Recently, PM Lee made a remark about getting right politics for economic development and such, and netizens reacted.

Frequently, people will point the fingers at problematic policies…

PM Lee himself suggested he should have been far-sighted…

But neither of them are right.

For a government already completely crippled by Meritocracy, I am surprised so many learned 100% educated Singaporeans still expect any viable policies. The wise men do not expect a general who can’t calculate men properly to be able to assign wings. Such generals don’t know how to take on a 100,000 enemies with his 100,000 men but will tell you he’d do his best, and he’d achieve objectives and his strategy will be to send them in waves and wings and bla bla bla…

But how many will be scouts, how many will ambush, the mountain can hold how many lurking troops and for how long, how will be the weather, how many will be sent to lure the enemies, how many will defend, how many will cook… All these down to supply lines and resource allocation need real talents and understanding of the grounds. But for most Singaporeans be it pro-PAP or pro-oppositions or moderates, many still bark up the wrong tree.

PM Lee cannot be far-sighted, not back then for now, nor now for the future.

It is not very hard to understand.

What kind of people will decide what future, what future depends on what policies… and while netizens want PM Lee to deliver right policies, his honorable reaction will likely be “so what are the right policies?” if he even take public calls seriously. To the PM, to his consultants, they have been on the ‘right policies’ all the time~!!! Which was why some crap policies in the view of netizens were delivered. But on the other hand, netizens and even opposition parties have been offering rather dubious and unworkable policies as well.

Just the unpopular Population White Paper alone… WP has suggested simply to hold the number as it is… as if this is even possible and will help at all. NSP’s was simply holds to allow the employees to adjust… like forever, if I must honestly say. And many netizens offered tons of policies which pertain to no reasonable appreciation to politics nor professional workings; one of the most glaring examples comes during the housing policy shooting… Some suggest bring down prices by X%, by selling back to HDB… but on the sellers’ side, logically speaking they will revoke and want their HDB flats to be sold high and higher and for mortgages to finance a new condo or business… and to even rent out at better rates.

So yes… perhaps PM Lee does need to deliver right policies hence resulting in right politics.

Problem is, he certainly can’t.

Singaporeans’ flamings aside… His infamous choice for 2011 Ms Tin Pei Ling… Who can expect this little girl story teller to offer anything concrete at such critical times?

Honestly, did PM Lee seek her and others out to lead at all?

Then, we have ministers who’d spend billions just hoping to buy success for YOG and go all the miles of ‘forcing’ students to ‘volunteer’… we have ministers who can’t be bothered about how much a bike is, who supported TT Durai from start to the end, and we have all those leaders who have talked a lot but delivering zero result. Then in the midst of uproars against inflation, some ministers suggested NWC to increase wages… … regardless of productivity and state competitiveness. And so on and so forth.

As long as this is the situation, why do netizens demand better policies? It’s as if this is a valid demand at all!

With what comes better policies?

While it is commendable that netizens show concern of how badly the state has been run, there exists another problem… It’s like this… if your mummy is pouring oil to fire, but you are only able to scream and scream as in those silly movies, it only creates a mess and helps the mummy de-focus.

There are currently many parasites in the society… who made use of the governance’s crappy state to grab as much nutrients as possible to grow fat and fatter while dumping all the other ores to be the social problems of the body, and while sucking the nutrients, they themselves not only cannot perform better, but they deny those better ‘germs’ in the body of nutrients to develop the ores into gems.

In this society, everyone is whining about a better society by whining against others. And this is how the society can progress?

The topic today is not really about PM Lee’s talk about right politics. We all know why the people are rising up against PAP and voting against PAP. The micro-economics has been managed into a huge mess, and the solutions are merely talk talk talk and more talk. Inflation remains on an ‘healthy’ path up, job security is waning, quality jobs are well matched by new citizens and foreign talents, while public transport is really shocking nowadays with recent break-downs for hours many can’t expect to buy a car as the government discourages against it. The talk of entrepreneurship has also been a generally empty one. Not to say, single guys are encouraged to stay in 2 room flats to attract spouses… I am totally not surprised why Singaporeans are one of the most unhappiest in the world.

From health care to conscription to education to now… many ‘interesting’ legal cases… the strategy against people raising brows is simply to send legal threats. In this INCLUSIVE society, the top and bottom can’t communicate without lawyers’ letters…?

While PM Lee is grooming more ‘leaders’ to come, perhaps more you-know-whos or mostly… you-can’t-even-to-bother-whos, Singaporeans are bending the hope on oppositions especially WP.

Here is the right problem in Singapore’s politics and political future that will support Singapore’s economic ambition… …

Despite the increase in numbers, none of the opposition leaders, hence none of the parties can produce an alternative government that works, and…

Many who hate PAP think this is ok. Many ‘moderates’ even thought that there will be a party split since how many years… There are so many semi-professional speculations and irrational pushes for a real trouble boiling to the max. People are really pushing any ‘monkeys’ against PAP.

The problem is, because PM Lee refuses to find people of great caliber, the people are also part of the culprits by pushing for incompetent alternatives. And pushing incompetent alternatives solely to punish and replace PAP only promotes incompetency and begets an equally bad leadership, if not worse.

How can I not be worried?

While I can understand the sentiment to oust PAP due to its all powerful insistence to remain at such ‘competency level’ hoping a freak election result is once in every 50 years, I must strongly suggest and remind Singaporeans the alternative solution to bad leadership is not merely oppositions, the goal is not 2/3 majority to deny any side of constitutional power to change any laws, the real goal of every election is to get a leadership that will fight in the best interest of you!

Hence, the real alternative or goal of election if the PAP refuses to improve will be for the next government that works to be formed. And it must be a team of people with governing capability.

With or without awareness, the war of the classes has already begun in Singapore. The elites hope to use Meritocracy to continue at such competency level in the hope to be fed fat, but the common people have already realized this can’t go on, because now… the call to support their old parents cannot be answered if you can’t even confidently support your own families and children! Using laws to whip the people to behave to support the parents, to find work when quality jobs are already so little and HRM so messed up is ridiculous…

As President Obama said, those who work shouldn’t be under the poverty line! But many Singaporeans work and work and work overtime but the CPF minimum goal post keeps changing and changing and yes… many teachers will also realize next year when per hour PSI reaches 700 for 3 hours, they and their kids at schools will be choking because 24 hour PSI must be at 300 before there COULD be stop-work order. Under a ‘PAP is behind Singaporeans’ government, many people are wondering are they slaves, and now… what kind of work condition will they be subjected to…

And when they are down, how can they pick themselves up?

It is not difficult to understand why people are discarding the PAP. But what I can never understand is…

Who in the right mind will discard PAP only to promote an alternative government that will never work?

A few of us came together offline… from civil service, from grassroots, from oppositions… We went through the ‘alternatives’… While folks in the government are worried about government’s performance… and insistence to perform like that with more ‘incredible leaders’ handpicked by PM Lee to come, even those from the moderate and opposition groups express a grim future.

Even the online politics is pure madness… flavored with judgmental and immature flamings, cyber-bullying and havoc… …

At such time when we need real leaders… people are still talking about degrees, jobs, and all those nonsense.

A while ago, an infamous historical genius was a talking point online, made popular by an Hong Kong drama, his name is Han Xin from Liu Bang faction.

When we need a genius to win a war, we need Han Xin. While many talked about him… many Singaporeans don’t realize…

Han Xin was depending on relatives instead of farming or working for meals. Which is… Han Xin was a jobless depending on his Dad, or since his Dad was gone, his relatives and friends to live out his earlier days as an adult.

And the infamous Liu Bang…. he never was an elite. He was merely some gangster-like figure who drank at pubs and usually didn’t pay up… because his town and he was poor.

At such time when PM Lee talked about the right politics and netizens reacted…

I really must ask… for the sake of the future, are we looking at supporting oppositions, or supporting the next government? Are we looking for another government infested with scholars and crippled by Meritocracy that thinks it is indeed a world super power, powerful enough to even licence the world? Are we looking for another government telling you all the talk talk talk and delivering nothing? Or are we looking merely to have a 2 parties government… to do nothing and stuck directionless?

2016 is merely 2 and half years away… If discounting the election year itself, it’s only 1 and half year before the election machinery shalt begin.

I am not sure if joining the existing parties is wise…

But neither am I confident there are enough leaders to be assembled to truly fight for the interests of Singaporeans.

This is not an SOS from a Singaporean… this is an SOS from the state.

The future of the state is in our hands. Yet, Singaporean minds are somewhat feeble.

While many deem it choice-less in the war against PAP… I am hoping that there is a choice. I hope that real talented leaders will emerge.

I have read many online articles, complaining about many many issues, suggesting numerous solutions…

But Singaporeans only have one solution: True talented leaders.

Only leaders with capability can offer anything concrete to fight for your interest beyond talk talk and more talk. Only leaders will groom more leaders… Pretenders will only groom pretenders who will support pretenders in power.

What do you think?

If I were to assemble a team of governors online, do you think it is possible?

Scope

PA gets dragged into the politics ever since opposition parties won 7 seats in Parliament.

I joined PA briefly for in a Constituency before I left. Below is my confession.

1) Yes. It is true that PA Constituency Managers are paid a lot. Their starting pay is already close to $4000 a month and their bonus can be more than 5 months a year. In fact, those Constituency Assistants with only O levels are paid $2.2K a month after a few years of service.

But on the other hand, they are required to work shifts, weekends and on big events such as National Day celebrations or festivals, they can work more than 6 days a week.

2) Yes. It's true that many PA grassroots volunteers can be political.

Some volunteer due to their children as they want to get into their top primary school and want to collect points. Even simple things like who gets to seat near the MP/ Grassroots Advisor during National Day celebration dinners can be political. Those who seat on the same table and near the MP will be a good judgement on whether you are important or not.

3) Yes. There are many foreigners too who take up PA Courses. In PA, we organise many lessons such as belly dancing, zumba, piano lessons, cookery classes and they charge the same rates for citizens, PRs and foreigners.

When a PRC foreigner is keen to take up zumba dancing classes, she insisted that the trainer speak to her in Chinese and not English as she is not fluent in English. When I replied that we cannot do that as there could be some non-Chinese in the class, she said that majority of the people are Chinese and should bend towards her favour....

4) And Yes again, most foreigners admire Lee Hsien Loong. When Mr Lee was invited to open the inaugural inter-Constituency sports games, many foreigners want free tickets to the event and most say that the major selling point is to see Lee Hsien Loong in person.

5) Yes. We are PAP's mouthpiece. Many policies such as raising transport fees, ERP gantry rates and helping to spread certain interest groups such as balloon sculpting get sent from HQ and down to grassroots level. But sometimes, I wonder how effective these focus groups are. For example, PA organised some grassroots focus groups to invite people to sit down and discuss about White Paper and Singapore Conversation.

Even the most hard-core PAP supporter opposed the White Paper during such closed door focus group meetings but ultimately, all the PAP MPs in Parliament voted for the White Paper.

So do they even bother to organise such grassroots feedback dialogue when they aren't even listening?

6) Yes. PA do work very closely with business groups especially when we need them to sponsor events such as Integration Family Day etc. That's why most business owners such as Hyflux, Crescendas Group and Charles and Keith are pro-PAP.

7) Generally, PA is still a good place to work in. Most people are fun, family oriented and when I first reported to work, one of them even bought me free donuts to welcome me.

Unfortunately, I was only given a one year contract with PA and will need to leave after that.

8) PA has many temps and events-driven, so they prefer to hire people on short-term contracts. After the event is over, you say goodbye. Getting a temp job or a contract job with PA is easy but getting a perm job in PA is very hard.

The most absurb thing is that PA gives you a one year contract without any bonus. Don't take up the job unless you are really hard-up for a job. So far, nobody has been converted from temp to perm in PA.

9) Volunteering and participating actively in PA during your youth days will increase your chances of getting a job in PA. Most PA people do volunteer with PA in their youths. Too bad I didn't so my chances are very low. Now, I am in mid-30s so even if I start volunteering now, it's too late as I am too old.

10) PA does not like opposition parties. It's anathema and a taboo subject in PA. Don't even raise this issue during lunch as it is really sensitive.

CJ

TRS Contributor

Pilots of Asiana Flight 214 were flying too slowly as they approached San Francisco airport, triggering a warning that the jetliner could stall, and then tried to abort the landing seconds before crashing, according to federal safety officials.

Investigators also said they were looking into the possibility that rescue crews ran over one of the two teenagers killed in the crash on Saturday. Officials released the details without explaining why the pilots were flying so slow — or why rescue officials didn’t see the girl.

The Boeing 777 was travelling at speeds well below the target landing speed of 137 knots per hour, or 157mph (252kmh), said National Transportation Safety Board chief Deborah Hersman at a briefing yesterday (July 7) on the crash.

“We’re not talking about a few knots,” she said.

Ms Hersman said the aircraft’s stick shaker — a piece of safety equipment that warns pilots of an impending stall — went off moments before the crash. The normal response to a stall warning is to increase speed to recover control.

There was an increase several seconds before the crash, she said, basing her comments on an evaluation of the cockpit voice and flight data recorders that contain hundreds of different types of information on what happened to the plane.

And at 1.5 seconds before impact, there was a call for an aborted landing, she said. The crash at San Francisco International Airport on Saturday killed two 16-year-old girls from China and injured dozens of others.

The new details helped shed light on the final moments of the airliner as the crew tried desperately to climb back into the sky, and confirmed what survivors and other witnesses said they saw: a slow-moving airliner.

Pilots normally try to land at the target speed, in this case 137 knots, plus an additional five more knots, said Mr Bob Coffman, an American Airlines captain who has flown 777s. He said the briefing raises an important question: “Why was the plane going so slow?”

The plane’s Pratt & Whitney engines were on idle, Ms Hersman said. The normal procedure in the Boeing 777, a wide-body jet, would be to use the autopilot and the throttle to provide power to the engine all the way through to landing, Mr Coffman said.

There was no indication in the discussions between the pilots and the air traffic controllers that there were problems with the aircraft.

Among the questions investigators are trying to answer was what, if any, role the deactivation of a ground-based landing guidance system played in the crash. Such systems help pilots land, especially at airports like San Francisco where fog can make landing challenging.

Altogether, 305 of the 307 people aboard made it out alive in what survivors and rescuers described as nothing less than astonishing after a frightful scene of fire burning inside the fuselage, pieces of the aircraft scattered across the runway and people fleeing for their lives.

‘THE PLANE WILL FALL DOWN ...’

The flight originated in Shanghai, China, stopped over in Seoul, South Korea, before making the nearly 11-hour trip to San Francisco. The South Korea-based airline said four South Korean pilots were on board, three of whom were described as “skilled”.

Among the travellers were citizens of China, South Korean, the United States, Canada, India, Japan, Vietnam and France. There were at least 70 Chinese students and teachers heading to summer camps, according to Chinese authorities.

As the plane approached the runway under clear skies — a luxury at an airport and city known for intense fog — people in nearby communities could see the aircraft was flying low and swaying erratically from side to side.

On board, Ms Fei Xiong, from China, was travelling to California so she could take her eight-year-old son to Disneyland. The pair was sitting in the back half of the plane. Ms Xiong said her son sensed something was wrong.

“My son told me: ‘The plane will fall down, it’s too close to the sea,”’ she said. “I told him: ‘Baby, it’s okay, we’ll be fine.”’

On audio recordings from the air traffic tower, controllers told all pilots in other planes to stay put after the crash. “All runways are closed. Airport is closed. San Francisco tower,” said one controller.

At one point, the pilot of a United Airlines plane radioed.

“We see people ... that need immediate attention,” the pilot said. “They are alive and walking around.”

“Think you said people are just walking outside the airplane right now?” the controller replied.

“Yes,” answered the pilot of United Flight 885. “Some people, it looks like, are struggling.”

When the plane hit the ground, oxygen masks dropped down, said Mr Xu Da, a product manager at an Internet company in Hangzhou, China, who was sitting with his wife and teenage son near the back of the plane.

When he stood up, he said he could see sparking — perhaps from exposed electrical wires.

He turned and could see the tail where the galley was torn away, leaving a gaping hole through which they could see the runway. Once on the tarmac, they watched the plane catch fire, and firefighters hose it down.

“I just feel lucky,” said Mr Xu, whose family suffered some cuts and have neck and back pain.

In the chaotic moments after the landing, when baggage was tumbling from the overhead bins onto passengers and people all around her were screaming, Ms Wen Zhang grabbed her four-year-old son, who hit the seat in front of him and broke his leg.

Spotting a hole at the back of the jumbo jet where the bathroom had been, she carried her boy to safety.

“I had no time to be scared,” she said.

At the wreckage, police officers were throwing utility knives up to crew members inside the burning wreckage so they could cut away passengers’ seat belts. Passengers jumped down emergency slides, escaping from billowing smoke that rose high above the bay.

Nearby, people who escaped were dousing themselves with water from the bay, possibly to cool burn injuries, authorities said.

By the time the flames were out, much of the top of the fuselage had burned away. Inside The tail section was gone, with pieces of it scattered across the beginning of the runway. One engine was gone, and the other was no longer on the wing.

San Francisco Fire Department Chief Joanne Hayes-White said the two 16-year-old girls from China who died were found on either side of the plane. Investigators are trying to determine whether they were alive or dead when rescuers reached the scene.

“What we saw yesterday, most people will never see in their career,” Ms Hayes-White said.

San Mateo County Coroner Robert Foucrault said senior San Francisco Fire Department officials notified him and his staff at the crash site on Saturday that one of the 16-year-olds may have been struck on the runaway.

Mr Foucrault said an autopsy he expects to be completed by Monday will involve determining whether the girl's death was caused by injuries suffered in the crash or "a secondary incident".

He said he did not get a close enough look at the victims on Saturday to know whether they had external injuries.

Mr Foucrault said one of the bodies was found on the tarmac near where the plane's tail broke off when it slammed into the runway. The other was found on the left side of the plane about 30 feet away from where the jetliner came to rest after it skidded down the runway.

Source: AP

Standard Chartered Bank has reported that household debt currently accounts for around 75 per cent of Singapore’s gross domestic product, up from 55 per cent in 2010 (“S’pore households among most heavily-indebted in Asia, July 3). Similar observations were flagged by UBS’ Regional Chief Investment Officer last year.

Many Singaporeans have had it good even with the last technical recession, but interest rates are now creeping up, economic woes for Europe remain pressing, while the United States’ fragile recovery has many years to go. China is showing signs of struggle, as is India.

While South-east Asia is seemingly doing well, the state of major global economies will surely continue to weigh on us.

Against this backdrop, the average household debt continues to climb due to high car and property prices. These are large, long-term financial commitments and, when the next economic downturn comes around, many leveraged borrowers will suffer, as will banks and other businesses generally.

Many forget that asset values can decline sharply in bad times — by as much as 30 to 50 per cent, as seen during the post-Asian financial crisis days. Households could potentially suffer negative equity scenarios in such circumstances.

The unprecedented supply of new residential property coming on stream, coupled with the record-high property prices today, will mean a sharp drop in property prices should our rosy economic circumstances turn hazy or bleak.

Raymond Koh

Nicaragua released details of Edward Snowden’s asylum request late Saturday, releasing the letter he wrote in full to media outlets, Mail & Guardian reports.

“I, Edward Snowden, citizen of the United States, am writing to seek asylum in the Republic of Nicaragua because of the risk of being persecuted by the government of the United States and its agents,” reads the letter, written in Moscow on June 30.

“As a result of my political opinions, and my desire to exercise my freedom of speech, through which I’ve shown that the government of the United States is intercepting the majority of communications in the world,” Snowden writes, ” … [the U.S.] has publicly announced a criminal investigation against me.”

The 30-year-old former contractor for the NSA has been on the run since last month, after releasing top-secret documents detailing a massive spying apparatus that collects telephone and email records, in addition to spying on U.S. allies. He’s currently holed up in a transit area of the Moscow airport.

Snowden goes on to make the case for admission into the country, writing that members of Congress and media figures have “accused me of being a traitor and have called for me to be jailed or executed.”

He also mentions the international precedent of the Ecuadorean embassy sheltering Julian Assange to bolster his case, and writes that his circumstances are similar to Bradley Manning — the American soldier currently on trial for leaking secret information about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars to WikiLeaks.

“Manning was submitted to cruel and inhumane acts by [the U.S.],” Snowden writes, who went on to say that it was unlikely he would receive a fair trial or “proper treatment prior to that trial.”

Snowden has submitted asylum applications to more than 25 countries. Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega said on Friday that he was willing to grant him asylum if “circumstances permit.”

*Article first appeared on http://au.businessinsider.com/edward-snowden-asylum-letter-nicaragua-2013-7

After viewing the video clips on the child abuse at My First Skool Toa payoh, one cannot but feel the pain of the poor child and the parents. Shit, how could such wickedness still happened in this first world city? How could it happen in broad daylight in front of so many adults and none of them feel any sense of responsibility and guilt to care and protect a helpless child? How could a child be left in the hands of a cruel adult while the rest turned to look the other way?

This incident is the same as the intern that was slapped in front of so many colleagues for so long. And the child abuse will continue if the parents did not have the presence of mind to check on the CCTV, or for some reasons the CCTV tape was not shown to them.

There is no point talking about this any more. The sickness of this society must be put right immediately. Every adult in the school must be sacked right away to put a message across that they cannot turn a blind eye to cruelty against children, helpless and vulnerable children. Not only parents must be made to feel safe when they left their children in schools or childcare centres, the children must be protected from being bullied and tortured behind the backs of their parents. How can parents be at ease to put their children in the care of others, supposedly trained and professionals?

The message that everyone in the school must be responsible for the well being of little children must get across. Not reporting abuses is as good as being accomplice to the vicious attack and guilty of the act.

And the torturers of children must be put behind bars, just like employers beating and torturing maids and foreign workers. This City is sick to the core if such cruelties are not nip in the bud and allowed to continue in childcare centres or schools, or in workplace again and again. Even one more case is one more case too much.

Why is it that no Sinkies will ever stand up to right a wrong, to defend the weak or a wicked act? After so many decades of being conditioned, better not to speak up, just obey, just do as being told, do not defy and oppose authority, this is what Sinkies have become. Not my business, and I did not do it, so I am innocent. 

The people, a first world and well educated people, must be empowered to look after themselves, their environment and their neighbours and fellow citizens, especially the weak and helpless. But no, they are all kiasi, kiasu and kia tai chee. Don’t get yourself into trouble, into other people’s trouble. In this child abuse case, it is the wrongdoing of the offending teacher, so not their business.

There is a need to empower the people, educate the people to stand up for their rights and to stand up for what is right and against what is wrong. We are turning a nation of people into unthinking and unfeeling robots that only care about themselves and nothing else.

Chua Chin Leng AKA Red Bean

*The author blogs at http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg/

It is disappointing to hear PM Lee Hsien Loong boosting of sustaining SG economics with the right politics alone. Has the PM forgotten the greatness of a country starts with the people of the country, the quality of political leaders and their passion to serve the country, driven by compassion for its people? Also, he must have forgotten that politics does not function alone.

Politics must response to the social needs of the people even as politicians lead; other then getting the economics right. For example, Singaporeans don’t want to become the minority in its own land. Singaporeans want previous and future influx of foreigners to stop and rollback because it has not brought prosperity to the masses but instead created more hardship.

So far, the majority of foreigners brought in are the wrong kind.  They are the ones that displaced Singaporean PMETs. The politics practiced by the PAP govt does not response to this. There’s no Singaporean-first law to protect Singaporean society from being discriminated or outnumbered especially in jobs. On the hand, the other foreign talents brought in that open doors and create jobs for Singaporeans are far and few.

Another example is the social need for Singaporeans to be more innovative and more enterprising in spirit to compete globally. However, the politics of the PAP govt has not react to such needs with liberation of social and media laws. In fact, it just got worse with requirement for popular websites dealing with information on SG to be held hostage by them with a $50,000 performance bond.

PM Lee’s mindset in practicing politics without responding to Singaporean’s social needs demonstrates his lack of passion to serve with compassion for Singaporean. This mindset has infected his entire PAP team.  His focus is not on benefits for majority of Singaporeans but how he can please foreigners to achieve economic growth.  The kind of economic growth doesn’t filter down to the majority of Singaporeans and is therefore unsustainable.

It’s not surprising his brand of politics as sole prerequisite for economics sustainability instead of politics adjusting and synchronizing with Singaporean’s social needs on the ground for the masses, can only serves to reinforce the PAP govt is unworthy of being entrusted with the power to govern SG by voters.

5starmoon

In its birth , TRS was heralded as a new addition to a slew of "alternative news sites". Sort of like a counter-propaganda tool against possible mainstream media manipulation by the ruling party, PAP. It used to publish good reading material, which lived up to its name as the "real singapore" , by voicing out the views of average Singaporeans (Sinkies FTW). However, lately, the standards are dropping. Drastically.

It is saddening to see a wonderful site decaying, publishing articles that are poorly worded. ( here's a brilliant example :http://therealsingapore.com/content/ntuc-child-abuse-case-parents-may-have-overreacted). Now, if you ask a majority of SG netizens on whether this site is credible as a news source, I doubt that the majority will agree.

Hence, I sincerely request to the admin of this site to buck up . You need to take a good look at your published materials and you need to stop the substandard ones from going on your page.  Publish the real facts and don't oppose for the sake of opposing. The PAP might be wolves in sheep clothing, but it doesn't mean they are wrong in every aspect. Without them, my education costs would have bankrupted my parent's bank account., and I am thankful for that.

All in all, please buck up.

Yours Sincerely,

A concerned Netizen

Editor's Note: Thanks for the feedback my friend. We will ensure we spend more time to screen through all the published articles in the future. 

Our recent article (MAS Has Another Go at Property Cooling Measures) has garnered a few comments online that we would like to address. Many of the comments have focused on how these measures will impact the poorer and more marginalised folks, who are barely scraping by with their daily needs and debt repayments. Not a few blame the government and banks for manipulating the rules for their own benefit.

The common sentiment is that these measures target the common folk, while leaving the rich and powerful unscathed.

They are not wrong. We believe these measures are precisely meant to target borderline loan cases, in which the borrowers would have just managed to scrape by getting approval, thanks to the unusually low interest rate. In addition, they are pulling out all the stops, using every trick in the book and exploiting all the loopholes in order to buy their property.

Yes, these measures hit this group hard, and we do not think it is necessarily a bad thing. This group would be the most vulnerable when economic factors start rocking the boat; they would be the first to tumble overboard. As one commentor rightly pointed out, national household debt has grown from 38% in 2000 to 75% currently. This amount of leverage could very possibly see banks succumbing as well, should a majority of their loans default.

In and of itself, this round of measures enforces prudence, and safeguards the public, as well as banks, against:

• Over-leveraging
• Lack of foresight
• Future market downturn
• Toxic debt situations

In other words, we think these recent measures by Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) are appropriate, albeit a little late for some, given the situation that is looming on the horizon. While owning a home may seem like a very essential and unequivocal right, it should not come at the risk of bankruptcy and the total loss of life savings. There are other options.

But, we do have a caveat. We also agree with many commentors’ point that housing, especially public housing, in Singapore has reached ridiculous price levels. That is why people are signing their lives away. Something must be done to change the rent-seeking, profit-at-all-cost-driven behaviour of the current property boom cycle.

The government cannot just rely on cooling measures in isolation. Further action, such as sweeping policy changes to public housing, must be taken.

At the moment, there is no capital gains tax in Singapore. Profit from sale of property is not taxed, unless an individual has been deemed to be trading in properties. At the very least, some sort of gains tax on the massive profits made on the skyrocketing prices of property would discourage churning and profiteering.

But in addition to taxing the rich profits made by such property wheelers and dealers, we believe taxation should also be levied on holdings. Having an upfront tax in the form of ABSD doesn’t seem to be enough. There are many who hold on to multiple property titles, either waiting for prices to climb further, or for rental purposes. Such people do contribute to the increase in prices by throttling supply. A holding tax that increases with number of properties owned, or even tiered by the value of total holding value, might be a way to encourage better distribution of wealth and property.

Another approach could be to reducing the cost of the subsistence level of housing, in order to deflate the market. A comprehensive rental scheme is one way to do that, and another way would be to simply increase the supply of public housing.

BLUTA Singapore

*Article first appeared on http://www.bluta.com.sg/blog/2013/07/mas-instills-discipline-with-new-housing-loan-measures/

Lina Chiam, NCMP

8 July 2013

Adjournment Motion in Parliament

Media Development Authority’s licensing framework for news websites in Singapore

Today in Parliament, Mrs Lina Chiam, Non-Constituency Member of Parliament and Chairman of the opposition Singapore People’s Party (SPP), raised an adjournment motion to speak on the new Media Development Authority’s (MDA) regulations of 28 May 2013 for licensing what they define as “news sites”.

Executive summary

The new regulations have provoked an uproar among bloggers, Singaporeans and even major international media companies like Facebook. We believe that the regulations are detrimental to Singapore’s reputation as a media hub.

We pointed out several ambiguous definitions in the new regulations. What constitutes locally-based websites? Should the server be local based? Should the news be local in nature? Should the content originator be locally-based? The government also needs to define more rigorously what constitutes a “Singapore news programme”.

We also believe that the regulations were intended to censor blogs that discuss politics. The $50,000 performance bond, if imposed, will effectively force some community-run blogs to shut down.

Why do we think so? Because if the government’s purpose is to regulate only professional news sites, they would have posted  a much higher performance bond than the current $50,000, and institute a much higher threshold of the volume of news produced by the website. Which professional news site posts only one article per week, as per the criteria under the new regulations?

What is the real purpose behind the MDA’s regulations? Is it really just to regulate Yahoo! Singapore News, along with websites of the mainstream media outlets, and to leave personal and community-run blogs alone? If so, the Broadcasting (Class License) Notification already provides for such regulation.

These are important issues that deserve to be raised in Parliament. It was not, prior to its implementation on 1 June. Just because the MDA Act empowers MDA to regulate through subsidiary legislation does not mean that it can dispense with the usual consultative processes with stakeholders. What is the rush here? The outdated Broadcasting Act should have been reformed first.

As such, the SPP has called on the Minister to withdraw the new MDA regulations. If the Minister refuses to, we have called on him to use his powers under Section 60 of the Broadcasting Act to issue exemption orders to major community-run blogs immediately. This would then show that the government is serious about its stated promise not to clamp down on internet freedom.

Mrs Lina Chiam’s speech text:

Madam Speaker,

May I first thank you for giving me the opportunity to raise the matter of the Media Development Authority’s licensing framework for news websites in Singapore, on this Motion for the Adjournment. 

Introduction

1. On the 28^th of May, the MDA announced a new licensing regime for Singapore news websites. These regulations require what are defined by MDA as online news sites, and which are visited by at least 50,000 unique IP addresses from Singapore each month over a period of two months, to put up a performance bond of S$50,000, and to comply within 24 hours to remove content that is found to be in breach of content standards. These regulations were to take effect just 4 days later, on the 1^st of June.

1. That provoked an uproar among bloggers and, indeed, many Singaporeans.

1. A protest against the MDA regulations was staged at Hong Lim Park on the 8^th of June by a coalition of bloggers called #FreeMyInternet.

1. For Singaporeans who run small blogs or who post comments on sites, they were concerned how the regulations would affect them.

1.  More recently, five members of the Asia Internet Coalition – Facebook, Google, eBay, Yahoo and Salesforce – have called the new MDA rules “unwarranted and excessive”. These are the world’s major companies providing internet-related services. This issue is now affecting Singapore’s business-friendly image and reputation as a media hub.

1.  The Government is trying to assure Singaporeans that they are not out to clamp down on internet freedom. The Acting Minister for Manpower, in speaking about these media regulations, said on television that Singaporeans can continue to air their views online. But what does that really mean? The Minister for Manpower also said that the regulations “do not encompass blogs” but may if “blogs evolve into news sites”. The definition of news sites under the regulations, as they stand, are so arbitrary, and can encompass any website posting at least one news-related article in a week.

1. That is why Singaporeans continue to believe that the regulations had been crafted to censor blogs, especially those that discuss politics. Once the $50,000 performance bond is imposed on a community-run blog, they are effectively forced to shut down; such community-run blogs are unlikely to be able to afford to put down that amount of money, and for it to be subjected to the prerogative of MDA on points such as the “24-hour take-down” rule.

1. This is not just about the ‘better communication’ of the new MDA rules, as the Minister for Communications and Information put it. There are legal issues that have not been addressed. Most of all, this issue had not even been put before this House for scrutiny and debate until today – a full 38 days after the regulations have already taken effect.

I raise two points at this juncture: -

The difference between press and media regulation

1. Firstly – press regulation is distinct from media regulation. Regulating the media at large would address fraudulent advertising, for instance. Media regulation is not routine. Regulating the press is quite different. For example, Singapore has the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act, or the NPPA.

1. With the MDA regulations, the definition of a “news site” was suddenly widened on the 28^thof May. Contrary to the MDA’s press statement, the new regulations do not merely have the effect of placing online news sites “on a more consistent regulatory framework with traditional news platforms”. Rather, the MDA’s regulations, as worded, can effectively encompass all online media. This is the case when the MDA presents a definition of a “Singapore news programme” as:

any programme… containing any news, intelligence, report of occurrence, or any matter of public interest, about any social, economic, political, cultural, artistic, sporting, scientific or any other aspect of Singapore in any language … but does not include any programme produced by or on behalf of the Government.

1. We find it hard to accept such a definition. This basically encompasses everything under the sun, which one can blog about. What then is not considered news?

1. The Government’s subsequent attempts to clarify the definitions here do not satisfy either, even if they refer instead to “computer online services” and to “commercial news websites”.

1.  One would find out that computer online services literally refers to the provision of a service – and indeed anything could be construed as a service – provided online through a computer. It can even cover internet search engine results. The net is cast so widely.

1. What is a “commercial news website”? Yahoo! News Singapore does not charge for access to its news articles, just like community news blogs, so why is the MDA referring to Yahoo as a “commercial news website”?

1. Moreover, one of the criteria for inclusion in the new regulations does not seem to meet the MDA’s stated intent of merely placing online news sites on a more consistent regulatory framework with traditional news platform. Are there print newspapers that only publish one news article a week? So why is it a stated requirement that online news sites which report an average of at least one article per week, over a period of two months, on Singapore news, need to be individually licensed? Why not set a higher threshold that is more consistent with the volume of output typically expected from newspapers? I would imagine this number to at least be a few hundred articles per month. Otherwise, it looks like the regulations are targeting personal blogs.

1. Questions abound. Once a website is licensed, would it stay licensed for its entire life, whether or not the number of visitors is reduced later?

1. That is why I submit to the Minister that these new regulations have the potential, legally, to extend control to all media, rather than just placing online news sites on par with regulations on print newspapers, which was the stated intent.

Is MDA only trying to regulate Yahoo?

1. Secondly – questions have also been raised about the curious line-up of 10 websites that will fall under these new regulations. Nine of them are the online outfits of newspapers or media outlets that already fall under the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act, or are under the ownership of Singapore Press Holdings or MediaCorp. Just one website is not – Yahoo! News Singapore.

1.  Yahoo has been licensed under the Broadcasting (Class Licence) Notification of 2001, since its inception. It is an automatic licensing framework. This particular regulatory framework for the internet contains requirements for both Internet Service Providers and Internet Content Providers – only those Internet Content Providers which have connection with political parties and those dealing with the propagation, promotion and discussion of political or religious issues relating to Singapore, will require registration. Under the Class Licence Scheme, Internet Content Providers and Internet Service Providers are deemed automatically licensed, and have to observe and comply with the Class Licence Conditions and the Internet Code of Practice, which is issued by MDA.

1. So if regulatory oversight for news sites like Yahoo already exists, why did the MDA have to introduce new regulations? The MDA had also gone on record to claim that there will be no change in content standards, and the intention is not to clamp down on internet freedom.

1.  Yes, we know that there are two new requirements in the new regulations – the 24-hour take-down rule, and the $50,000 performance bond. Why is there the need for these sanctions? Is it because Yahoo has not been complying with content standards?

1.  As mentioned earlier, statements indicated that the new rules aim to place online news websites on a more consistent regulatory framework with traditional news platforms. The public interprets this to mean that the Government wants to control the internet in the same way that it has been controlling newspapers in Singapore since 1974 under the NPPA, in what is one of the most sophisticatedly controlled media environments in the world.

1. So what is the purpose behind the MDA’s regulations? Is it really just to regulate the Yahoo news site, along with sites of the mainstream media outlets, and to leave personal blogs and community blogs alone, even if they meet the criteria of having a viewership of 50,000 per month?

So many unanswered questions

Test of “locally-based websites”

1. There are still many unanswered questions. The Minister clarified that the new regulations aim to cover only locally-based websites. But we wonder how he intends to define – hopefully with acceptance from the industry – a locally-based service? Would the MDA refer to the location of the server, the computer, the operations of the company, or the type of news?

1.  In this connection, we also ask – why were the websites of CNN, BBC, Reuters and Bloomberg left out of the list? Certainly we can argue that they qualify. They are surely computer online services and we can be quite sure that they are in the business of news! Some of these firms have offices in Singapore and have been providing new services from Singapore.

1.  Otherwise the regulations seem to be so arbitrarily drawn out. Its implementation would appear to be subjected to the whims and fancy of the MDA, without any provisions for legal oversight or redress.

Test of computer origin

1. The computer may not need to be physically based in Singapore. When we checked with an IT expert, a cloud computer powered by energy from Singapore could be also covered.

1.  Will the MDA define for us the jurisdiction for cloud computing services? Allow me to give a simple example – how does the MDA consider the case of a popular news site, operated by a Singaporean blogger, using a blogging platform powered through cloud computer systems?

1. In this globalised and digitalised world, we are not sure if it makes sense to speak of a “locally-based website” any longer.

A better roadmap for reforming internet regulation

1. Given that there are so many unanswered questions, some technical, others conceptual, should we not revamp and update the entire Broadcasting Act first? We believe that the Act has to be first updated to be relevant with the new internet industry and new technology before we can start to discuss these new regulations. I understand the Minister has said that the Government may tackle amendment of the Broadcasting Act some time next year. So why rush through these MDA regulations meanwhile? Would the legislation not then be untidy?

1. The regulations also seem to have disregarded the key 2008 report of the Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society, or AIMS, which was set up by the then Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, Dr Lee Boon Yang. Among the report’s many recommendations on liberalising the regulation of the internet, it said that “a relationship built on trust among all parties is more likely to last compared to one built on a list of do’s and don’ts”.[1] Is the Minister planning to dismiss the findings of the AIMS report?

The lack of rigour in our legislative process

1. Why was this not brought before Parliament, such as through a ministerial statement? Just because the MDA Act empowers MDA to regulate through subsidiary legislation does not mean that it should dispense with the usual consultative processes with stakeholders. What is the rush here?

1.  The MDA regulations were dropped like a bomb on the 28^th of May. I decided to file an adjournment motion on the 31^st of May, but Parliament was to be on recess until July. Then on the 19^th of June, the Member for Choa Chu Kang filed the first Parliamentary Question on the matter. Was the Government intending to address this matter only through PQs?

Withdraw the MDA regulations

1. The MDA regulations are premature. They fail the test of legal rigour, not only because of its ambiguous wording – the whole regulatory regime has too wide a scope for arbitrary execution. This relates to the overarching Broadcasting Act which is outdated, but has not been amended yet.

1. As such, the Singapore People’s Party calls on the Government to withdraw the MDA regulations of the 28^th of May.

Or issue exemption orders for blogs immediately

1. In the event that the Government refuses to withdraw the MDA regulations, what sort of legal guarantee can the Minister offer to all bloggers that they would not be targeted?

1. In that case, we call on the Minister to immediately issue exemption orders for community news blogs like The Online Citizen and TR Emeritus, with his powers under Section 60B of the Broadcasting Act. I single out these two websites only because I believe they have a readership of over 50,000 – at least The Online Citizen has stated this publicly – but I also make this reference to any other such news blog that may fall under the criteria of the MDA regulations.

1.  The Minister signalled that government news or commentary will not be targeted under the new licensing regime for Singapore news sites, as long as they are factual and not misleading, and said that such claims are ‘far fetched’.

1. These assurances are vague and do not constitute a legal guarantee. Bloggers speak of the MDA regulations as the proverbial Sword of Damocles. It is the fear I strike in you if I hang an axe over your neck, even though I promise you I will never kill you.

1.  So to remove any lingering doubt among the public and the business community, we challenge the Minister to issue these exemption orders, to clarify things. Section 60B of the Broadcasting Act says that the Minister is given the power to exempt any person or class of persons from all or any of the provisions of this Act or any subsidiary legislation made such as these MDA regulations.

Conclusion

1. In conclusion, we are reminded of what George Washington, the first President of the United States, said: “If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter”.

1. With unclear regulations like the MDA’s, the Government ought to clarify each and every point made above. At the moment, without the exemption orders I just mentioned, it would appear that the regulations can be applied in future on any of the most-visited blogs and websites in Singapore.

1.  Singaporeans will be all the more impoverished if the free flow information is curtailed with these MDA regulations, and by the trajectory set by them. One does not even need to believe in the constitutional right to free speech to realise how worrying the new MDA rules are, from the point of view of legal order, transparency in governance, and good business sense. With the freedom of expression suppressed, Singapore is not living up to its potential as a First World country.

Thank you Madam Speaker.

[1] AIMS report, 1.20

AFP News

The United States said Monday it was "deeply concerned" by what it called a "new restrictive" law in Singapore for licensing online news websites.

"We urge Singapore to ensure that freedom of expression is protected in accordance with its international obligations and commitments," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.

"We are concerned... to see Singapore applying press restrictions to the online world."

The surprise regulations came into force on June 1 requiring news websites -- including one operated by US-based Yahoo! -- to obtain licenses from the city-state's official media regulator.

Last month, Singaporean bloggers blacked out their homepages for 24 hours to protest the measure which they say will muzzle freedom of expression.

The new rules stipulate that websites which have at least 50,000 unique visitors from Singapore every month and publish at least one local news article per week over a period of two months must obtain an annual license.

Singapore's media regulator, the Media Development Authority (MDA), and government leaders had sought to allay fears the rules were aimed at the feisty blogging community, pointing out that blogs were not considered news portals.

But websites granted a license will have to remove "prohibited content" such as articles that undermine "racial or religious harmony" within 24 hours of being notified by the authority.

The move has caused an uproar in the online community, which largely sees it as a measure to muzzle freedom of speech.

Bloggers participating in the Internet blackout insisted the law's broad reach was indicative of the government's intentions to require blogs to seek licensing in the future as well.

Dear Real Singapore,

I am writing to you hoping that you can share my experiences with our fellow readers. I am complaining regarding our trusted Singapore Police Force.

Last year 2 Nov 2012, I got engaged the reputable M Hotel in Singapore to hold my wedding banquet. While I was serving my guests in the banquet, someone from the Hotel trespass my room and stole my Hongbaos.

Knowing that the whole level for the hotel was meant for VIP guests or guests that hold their banquet there, our ‘brothers’ left our collected Hongbaos inside our wardrobe and hid it well as they do not have our password to the safe.

This thief is familiar with the whole system and procedures. The thief had access to this level and has all the time in the world to siphon the money from the Hongbaos.This thief was experienced and I suspect that it was not his first time doing this. He would siphon every $50 dollars from each Hongbaos. Example if the Hongbaos should have $128, the thief would take $50 and leaving $78 behind. In this case, it will take off some suspicions off as the number of Hongbao will remain the same except for the value.

We made a police report 2 days later after verifying with our guests and we conclude that there a break-in to our rooms. Till date, the police have not arrest the thief and claim that they can’t do much even though the CCTV had capture the thief entering our room. Also the SPF took 9 months to call my brothers for their statements to be taken. Cheers for SPF efficiencies!

Just recently, a childcare teacher was arrested for abusing a child. Her whole action was captured on CCTV so I don’t see why the SPF is so helpless toward my case.

I am not asking for much, I just would like a police report so that I can proceed with legal actions to the hotel but apparently it takes them like years to generate this report or prosecute this suspect.  Can we expect anything more from our SPF in future?

P.S I have police report and email corresponds made to SPF  website to prove my case is genuine.

Thanks and regards
Troy Lee 

mobile: 9******4
email: l*****y@gmail.com

Some of you may be aware by now of the consistent and daily bashing of the WP by anonymous bloggers in their comments here and in other blogs. I want to declare that I am not a supporter of any political party. The tactic used is the same as that of the Americans attacking their chosen enemies, schemed by the mind benders, to subtly plant negative thoughts into the heads of the innocent readers. No, the readers do not believe or agree with the bashing, but the idea is planted in their subconscious and will eventually influence their thoughts in the most unexpected moment.

These are the works of highly trained professionals and executed by the runners. Everyday without fail, they will post things like WP is sleeping, WP is not doing anything, WP has few good people, WP is incapable of forming the next govt etc etc.

The work is not done by one individual but by a brigade. The line of thought is similar in nature. Just read through the blogs and take notice of such vibes and vitriol. Be aware and conscious about them and build yourself a defence mechanism to ignore and reject such negative ideas consciously. This requires effort to do so. Not doing anything will open one to a long period of idea planting and mind bending and before one knows anything, the idea is imbedded in the some corners of the mind and will affect one’s decision at those critical moments.

Be aware of what you read. Be protected like being protected against the virus. Be vaccinated. The mind game is ongoing all the time.

Another thing that the brigade is doing is character assassination. They would not discuss or engage an issue but just go straight to attack the blogger. Such slimy people are simply shameless things that walked on two legs and calling themselves human beans. There are plenty of them out there, here and in other blogs. And the people who sanctioned their acts, paid for their acts are the bigger devils themselves, though many would put on a pretense that they did not know and are not involved.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean

* The writer blogs at http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/

For years, the old Rail Corridor was a strong line of steel running from Tanjong Pagar to the Causeway. The tracks were removed in 2011, leaving a ribbon of green open to runners, walkers, photographers and cyclists.

As it threads its way between condominiums and expressways, it is easy to see how tenuous its continued existence is. In a city where the car is king and development is fast-paced and constant, that this corridor exists at all is a gift to be cherished.

It will need protection to survive amid the concrete and steel. Yet, people are already disrespecting the trail, blocking it, abusing it and even parking vehicles on it. Recently, teams have been felling trees and leaving them across the track. If the trees do need clearing, surely they could be felled parallel to the track so people can pass?

This may seem like a minor point, but if the track gets blocked, people would stop using it and it would fall into disrepair. Then, it is a matter of time until the “unused land” gets turned into parking lots, buildings and shopping centres.

Over the past two years, those trimming trees for businesses, condos and housing estates have dumped branches on the sidings. These raised areas used to provide an alternative route when the track was muddy. Now, thanks to the dumping, they are overgrown and impassable.

Increasingly, lorries, vans and other vehicles are parking in the middle of the track and using it as access to building sites, which are creeping closer. The heavy vehicles block the way and cause ruts that fill with water.

In several areas, most notably between Holland and the bridge over Bukit Timah, the track is so muddy it is nearly impassable. There is over 30 cm of stagnant water under some of the bridges — during a dry period. During rainy weather, it gets a lot worse.

Further north, the removal of the old rail bridges means there is a need to cross busy roads. In one area, there is no way over a canal; the track comes to a dead end, meaning a long trip back and a detour.

The agency in charge of maintaining and protecting the Rail Corridor should stop people from felling trees across it, dumping rubbish on the sidings and parking all over it.

The whole length, and not only sections, must be kept clear so people can continue using and enjoying the track. If parts become unusable and the edges get nibbled away, we risk losing it entirely, in which case there would be no getting it back.

NICK MCHUGH

After spending $2.6 million renovating their premise at the Suntec Singapore convention centre, the Kongs have returned back to Suntec last Saturday (6 Jul) to preach.

CHC worshippers packed the newly renovated 7,305-seat Suntec auditorium as Kong Hee gave a sermon titled “A House On Fire”.

Kong Hee and 5 other CHC leaders have been charged with misusing church funds to further the pop career of his wife, Ms Sun Ho. The trial is still on-going.

His wife appeared on stage with Kong.

Ms Ho told the media that she was pleased with the Suntec venue, saying, “Nothing good ever gets achieved without a certain measure of pain and struggle.”

The Suntec Singapore convention centre is now partly owned by CHC.

CHC started searching for a bigger premise to house their service in 2005, after their Jurong West premise proved too small for its burgeoning crowd. According to CHC, they now have 19,800 worshippers.

3 years ago, it invested $310 million to become a co-owner of Suntec Singapore.

At first, CHC wanted to hold services at the 12,000-seat auditorium in Suntec Singapore but URA objected due to guidelines which stated commercial properties could not use more than 10,000 sq m of space for religious purposes.

CHC then settled for a smaller auditorium which has more than 7,000 seats.

After a revamp, which includes a new stage, a radio DJ booth, a Christian bookstore and even an indoor playground with bouncy castles, it finally re-opened last Saturday.

Of the 5 CHC leaders currently on trial together with Kong, one of them, Chew Eng Han, has left the church. After Chew left, he posted a message online on 22 Jun (‘Chew questions the conduct of CHC pastors & senior leaders‘), questioning the conduct of CHC pastors and senior leaders, and replying to a CHC’s statement about his departure.

Chew wrote, “My query is how many of the board members made a conscious effort to read the COC Inquiry Report which was made accessible to them? And if they did, was then a diligent internal inquiry held in-house, to determine if there was any wrongdoing on the part of the alleged wrongdoers? Has the board done an inquiry on the issues named by COC, and satisfied itself fully that there has been no compromise of integrity? If the board has not done so, it cannot state that it knows and believes in the integrity of the senior leadership.”

“The board is probably unaware of many other issues, especially those on the pastoral angle, in terms of the manner of conduct of some of their pastors and senior leaders. Without such information, it is not equipped to issue a board statement of confidence.”

“The church statement is a mere attempt to unite the church with a spiritual tone, but lacks substance in dealing with the real issues of truth and integrity.”

TR Emeritus

*Article first appeared on www.TREmeritus.com

Sinkies are most happy when their property prices keep going up. Sinkies are even happier when they own more and more properties. Sinkies are happiest when they look at their bank accounts and see the number of zeros behind the digits keep growing. 

Are these what Sinkies are happy about? Would Sinkies be happy to have more babies and children in their homes? The Govt think so but for the wrong reasons. There are different kinds of joy in life. Some want more money and properties, some want more power, some want more children. What do Sinkies want?

The way it is going, many will leave this world without having children or maybe one or two. Many may want to have more as having children is another kind of happiness, another kind of wealth that money cannot buy. Many Sinkies spent a lot of money going on holidays, visiting this place and that place, taking photographs of the places they visited. Some choose to stay at home to enjoy their children and grandchildren. Different interest, different joy, different happiness. 

The govt also want children but of an unrelated kind. Strangers from all over the world are welcomed just to push up the economy, for economic growth. Is that a really good thing or a foolish thing to do? 

While the social economic system in the country is designed to make the citizens childless or unbearable to have children, and the Govt could not understand why, and choose to import foreigners for economic growth that brings little or no joy to having your very own children and family, and the joy of seeing them grow. 

Is there something not right somewhere? What is the purpose of this country if it is not to make the people, the citizens, happy and enjoy a fruitful life of abundance, not only in owning more and more expensive properties, but also having more children and a growing family? 

Many will end up leaving behind all their material riches, money and properties, with no children to inherit them. When they pass away, it is all over. What is life and what do we live and strive a life time for? Some are contented that they lived well and do not bother after children after they are gone. It is life, our lives, not the lives of foreigners and people that have nothing to do with us. As a country, the Govt should be talking and thinking about how to make lives worth living in this island for its citizens, and having children and happy children must be a major goal in living. What is the point of having so many properties when there is no one going to live in them when the owners die? Oops, we shall invite the foreigners to take over this island and everything there is in it.

Is that the purpose of it all? 

I am just rumbling.

Chua Chin Leng AKA Redbean

*The writer blogs at http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com

So now we know what keeps PM Lee up at night is not so much Ho Ching’s snoring but midnight musings over how to retain the “specialness” of Singapore. This so that outsiders can look at us and say: “Wow, let’s go and see what’s happening there.”

Appearance matters, after all, when keeping up with the Jones of the world.

PM Lee also said that if he could persuade another ten billionaires to Singapore, he would have no qualms doing so even if it results in higher income inequality, “because they will bring business, they will bring opportunities, they will open new doors, they will create new jobs”.

Instead of losing sleep over how the world views Singapore, perhaps the PM should ponder over how the average Singaporean views the government’s curious fixation on the super-rich. So far, it has not done a very good job of convincing us that the much feted trickle-down economics has improved the lives of Singaporeans. Show us that we are wrong please, give us the numbers of exactly how many businesses, opportunities and jobs have been created for every billionaire who has relocated to our shores.

Tell us that it’s not just about the likes of Eduardo Saverin single-handedly shoring up the private night club industry, of Jim Rogers competing with Singaporean parents for a place in Nanyang Primary with his influence and resources just so that his daughter can learn Chinese, or of Nathan Tinklersupposedly moving here to escape his creditors, because it is all we read of why these rich foreigners are here. Where of the jobs, what of the businesses? And this is before we even get started on them buying up luxury properties and fancy cars that just makes everything more expensive for everyone else.

Why not, instead of obsessing over ways to persuade another ten billionaires to come to Singapore, spend more time thinking about how to help another ten local companies grow?

A lesson from corporate finance is timely if we think of the PM as the CEO of Singapore, Inc and every citizen as shareholder. As academics will tell you, the first and foremost role of the CEO is to maximise shareholders’ value, not to increase top-line revenues, earnings per share or share price. Think of this as analogous to the role of the PM in improving the lives of every Singaporean, where economic numbers are either a means to this end or a by-product of this mission. As with CEOs, it is all too easy to lose sight of this mission.

Corporate finance also teaches us to guard against management pet projects and empire building. PM Lee proudly tells us there’s only one Marina Bay in the world, like it is some eighth world wonder. Gardens by the Bay is our new pride and joy while yesterday’s darling, the Singapore Flyer, was a borrowed idea and is no longer sexy as it goes into receivership. What pet project next? His government also tells us we need 6.9 million people to continue growing, like CEOs buying up companies to grow their empires at the expense of quality of growth and value to shareholders.

Rising inequality leads to rising discontent and discord, regardless of how true it is the presence of the super-rich will end up benefiting the rest. This is because perception by the people matters as much as, if not more than, the appearance to the outside world that PM Lee worries about. And, right now, the social costs are much more visible than any economic benefit.

Void Decker

*The writer blogs at http://www.voiddecker.com