with jobless grads in the streets. If that is the case, the govt would not liberally take in so many immigrants to “fill up the shortage” as what the PAPpy always claim. So what now, Mr Minister for Ed?
High MOE standards only top 5% can achieve -

Let us take a look at the ridiculous gargantuan task a Sinkie student has to go through in order to get that coveted place in the uni. You must be:

1. Be effectively bilingual in both written and oral skills. This is a MUST. Fail your Mother Tongue, and you can kiss your uni dreams goodbye.
2. Be good in your academic subjects.
3. Be able to take contrasting subjects. That means, you must be good in the hard sciences and the softer humanities subjects.
4. It would be good if you have CCA to support your wonderful academic results. Especially sports.

Now how many students can achieve all the above? Many a time, we have students who are good in all subjects except Mother Tongue. Or maybe a student is good in the hard sciences but weak in humanities. Or the reverse. Or perhaps weak in CCA. Too bad because somehow if you are weak in one area, your chances of a uni place is adversely affected.

But the bar is lowered for foreign students! -

The most ridiculous part of this high standard set by MOE, which only about 5% of the top achievers can attain, is that when it comes to foreign students, the PAPpy govt is so relaxed on them. Many can’t even write or communicate in English well enough to be in an English stream uni in the first place. Many of them also struggle in JCs and secondary schools. But not to worry, mad PAP, who have set a gargantuan task for local students are so quick to help these students with tuition funded by tax payers’ money!

Say…. why must such a high order be expected from locals, yet the bar is set so low for foreigners, and that too, the foreigners are given funds from tax paying citizens? What is this nonsense which PAP claims we can’t afford to have too many grads lest we end up with jobless grads, but at the same ridiculous time, PAP is so liberal in accepting immigrants, on top of funding their children’s education right up to uni?

Quick wrap up and conclusion -

Mr Heng advises parents to have a “mind shift”, whatever that means. He expects parents and students to moderate their expectations. He expects them to emphasize less on academic results. But little does he realise that it is the current education system that stresses so much on academic results.

At the same time, while a huge humongous task is set as a benchmark for local students to gain entry into unis, the bar is set so low for foreigners it makes a mockery out of our education system the govt is so proud of.

In the end, what Mr Heng is asking is that you should not think too hard about going to the uni. Perhaps he is hinting that the uni places are meant for foreigners and not for locals.


Source: Barrie


Wednesday, 21 August 2013

Not a word uttered on Job Security

This year National Day Rally was conducted in Ang Mo Kio ITE, with the focus on the Our Singapore Conversation (OSC) which just started more than a year ago. I believe everyone was looking forward to it. For me, I was looking forward to announcements on what the government will do to help Singaporean.

In summary of the rally speech, the government is looking to enhance three areas which are Health Care, Education and Housing. These three enhancement would probably bring cheer across the board. Although PM Lee admit that there is no fool proof to enhance the three shifts, but the government is still trying to get the best out of it. I felt that this is a step forward to change the way the things are going.

Although much cheers have been given to the rally,  I am very disappointed about the one shift of government policy which is missing in action – Job Security!

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had just clarified that the government is not decreasing the number of foreign workers but they are just slowing down the increment of the foreign workers. That is to say, more foreign workers are expected to land on our shore amid slower increment. PM Lee also highlight that the government will do its best to help SMEs to tackle the labour crunch.

PM Lee had stopped short on how the government are going to do to help workers in the following problems that we as employees are facing:
  1. Low wage workers – how are the government going to support this group of workers? How the government going to increase the wages of these workers?
  2. PMET – How can the government do to prevent job replacement by foreigners? What can the government do to help those jobless PMET regain employment?
  3. Work-Life Balance – Not mention a single word by PM Lee during the rally. Is he still trying to fix the issue or do not know the to fix the issue? This is everybody’s guess.
Job Security remains as one of the main concerns of every Singaporean yet nothing is mentioned at all on this issue in this rally. Without job security, all other things are just lips services including paying for your HDB flat for 25 years.

I feel quite disappointed with this National Day Rally. This Rally is all about one word: Image of Singapore. Government want to get rid of the Kiasuism of Singaporeans, become a logistic hub that everyone goes to (International airport & ports), and how to beautify Singapore. But it seems that the most important message hidden in this rally speech is: Preparing for the increase of population to 6.9M.

Note: Special Thanks to ” The Online Citizen” editor, Terry Xu, to edit my languages and make the post more interesting.

Source: William Lim

Friday, 2 August 2013

Refusing to fly the National Flag: the snub continues


 In 2011 I wrote about how Singaporeans snubbed the ruling PAP regime by refusing to fly the National flag on National Day.

Two years on, Singaporeans are still in a snubbing mood. With less than a fortnight to go before National Day on 9 August, most people in the heartland and private estates still refuse to fly the National flag.

Two years after the 2011 General Election and Elected Presidency Election, the Prime Minister and Elected President have gone back on most of their pledges made during their swearing-in ceremonies.

In the two years since 2011, much has happened to demoralise Singaporeans.
The mass imports of foreign workers continue unabated. The proposed 6.9 million population White Paper was rubber-stamped by a PAP-dominated Parliament.

Bloggers received lawyer letters threatening legal action ( the default course of action against dissent). A film-maker, a graffiti artist and a cartoonist were charged in court under a variety of laws including one of scandalising the judiciary through cartoons.

To curb dissent further the PAP regime, without public or Parliamentary debate, hastily made it mandatory for online news sites to be licensed. The “noble” objective is to ensure that we read the right thing.

Salaries remain stagnated, housing and car prices have sky-rocketed, overcrowded trains and buses, frequent train breakdowns are some the issues that have bedevilled society and kept most people awake at night.

The ruling PAP has ripped apart the social fabric of Singapore society with its mass imports of cheap labour and liberal immigration policy.

Housing values were increased on the grounds that rental values had gone up. This means households now pay more in property tax.

No doubt the regime gave the people the GST Offset Package but in the same breath it has increased ERP fees.

National Day (or Independence Day in some countries) is a day of celebration. However, many have made plans to escape from the oppressive atmosphere by taking a short break overseas.

What’s there to celebrate?

Source: Roger Poh

Leong Sze Hian analyzes the latest Govt’s unemployment figures

Unemployment rate increase?

Leong Sze Hian
I refer to the article “Singapore jobless rate rises to 2.1%” (Channel NewsAsia, Jul 31).
It states that “Singapore’s overall unemployment rate was 2.1 per cent in June 2013.
It was 1.9 per cent in March 2013 and 1.8 per cent in December 2012.

This is according to the Manpower Ministry (MOM) in its report on the employment situation for the second quarter of 2013.

Resident unemployment rate increase more?

The resident unemployment rate rose to 3.0 per cent in June 2013 from 2.9 per cent in March 2013 and 2.7 per cent in December 2012.

Singaporeans’ unemployment rate increase the most?

The unemployment rate for citizens increased to 3.1 per cent from 2.9 per cent in the preceding two quarters.”

Reading the above gives you the feeling that things have gotten worse on the unemployment front.

However, when you read that the unemployment rate for Singaporeans has risen from 2.9 to 3.1 per cent, it probably does not register much as to how bad things are, because the mind generally perceives a 0.2 per cent increase as perhaps “not very much”.

No number of unemployed?

I was curious as to why the media report did not mention the actual number of unemployed Singaporeans (only the increase in the unemployment rate was mentioned) or the non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rates.

So, I went to the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) web site to look at the full report.
83,000 residents unemployed?

The report does give the number of unemployed – an estimated 83,000 residents including 72,700 Singapore citizens were unemployed in June 2013.

Again, I found it rather strange that even the report does not give the number of unemployed a quarter ago (March 2013) – it only gives the unemployment rate in June and March.
When I read this, my sixth sense told me that perhaps the number (for March compared to June) may not look good.

Simultaneously 2 media reports – one not so good, one not so bad?

Also, on the same day, there was another article “S’pore in “relatively healthy state” with regards to jobs: Tan Chuan-Jin” (Channel NewsAsia, Jul 31), which said “He said Singapore will need to continue to create good jobs and opportunities by having quality growth and keeping the labour market diverse and dynamic. He added that at the same time, the playing field has to be kept level.

Mr Tan said tensions pull in different directions, but the balance needs to be managed so that things are ultimately better for people and society“.

Reading between the lines (of so many words) and from my experience – when two news reports come out almost simultaneously – one say not so good (unemployment  up) whilst the other says actually not so bad (“relatively healthy state with regards to jobs”) – my sixth sense told me that maybe its quite bad.

So, how do I satisfy my sixth sense to see whether I’m right or wrong – kind of like are Singaporeans being fed with the “right” kind of news which a Minister said recently in an international news TV programme that when Singaporeans read the news, we need to ensure that they read the “right” things (something along this lines)?

Well, I try to find the March unemployment number in the MOM web site lah!

22,700 more unemployed Singaporeans?

Lo and behold, the March number of unemployed Singaporeans was 50,000 (non seasonally adjusted). So, the number of unemployed Singaporeans increased by a whopping 22,700 or an alarming 45 per cent in the last quarter!

Why is this number so alarming? – Because if you look at the employment change in the last quarter – “employment creation, it increased to 32,500 in the second quarter from 28,900 in the previous quarter”.
32,500 jobs created, but 25,300 more unemployed residents?

So, does his mean that we created 32,500 jobs and yet another 22,700 more Singaporeans (25,300 in total if you count PRs – there were 57,700 and 83,000 residents (Singaporeans and PRs) who were unemployed in March and June, respectively), were unemployed?
Does this mean that only about 22 per cent of employment creation went to residents (only about 14 per cent for Singaporeans)?

Only about 1 in 10 jobs created went to Singaporeans?

So, does it mean that the bulk of employment creation went to foreign workers?

Tightening on foreign labour?

If so, then all the recent rhetoric about putting Singaporeans first and tightening on foreign labour do not seem to gel with the unemployment statistics.

As to “MOM said the tight labour market showed signs of easing as layoffs rose amid business restructuring and consolidation” – if the labour market is really tightening (in addition to healthy employment creation) – shouldn’t it be reflected in better unemployment numbers?

No logic?

In other words, it may defy logic that whilst employers find it harder to get Singaporean workers (as well as a lot of new jobs were created) – a lot more Singaporean workers have become unemployed?

Why not breakdown the statistics?

Of course, the easy answer to give us a clearer picture may be for the breakdown of the employment change to be given for Singaporeans, PRs and foreign workers.

Singaporeans’ unemployment rate increased a lot to 4%?

The fact that the non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Singaporeans has increased much more from 2.8 to 4.0 per cent, compared to  the residents (including PRs) and overall unemployment rate (including foreigners), may give us a clue as to how bad things are on a relative basis for Singaporeans relative to PRs and foreign workers.

Damn hard to try to figure out what’s really happening? 

(Note: You won’t be able to find the non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Singaporeans in the subject media reports or the subject MOM Employment Change Second Quarter Report which talk about the seasonally adjusted unemployment rates only – you have to search and find it in the MOM web site – Perhaps another example of reading the “right” things, is it?)

“Relatively healthy state”?

In the final analysis, is “Singapore is in a “relatively healthy state” with regards to jobs for its people” or arguably “more hazy with the PSI level getting higher”?
Uniquely Singapore!

Leong Sze Hian
Leong Sze Hian is the Past President of the Society of Financial Service Professionals, an alumnus of Harvard University, Wharton Fellow, SEACeM Fellow

PAP, shame on you!!

Never has the author ever felt so ashamed of calling himself – Singaporean.
While others are dying from Dengue breakout and the haze is invading into our clean air space, a bunch of power hunger ruling party politician spent hours debating on a hawker center “clean”.

It is as though such “cleaning” post an immediate health hazard to Singaporean in the same seriousness of dengue mosquito’s bites or haze.

Yet with such gusto and arrogant the mouth uttered “Politics is about power” and the master behind “it was approved by the government and cabinet.”

How should one make out of this?

In fact the author is not the least surprise for previously in the case of Toh Yi SA (Studio Apartment) Saga he had witness at first hand the low caliber and uncaring attitude of the government of the day. Why so?

1)     Attention and time strictly reserve for rubbing shoulder with the rich and powerful? 

When the SA saga took place, the MP with a popular “female” name was nowhere in sight, action or words though he was always keep in the CC list of all emails dealing with the PMO, HDB, URA and MND. Being a Minister of Environment and Water resource he is found to be missing in action. But this is quite the contrary when it is the case of Toh Yi’s rich neighbor Maplewood condo residents’ petition, immediately our female named minister and his rookie MP team mate sprung into action.

(From the state media Straits Times)

Where was Bala during Toh Yi SA Saga, has the minister forgotten that the location where the park used to stand was opened only barely a year ago after spending hundreds of thousands before the 2011 GE (perhaps for the purpose to garner votes). Did he find it awful having to explain to the Toh Yi residents why a park has to be removed only after GE? Or as a Minister of Environment and Water Resource he is incapable of facing the music that Toh Yi does not have a green lung and while the government keep humming to the tune of “environment friendly and going green”.

However, we should not be surprise or disappointed with him as to him “politics is about POWER”, thus it explained why attention and time should only be reserve for the rich and powerful. Or maybe his rookie GRC team mate “cow slayer” wonder women is one kind of rare talent that does not need any hand held guidance from a senior minister. Why short changed ordinary residents from some unknown estate? Ordinary people do not deserve your attention and time?

2)     Failing to walk the talk  and insincere appeal

Not long ago a certain person in high power once called out to Singaporean “I cannot do it alone I need your help to make Singapore better” but last minute call did not impress approximately 40% of the population which resulted in a boot kick for a minister class MP and losing another single seat constituency later on.

This is also the very person who told us via national media that he backed and endorsed the debate on hawker center “cleaning”. While a group of residents pleaded with him to come walk the ground at the estate to take a stand if the location is indeed suitable for the said studio apartment construction. Not only he ignored them with absolute silent but he went on to attack the residents with name calling rewarded them with a negative naming – “nimby”. When asked to help but when help was rendered the reward ended up as such. Perhaps the last minute stunt pulled together for the GE was with hypocrisy intended? It must be so!! For even their grassroots leaders go around telling residents that consultation with the residents is unnecessary in anything the government will to do.

3)     Only care for the rich?

On the other hand, his Dad after the 2011 GE walkover declared “I will continue to take care of you” but who would have thought that “you” mentioned is perhaps only referring the rich. How did the author arrive at this conclusion one may asked. Again it is none other than the Toh Yi SA, while the poor have to make do living up the hilly slope up where the fragile legs would have to endure the rich is entitle to live on flat ground with the luxury of the bus stop right at it’s footstep.  Just months after the Toh Yi saga, MND announced bidding for a piece of land along Jalan Jurong Kecil, just a few hundred meters along the road where Toh Yi estate is located. In its bidding material the location is taunted as excellent location for retirement homes.

“The site is an ideal location for retirement housing as it is situated within an established residential area and next to the tranquil enclave of the landed housing area at Chun Tin Road/ Lorong Pisang estate. This is especially attractive to residents with preference for a quiet ambience. This site is also close to nature reserve and at the same time enjoy the convenience of having buzzing commercial activities nearby.”

So should we not raise the question to the pair of father and son, would they continue take care of ordinary folks like us and not shelved us up the hill out of sight and buzzing activities? Would our self-motivated participation in nation building be ridicule as some psychopath freaks? Last but not least, we should also ask to the all righteous wannabe $8 heart bypass MP obsessed with asking others to come clean when the $2 company issues went into hiding.

In conclusion, the seduction of power and money is a horrible thing, one would only lose his bearing or moral compass but would sell his/her soul to be with it. Remember they told us “million dollars salary” is sort of compensation for “losing their privacy” and “it would be a shame to talk to a million dollar private company CEO”.

Shame on you PAP, is this the best you can put forth before your fellow country man to serve them in your so called hypocritical “integrity and clean politics”??!! While you are the real devil selling the illusionary GDP numbers (according to Uncle Leong how they would draw down reserve to fuel the GDP numbers to pocket indecent bonuses) that does not necessarily equate to raising the standard of living for the present and future generations.
To all true children of the lion city!! Let’s redeem your country from this madness and build make a stance for the future of our beloved children!!

Come GE2016 make the right choice of voting out PAP, as would the man on the street would say voting a dog or cat is better than voting for a PAP candidate!

Toh Yi Resident

Saturday, 20 July 2013

What exactly determines a foreign talent?

A Foreign Talent is one who contributes to the economy, who initiates ways and means to sustain the economy and to further expand it by their initiative,talent, creativeness,ideas,suggestions, implementations, and make critical decisions regardless of what trade or profession they are in.

There are only two talents that all countries have either it is manufacturing or services.
Decades ago we had these foreign talents most were Caucasians, and all had disappeared, one by one.

These FT’s were not as what we have today, they were the highly educated ones with experience in their various fields.

They had never given us many or no problems in social issues, and were in fact well behaved.

They were not elites, or rich but who wanted to make a living and an impression as they were highly qualified. They had all gone for good.

The elites will only come here to invest only if they are rich and connected or invited.
So ,what really happened to these qualified FT’s is anyones guess? Frankly, knowing anything in Singapore governance is always a mystery.

All Singaporeans know that unless you are daft.
Fast forward today, we have foreign talents, but, they do not possess all the credentials of the former. They are simply employees with no teeth. They surely lack all creativeness or initiative but, are all employees willing to work their ass out to make a living for themselves only, in Singapore and for their well being back home.There is totally no contribution to the economy to the citizens well being at all except for the MIW, only.

Otherwise why are our jobs had been taken by them so easily when Singaporeans are highly educated till this day? They do not even speak our languages, their English is horrendous, so how did they became a FT.

Today, we have 25 of them being caught with their pants down with fake documents (‘25 FTs charged for submitting forged academic certificates‘), which we never had such incidences decades ago.

Singaporeans do not brush this aside as another 6.9 millions FT’s are on the way to our shores. Mr Ministers could you please explain to the citizens what is really going on in your heads and the ministries governing Singaporeans well being. Thank you.


Dead Horse

25 FTs charged for fake certs – go after employers and HR agencies too

25 fake FTs, 21 from Myanmar, 3 from India and 1 from the Philippines have been charged for forging certificates to get employment passes and very likely all will be jailed as none will be able to pay the $5000 fine. The jail sentence is for 4 weeks while those unable to pay their fines will be jailed for 20 days. The difference in the days for the jail sentence could be due to the cases being different.

These FTs were caught after being employed for less than a year. They are new applicants. Many enraged Sinkies are calling for tougher measures as the sentences were just too insignificant for the risk and reward considerations. It is a good start for the MOM and people are expecting more to come as this is only skimming the surface of a problem of several hundred thousands of FTs here.

To mean business, MOM should go after the employers and the recruiting agencies as well. They have to go for the source of the problem and not the foreigners that are trying their luck. And worse, they are not going to pay the fine and the govt would still have to feed and house them for the duration in jail.

Go for the jugular, and employers and recruiting agencies that failed to do the due diligence or actually in cahoot with the job applicants should be severely punished. And the employers and recruiting agencies are likely to have the finances to pay up and would avoid repeating the act.

Hope this is not just a show and the reaches of the MOM should extend to all the existing EP holders under employed and eventually even to new citizens who have gotten away. It is a long and tedious process and it is best that MOM signals its intention and how far it will go to nab the culprits and the cheats.

MOM must issued a stern warning to all employers and recruiting agencies. In that way it could be seen as giving them a chance to get out while they can and for employers to clean their own houses before the net closes in on them.

By placing the responsibilities on the back of the employers and recruiting agencies will shift the burden to them as well. MOM just does not have the manpower and resources to deal with the few hundred thousand FTs here. Leave it to the employers and recruiting agencies to do the vetting and checking. MOM should just take on one company at a time starting from the big ones to send the message across that it means business.

The citizens are demanding that the govt must act thoroughly and seriously on such violations of the employment law and cheating the deserving citizens of their right to employment. Also it will save the embarrassment of being seen as a silly govt that claimed to be intelligent and sophisticated first world talents but got cheated easily by third world half baked non talents and fraudsters.

The Sinkies are not daft and are watching carefully to see how real is the effort of the MOM. There are many fakes hiding deeply in the banks and financial institutions and some may be holding very senior positions for many years here. It is also good that MOM has asked the public to whistle blow, to feed back on suspected cases to their hotlines.

MOM said it will not condone such acts of false declaration, and will take severe actions against offenders.

Members of the public who have information of persons or employers who contravene the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act should report the matter to MOM at Tel: (65) 6438 5122 or email mom_fmmd@mom.gov.sg. All information will be kept strictly confidential.

Source: Chua Chin Leng aka redbean

Tuesday, 25 June 2013

The Art of throwing Smoke

He was silent when the freedom of the internet was threatened by the likes of Yaacob Ibrahim.  He was just as quiet when the number of dengue cases crept past the 10,000 mark. He did not chime in when Vivian Balakrishnan waded into the hawker center scaffolding dissertation. So what keeps our prime minister awake at nights? Nobody would have guessed it was the beautiful view of the skyline from the Istana’s manicured lawn, a sight none of us will ever get to see at the crack of dawn. Lee posted a Facebook photo of the haze taken at the Istana, commenting: “The city in the distance is barely visible. We are all affected by the haze.”

At stake, of course, are the tourist arrivals, who had not planned to travel all the way to see the Merlion engulfed in smoke. Said national icon is permitted to spit 24/7 to its heart’s content, but smoking is strictly prohibited. Some laws are simply not allowed to be applied with a light touch. Too bad the peasants have to put up with watery eyes, and coughing fits.

Instead of dialling up President of Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono direct – and remind him how little he is paid for running a country of 247,496,843 people – Lee deputised Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Vivian Balakrishnan and Foreign Minister K. Shanmugam to call their Indonesian counterparts to register Singapore’s “serious concerns” about the situation and to offer help to fight the fires there. Someone expressed hope that the experts can get together soon to compare notes on “what’s happening and where, and what’s being done.” Every schoolboy in Singapore knows what’s happening (farmers burning crops), where (Sumatra and akan datang, Kalimantan) and what’s being done (zilch).

Balakrishnan, fresh from calling the Aljunied town council to name cleaning contractors, said in his own Facebook account that he asked Indonesian Minister Balthasar Kambuaya to name the companies responsible for the fires there causing the haze. For a guy who flopped at floods, danced around with dengue, the only thing he knows about clearing the haze is, as expected, pointing fingers at someone else.

The Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution was signed in 2002, but Indonesia has yet to ratify it. Also not ratified is the extradition treaty with Indonesia, signed in 2007, because their House of Representatives refused to approve both the treaty and the defense agreement as a package. Indonesia’s House Speaker Marzuki Alie had complained loudly about Singapore’s request to be allowed to conduct military training within Indonesian territory in exchange for the extradition treaty. While the politicians quibble, the fires of Sumatra rage on.

Source: Tattler
The writer blogs at http://singaporedesk.blogspot.com

Thursday, 20 June 2013


Dear Mr Tan Chuan-Jin,
I am writing to you as a deeply concerned Singapore citizen, and also as the daughter of a crane operator. I have some burning questions and I ask for your response with utmost respect.
The haze in Singapore has hit a historical high with the PSI reported to have reached 321 at 10pm, 19 June 2013. Air quality is considered to be ‘unhealthy’ when PSI is above 100, ‘very unhealthy’ when above ‘200’ and ‘hazardous’ upon hitting 300. However, my father and his colleagues were still working at a construction site well past 10pm. The workplace did not carry out a risk assessment although the PSI has hit a record high; employees were not issued masks and were even asked to work overtime despite the worsening haze.

It is apparent that for construction work to be carried out in an environment where the PSI has soared beyond 300 is extremely unsafe. Employees are performing physically strenuous tasks and the hazardous air quality is detrimental to their health. Furthermore, the smog creates visual impairment. As visibility is compromised at the workplace, the employees’ safety is put at risk, especially in the building and construction industry where lifting operations are integral. 
I quote the Workplace Safety & Health Act (WSH Act), 
“In situations where haze poses imminent danger to the safety and health of workers and measures have not been taken to mitigate those risks, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) may order the affected work to stop. If any person (individual or corporate bodies) fails to comply with a stop work order, under the WSH Act he shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $500,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.”

However, there was no stop work order issued yesterday, even when the PSI has indicated that the haze was ‘hazardous’ at 321. My questions to you sir, is to ask at what point does the Ministry of Manpower determine that the haze is posing a threat serious enough, such that a stop work order would be issued; what exactly are the indicators that the ministry consider when making the decision? Are there any other indicators besides the PSI? Is there any measures taken to ensure that employees involved in outdoor work have their health and physical safety taken care of in a hazardous environment like what Singapore is currently having?

As a human, it is my wish to see that everyone has access to care and protection in the workplace, and not to be asked to work in a hazardous situation. As a daughter, my wish is to see my father return home safely each day. I am sure that there are many, many more sons and daughters who feel the same way that I do. We need transparency in this hazy situation; it is not safe to work outdoors in the thickest smog that Singapore has seen. I want to know at what point MOM deems a stop work order necessary. I genuinely hope to receive your response soon. Thank you for your patience.

Yours sincerely,
Chun Kai Xin

Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/kaixinchun/posts/10151494556088193

Saturday, 15 June 2013

Mindef discriminates “part-time” degree officers, but nobody knows?

Captain Shaun has served as an officer in the army for about 10 years.
He signed on as a regular during his National Service. After about 3 years into his service, in 2003, he successfully applied for a Local Study Award (LSA) from Mindef. 

Graduated with “honours”, but get “pass”pay?
He graduated form a local university in 2007 with a Bachelor of Science (2nd Class Honours (Upper) and notified Mindef accordingly.
He was subsequently informed by Mindef in December 2007 that “the Scheme B Salary Emplacement Board held on 26 Oct 07 has found you suitable for emplacement onto Scheme B with effect from “1 Dec 07″.
He discovered by accident in Nov 2011 (as part of a new salary review process at that time for all officers of his grade – new MDES service for military officers)  that he was paid the salary and placed on the wrong salary scale of an emplaced officer with a pass degree, instead of that for a 2nd Class Honours (Upper) for the 4  years since his graduation in 2007.
Conservatively speaking if the shortfall in pay is about $200 plus a month, that works out to a total short-payment of about $11,000 for the 4 years.
He then sought clarification from his Unit Manpower Officer (MPO) who eventually referred the matter to the Head of Manpower (HOM).

All the correspondence
In the interest of and to facilitate total transparency of what transpired, all the email correspondence (without the names, except Captain Shaun’s) are transribed below [link]:

 As a last attempt, Captain Shaun contacted the department which administered his LSA. Below is the department’s reply:
From:                           Hd PMB
Sent:                             Tuesday, 7 February 2012 6:56 PM
To:                                ME4 Shaun Fernando
Subject:                      Pay issue / R
Hi Shaun,
Thanks for taking time off to come to JMPD this morning.
Initially, I thought we had a case to fight since there was approval for you to do the course on a part time basis. However, when I studied the issue deeper, I was not sure what was asked of MPPD back then, in 2003, when the check was done. For example, Did LTC G specifically asked that you be allowed to do the course on a part time basis even though you were awarded an LSA to do a degree course on a full time basis.
Back in 2007 when the board was held, we had already check with G if she could remember what did she ask of MPPD. She could not recall anything, and neither could we find anything in the files to show that approval was given to do the course on a part time basis.
MPPD honoured the deed which was changed (by JMPD) to show to show that the course was done at SIM Open University, by allowing you to be assessed by the Sch B Board. So, while the board cleared your emplacement, it was not to be on Honours starting pay, but on a general degree (based on subsequent checks with MPPD). There was no reason given back then, and I do not think MPPD would be able to give a reason now. But they did have an issue with doing the course part time. Of course, we do not have any documentation to show that they were indeed the ones who approved the study on a part time basis.
As such, I would not be pursuing the matter further. If there is anything else that I can do for you, do give me a call. Have a great week!”

Everybody in Mindef trying very had to help?
Comments: You can see from the above that everybody was trying very hard to help Captain Shaun on his pay issue, but after about 12 months of umpteen emails – still no conclusion!
After he resigned from the service in March 2012, he waited until November 2012 to seek advice and assistance from his MP as there was still no conclusive response from Mindef.

MP write – then response very fast?
His MP, the Right Honourable MP for Teck Ghee constituency wrote to Mindef on 28 Nov 2012. Mindef replied on 18 Dec (21  days later – wah! quite fast leh – response this time – not like the above after 12 months still nothing!)
The reply was
“We have reviewed your case and ascertained that you had been emplaced on the appropriate salary scheme throughout your regular service”.
Got discriminatory policy or not?
From the above, it would appear that there may be a discriminatory policy against officers who took a “part-time” degree course, as they will only be emplaced on the “pass degree” salary scale, instead of the “honours degree” salary scale, when they pass with “honours”.
If this is the case, why is this so?
What kind of a message are we sending to the officers – no need to study so hard because even if get “honours” – also get “pass degree” pay scale.
So, full-time course get honours get honours pay, but part-time course get honours get pass pay only?
Full-time course get pass get pass pay, and part-time course get pass get pass pay?
Where’s the logic?

How many affected, how long, how much?
How much is the difference in the 2 pay scales in a typical lifetime of an officer?
How many officers have been affected by this over the years?
According to Captain Shaun, the reason why he ended up with a course which was apparently defined by Mindef as “part-time” (which from the above email correspondence – it would appear that nobody knows – MPOs, HPO, CO, and of course Captain Shaun)

Discrminatory policy that nobody knows – until its too late?
Why didn’t the relevant department in Mindef inform Captain Shaun (or for that matter have they ever informed any other officers in its history) that a “part-time”degree course (as defined by Mindef which apparently nobody knows about this policy) would result in a lower salary scale, even if they graduate with good honours?
If officers like Shaun had been informed, why would anyone choose a part-time course?
In this case, Shaun selected a course which was approved by Mindef – which the local university decided to run classes on the average of about 4 nights a week to accomodate learning adults. So, Shaun was none the wiser to the predicament which he found himself in, when he graduated (which fortunately he discovered almost by accident  oniy 4 years later).
Shaun had initially applied for a full-time course which was validated by a foreign university (approved by Mindef), but his admission was not successful. Then, he was transferred to the subject 4-year course (also approved by Mindef in a new deed issued to Shaun)
In fact, he lost out in pay for 1 extra year, because the course he selected ended up to be 4 years, instead of the normal 3 – officers on the Local Study Award only get an allowance of $9,000 a year during the period of studies.

MOE – Your view please?
What is the view of the Ministry of Education on the above apparent “discriminatory” policy?

Universities – Your view please?
What is the view of the local universities on the above apparent “discriminatory” policy? Are part-time degrees from UNISIM worth less than a full-time degree?

“Care for soldiers”?
In this connection, according to Mindef’s core values (the last out of 7 core values) is “care for soldiers”.
Civil Service core principles?
According to the Civil Service’s 7 core principles – maybe 4 of them may well apply (or arguably was not applied well enough) in this case – “Responsiveness and Effectiveness,  People-Centricity, Mutual Courtesy and Respect, and Shared Responsibility for the Public Good”.

ASEAN Human Rights Declaration?
The subject issue of “discriminatory” policy (if indeed there is one as I have asked above) may also need to be seen with reference to and in the context of Article 7 and 9 of the ASEAN HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION:
“7. All human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. All human rights and fundamental freedoms in this Declaration must be treated in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing and with the same emphasis.
9.In the realisation of the human rights and freedoms contained in this Declaration, the principles of impartiality, objectivity, non-selectivity, non-discrimination, non-confrontation and avoidance of double standards and politicisation, should always be upheld. The process of such realisation shall take into account peoples’ participation, inclusivity and the need for accountability.”

$12.3 b not enough is it?
According to the article “Hard truths about Singapore’s defence” (Straits Times, Mar 17) – “Singapore’s defence budget, at a projected $12.3 billion this year, is the biggest in South-east Asia. And it is an open secret that Singapore has one of the highest per capita defence spendings in the world, after countries such as Israel. It possesses a highly-advanced “third generation” fighting force built on the principles of “see first, think quicker, kill faster”.” – So, maybe $12.3 billion may not be enough – such that have to stinge on not paying “honours” degree officers “honours” pay! And as to “”see first, think quicker, kill faster” – how come one simple pay clarification can take 12 months without any conclusion!
May God help us – if war really comes!

Saturday, 8 June 2013

The fall of Singapore inevitable?

Is the Fall of Singapore Inevitable?  This question may have many different response, there may be a majority that says 'No, its not possible!.' But in my opinion it will be a yes, reason being?

say no to an overpopulated singapore 

1) The PAP government is no longer capable of ruling Singapore, yes we can agree, Lee Kuan Yew did a pretty much good job in building up Singapore, but as time progress, they have changed. The citizens are starting to lose trust in the government. Moreover with the recent new ruling by MDA to control internet, white paper for 6.9 Million population, new ruling by MAS to curb cars in Singapore, rise in cost of living, rise in elitism in Singapore lastly rising number in the number of foreigners. These has already brought about much unhappy towards the government.

2) Opposition, I am not trying to say that the opposition party are  useless and unable to garner votes nor control Singapore, but by the time the PAP government are thrown down from power, and the oppositions are to take over, it will be not easy for them to regain control of Singapore, what we may see everyday are protest, strikes and riot. This can be easily related to many countries around the world in the past century, with a tyrannic government it will bring about resentment. Some may say there is still another General Election we can change the government the government will be constantly changing, each time the government is changed, each time things will get messier and messier, as new policies and change does not have enough time to take place. Thus the government themselves will cause the fall of Singapore.

3)   The number of foreigners in Singapore is constantly increasing, and the number of Singaporeans leaving are also on the rise, we may see a time where there is only foreigners in Singapore, and the big question is what does Singapore has to offer for them to stay here permanently? So after sometime the population will start shrinking once again.

4) Sustainability of our population, Singapore has no natural resources, some main sector which makes up major part of our economy are  medical equipment, SMEs and tourism.  Main question, should we depend on tourism? Singapore is a very small country what that is interesting for tourist can be easily be seen in less than a week, and out of 10 how many will come back again? Is tourism sustainable in Singapore? You say for yourselves. With the current policies, will many people start their business here? Lastly medical equipment, my
opinion is we should actually focus in this sector, why you may ask? During a economy slowdown, which will you save on?  Going on a holiday or taking care of your health? 

My prediction would be that come 2018 Singapore economy will crash badly from the economy crisis. Look at the pattern  since Asia started booming.

1988: Crisis started from the West
1998: Crisis started from Asia
2008: Crisis started from the West
2018: ?

So we should start preparing and brace ourselves for it. As based on my prediction, once Singapore economy crashes, the government will fall as well in the 2021 election and on a side note, the economy crisis this time will not be of anything minor, it may be worst than the Great Depression in the 1930s.

All these are only my prediction, who knows it may not goes as what I have predicted? But one thing that is for sure the government will soon lose its power. Nothing stays in power all the time. Only time will tell.

“Be the Change you wish to see in the World.” ~  Gandhi

Source: Chloe Junior TRS Editor

Friday, 7 June 2013

MDA – Loosening the G string

I sat through the live telecast of Talking Point on the issue of new licensing of online news sites. The most unbelieveable thing to happen in the programme is that the MDA personnel was not there, not Yaacob or Koh Lin Net but the Minister of MOM, Tan Chuan Jin. Isn’t this odd? Don’t tell me the new regulation was initiated and approved by Chuan Jin and he has to kuai kuai come out to explain his stand? Quite possible isn’t it? If I were Yaacob or Lin Net, even if my name is named after internet, I would not want to explain anything so unpopular if I have nothing to do with it. Your guess why Chuan Jin has to front this show.

What came through very clearly was that the regulation was rushed out without much thought, with many blanks left unanswered. Now they are going to relook at the details and to fill in the blanks. The main purpose is to target sites that are reporting on Singapore news and not so much about the right news. But right news still came out for some discussion and by the end of the show, no one really knows what is the right news or what is the right news all about.

The other point that came out clearly is that bloggers or individual websites will not be targeted. Then why was this not spelt out in the first place? Or is this an after thought, that bloggers were originally in the scheme of things? Imagine how much venom would have been taken out from the bloggers if from the first move the MOM clearly said bloggers will not be affected by the new regulation. It is still not too late to make an amendment to make it official that bloggers will not come under this regulation. Will the MOM just do that?

The truth is that MOM was not sure how things would develop and they wanted the provision that when blogs take on the characteristics of news site, reporting on Singapore news, then they will come under the regulation. Then I must say many bloggers will eventually come under the regulation despite the denial. Don’t trust me, let me explain. What if I keep reporting on the number of crocodiles in Sungei Buloh Wetland? Is that not reporting on Singapore news? What if I keep reporting about MRT jams or breakdowns as I take the train daily? Is that not reporting on Singapore news? There is no where to run when the definition of news is everything under the Singapore sky. Would MDA want to make this ‘Singapore News’ more specific?

Bertha Henson kept asking the minister what was the real intent of the regulation. And some callers asked a very simple question, ‘Is there anything that is not covered by existing regulations that made the rushing out of this new regulation that necessary and urgent?’

Anything criminal, defamatory or inciting violence on racial and religious issues are fully covered by existing laws. Then why ah? Why in such a hurry to rush out this regulation without making sure that the G string is properly tied and in the right place. Now the G string is found to be too tight and a lot of loosening and readjusting will need to be done, exposing many embarrassing holes and parts that should not be exposed.

What is the real intent of pulling this G string?


Source: Chua Chin Leng aka redbean