I refer to "Khaw Boon Wan loses hundreds millions building HDB"

http://www.therealsingapore.com/content/khaw-boon-wan-government-loses-hundreds-millions-building-hdb

How I wish Minister Khaw could stop this self-pity.

I was a former HDB officer before and I do know that HDB staff salaries are relatively quite high.

For example, a basic pass degree Estates Officer could easily be promoted to Senior in 4 years and earn S$5000 a month.

Even when I was working there, many of my immediate superiors could afford to drive big cars and live in private property and some of the girls can indulge in fashion shopping in Gucci or Louis Vuitton.

I am now working in the healthcare sector and I can assure you that many allied health care workers in the public sector are benchmarked significantly lower. A fresh graduate working in a public hospital usually could command only $2500 a month. Many public hospitals also prefer to hire diploma holders and Pinoys as they have lower salary expectations. This is not taking into account that most health workers have to stand long hours, work on weekends and have to work midnight shifts.

Even many local medical doctors prefer to decamp and go into private practice or private sector as they can pay more.

This is because most public hospitals are money losing business. Most medical treatments, medicines are subsidised so it definitely eats into manpower budget which indirectly affects staff salaries.

Yet, Health Ministry doesn't really brag about money losing business and asking members of public to take pity on health care workers.

Defence Ministry is also a money losing business. Ammunition, defence weapons are also capital intensive equipment but yet, many army officers can afford to drive big cars and live in condominiums. So far, defence ministry has never publicly declared that it is money losing business and asks members of public to sympathise with them.

I would urge HDB to stop this self-pitying. If it truly wants to repent, it can consider cutting their staff salaries and redistribute the money back to taxpayers.

TRS Tan (Alias)

We have lost faith in the system.

That's how Mr Laurence Wong and Mr Paul Liew described their feelings about the way the police have handled the assault case which they were involved in.

The two men, together with Mr Wong's then-fiance, were at Suntec City one evening in April 2010 when they came to the aid of a cab driver, Mr Tan Boon Kin, 57, who was being harassed and assaulted by 3 Caucasian men - New Zealander Robert Stephen Dahlberg, 34; Australian Nathan Robert Miller, 35; Briton Robert James Springall.

 

Dahlberg

When the two men tried to stop the assailants from attacking Mr Tan, they were set upon by the Caucasians too. In the event, Mr Liew sustained a fractured nasal bone, a deep gash on the forehead and nose bleed. He had been slammed against the sharp edge of a pillar, had slumped to the floor and was repeatedly kicked on the head and face by the group of expats.

 

Mr Tay, who was the cab driver of a second taxi which Mr Wong had booked, also tried to help but was punched by the Caucasians. So was Mr Wong.

Miller has since been sentenced to 3 weeks' jail. Dahlberg and Springall have fled Singapore.

(Read an account of the assault by The New Paper, which first reported the incident in May 2011 below. Read also publichouse.sg’s report in October 2011 on the assault here.)

The search for justice following the incident has left Mr Liew and Mr Wong utterly despondent and disappointed with the authorities. Although it has been almost 2 years after that fateful night, the two men still remember vividly the details of the punches, kicks and racist vulgarities hurled at them by the group of Caucasians as they were viciously attacked.

The way the police handled the case has left them losing faith in the legal and judicial system, the men told publichouse.sg.

Following the assault and looking for justice, Mr Wong has gone out of his way to assist the authorities in its investigation - but these were met with delays and seeming disinterest by the police.

On the night of the incident itself, for example, after the police had arrived, Mr Wong had informed them that there were witnesses at the nearby taxi stand and the club, Balaclava. “The few people who were clapping and applauding when we were being beaten up were still at the taxi stand. So, I told the officer, ‘Those guys saw it. Those Caucasians saw it. Can you talk to them?’ The [officer said], ‘Okay. Relax, relax.’ He went to them and [the Caucasians] said, ‘No, we don’t know, we didn’t see anything. We came here and the ambulance was already here.’ I said, ‘That’s a lie.’”

The officer then told Mr Wong, “Sir, if they say no, there’s nothing I can do, ok? Relax! Relax! Stand there!” Mr Wong was left helpless when he heard this. “I’m the victim but I’m very clear on this, but he didn’t believe me.”

Doing police work for the police

A week after the altercation, Mr Wong returned to the scene of the crime to take pictures of where the assault had taken place. He did up a story board of the incident with the pictures and marked out the specifics spots of each attack. He also highlighted the location of the closed-circuit televisions around the area on the board. To help the police even further, Mr Wong printed out a map of the area and marked out the assailants’ escape route on it.

It was Mr Wong’s then-fiance who suspected that the assailants might have originally emerged from an event which we understand was titled, “White Collar Boxing”, that evening at the Suntec City Convention Centre. The police was informed of this.

As far as we understand, the investigating officer did call the event organiser on the phone and had also emailed them but did not manage to get the information on the assailants.

About 3 weeks after the assault, Mr Wong went to that establishment at Suntec City and identified and obtained the names of the assailants himself from pictures of the men shown to him by the event organizer.

Mr Wong had decided to do this because the police seem not to have had the information.

Mr Wong then handed the story board with the pictures, the details of the assault, and the names of the assailants over to the police.

The police praised him for the “good job” in doing these.

But that was not the only thing Mr Wong did to help the police in its work. He had also assisted the police in retrieving medical records for the case.

He told publichouse.sg:

“After they caught the 3 of them, about 3 to 4 months, I said, ‘What’s been going on?’ They said, ‘Oh, we’re still waiting for the medical report from SGH.’ I said, ‘Ok. What’s taking you so long?’ ‘Oh, we called them but they said they are busy.’ I said, ‘Hang on. Cantonment Police Station, SGH. 500 steps away [from each other]? You have to send emails, up and down.’ They said, ‘Ah, we told them urgent already… We sent them 3 times emails. Nothing. We told them it’s urgent but nothing ah. Nothing can be done.’ I said, ‘So, nothing can be done. Can’t you walk over and ask them for it? Do you know how important this medical report is for us to submit the case [to the courts]?’ They said, ‘If they don’t release, what can we do?’”

It was out of frustration that Mr Wong took matters into his own hands. He called SGH himself. “I made a call and said, ‘This person, this case, I want to know who is the doctor in charge. I am about to go to the Ministry of Health. I want all your names. I’m going to the ministry and I’m going to speak to the minister. You either tell me now or you don’t give me the report.’ In 15 minutes, they said, ‘Sir, we found your report. It has been with us for a while… We can get you the report now.’ In 2 hours, it was done. Early the next day, in the morning, it was delivered to the [investigating officer]. I called the IO and said, ‘Settled?’ He replied, ‘Wah, steady lah, brother.’”

 

Miller

Mr Wong was flabbergasted at the officer’s reply.

 

It took Mr Wong just one phone call to get the report.

“Why did Laurence have to do his due diligence?” Mr Liew asked. “He is supposed to be protected by the law! He basically had to do the investigation [himself]. Why does he have to do it?”

The police, he says, were also not forthcoming with updates when he asked for them. “We are working on it,” or that “the case is under investigation” were what Mr Wong was told each time he asked for updates. This went on for months. In fact, Mr Wong says he was told by a police officer that the police has no duty to inform victims of the status of a case.

He only came to know of how the case was proceeding when he reads news reports of them.

Not the police’s duty to update victims

“[They] claim that it is not [their] duty to inform the victims of what is going on,” said Mr Liew. He only came to know that Springall had fled Singapore when he was informed through the media. “I’m receiving information from the press!” Mr Liew said. “Why is the press faster than the authorities?” he asked.

“I called the DSP [on Friday] asking for answers. Like, so what’s happening now? I called the [Attorney General’s department], the AG department say, ‘Go back to your IO [investigative officer].’ IO don’t want to give me answers. I called DSP, DSP again said, ‘Go back to your IO but don’t worry, we’ll get your IO to get back to you.’ You’re not providing me answers.”

Mr Liew, who is a student in an Australian university but is currently back in Singapore, said he would be able to provide the most help now that he is physically here in the country. Yet, the police doesn’t seem interested in this. “You’re not giving me direction, effort, nothing at all. Zilch. Communication is meek at best,” he said, referring to contact between himself and the police.

“When I signed on with the [Australian] school in September,” Mr Liew says, “I called the investigating officer and said to him, ‘Look, I’m leaving in February. So if possible, can you please try and settle this as soon as possible?’”

It was November when he informed the officer of this.

“The officer said, ‘Ok, ok. No problem.’ I trusted that they would do their job.”

In January, when Mr Liew was preparing to leave for Australia for his studies, he had still not heard from the police. “What do I need to do?” he wondered. “Do I need to get a lawyer?” So he called the police again. “Oh, you’re leaving now?” the officer responded. “You’re leaving in 2 weeks? Wow. Okay. Looks like we got to get something done huh?”

“It was only then that he called me down,” Mr Liew went on, “took my statement, made me sit beside his cubicle, print out all the statements and everything and then he said, ‘Ya, we will submit these as court documents as part of your testimonial.’

“So I asked him, ‘What is the status of the case?’ ‘Oh, it’s with AG and then there’s some involvement of the Foreign Affairs.’ I’m suddenly wondering, you know, logically these are non-Singaporeans so yes, Foreign Affairs is involved. [But] how much is Foreign Affairs involved that the case must sit with them? They [should not] impede the justice process just because these people are foreigners.”

“And even after leaving [Singapore] and being in Australia, I am still chasing after them. I’m still asking them what’s going on?”

Losing faith

Things got moving again when court proceedings started in June 2011. In the event, the 3 Caucasians were granted bail. All in all, the case has dragged on for 22 months since the assault.

Mr Wong and Mr Liew are also upset about why it had taken so long for the authorities to act when the assailants had already been picked up one week after the incident, and they had admitted to the assault about 3 to 4 months after that.

“All these were in place, A to Z already. So what was the extra ingredient that was required for the expediting of efficient justice?” Mr Liew asked. “It’s not rocket science. You have the assailants, you have the reports, you have the persons admitting to it.”

“Honestly, if you asked me, this case has now come to a dead end… I have somewhat lost belief in the system but I’m trying to find hope in it. I don’t blame the government. It is not my place to blame but it is very sad [and] I’ll say it anyway: if the person is not dead, nothing swift will be done.”

Mr Wong expressed the same sentiments as Mr Liew.

“Lets just say that I have totally given up,” he says. “Totally given up on our system. It is common sense, you know? If somebody beats up somebody, then you should arrest him and trial him before you let him go.

“What really makes me sad is not how incompetent our police or legal system is. It’s that people with authority and power to protect are not protecting us. They are not protecting us efficiently enough. I feel really sad for fellow Singaporeans…Those with the power that is invested in them to protect us are not doing their job well enough, in my perspective, because what will fellow Singaporeans do, what will your mother do, what will your brother do, your friends, when you see things like this happening? It has instilled fear in every Singaporean.”

“We’re being treated so unfairly now just because we want to save a fellow Singaporean who [is also] somebody’s father. Until now, I still do not know how to digest [this whole thing].”

Mr Liew [picture, right] plans to write to the Home Affairs and Law ministries about the matter.

Asked if he had contemplated a civil suit against the assailants, Mr Liew said, “Yes, I have. In fact, the reason why I dared not start a civil suit was because of the sluggish response by our investigation officers… I am not a rich person… I could [also] be [accused] of exploiting the system trying to earn money out of this [case].”

In the midst of deep frustration and disappointment with the system, however, Mr Liew is glad for one thing.

“I could have died that night. But I survived, fortunately.”

-----------------------

NOTE.

It is unclear if the Singapore authorities have made any requests with Interpol to bring back Dahlberg and Springall to stand trial in Singapore. It is also unclear what the authorities are planning or have planned to do, going forward, about the 2 remaining cases.

Mr Wong and Mr Liew have not been kept apprised or informed of any further steps the police intend to take, if any.

A wall of silence seems to have been erected by the police around the case.

In the meantime, a report in the New Zealand Herald on 12 February 2012 had this to say:

Dahlberg's father Bill said in December his son had returned to New Zealand and would not go back to Singapore, where he had lived for five years.

On Friday, he told the Herald on Sunday his son was no longer in New Zealand but refused to comment further.

Dahlberg is accused of punching one man and pushing another, causing him to break his nose and cut his head when his face hit a pillar. One of his co-accused, Australian Nathan Miller, was sentenced on Monday to three weeks' jail after he admitted a charge of causing hurt.

Neither Singapore nor New Zealand police would comment on the hunt for Dahlberg.

Singapore has an extradition agreement with Commonwealth countries, including New Zealand, but Singapore Attorney-General Chambers' spokeswoman Jin Haw Li would not comment when asked if the office had made any requests for extradition.

New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade spokesman Adham Crichton said the ministry did not comment on specific details related to extradition processes while an international criminal investigation may be ongoing.

"There was no request for consular assistance in relation to this case when it first came up so the ministry has not been involved."

--------------------

Report in The New Paper on 13 May 2011:

3 men bashed for trying to help cabby

Taxi driver being attacked near Suntec City taxi stand was clutching chest and pleading for passers-by to help. -TNP

Fri, May 13, 2011

By Elysa Chen

FLEEING from his assailants, the cabby pleaded with two passers-by to help.

When Mr Wong Xiong, 38, and Mr Paul Louis Liew, 26, did so, they and another taxi driver ended up being attacked.

They allege that their assailants were three Caucasian men while a fourth acted as alookout.

The incident happened a year ago outside the Suntec City Convention Centre.

Mr Wong and Mr Liew told The New Paper (TNP) that they were wondering why police investigations into the incident were taking so long.

In response to queries from TNP, a police spokesman said investigations are still ongoing.

The police received a call at 12.20am on April 11 last year requesting for assistance at the taxi stand at Suntec City Tower 5.

"Upon police arrival, it was established that a group of Caucasian men had a scuffle with a few members of the public," the spokesman said.

Mr Wong and Mr Liew said their alleged assailants had fled by then.

Although they had no idea who the men were, they were not about to let them get away.

After the incident, Mr Wong's girlfriend figured that the alleged attackers, who were wearing suits, could have attended an event at the Suntec City Convention Centre.

She was right. There had been a function there earlier.

Two weeks later, Mr Wong said he managed to obtain some pictures of the function.

Identified men

As he had taken a photograph of one of the attackers with his mobile phone during the scuffle, he identified him from one of the pictures. He also recognised two other men from the same picture.

Mr Wong, a businessman, had also returned to the scene and taken pictures a week after the incident.

He marked out on the photos where the assault had taken place and where closed circuit television cameras were situated.

He printed a map of the area and indicated the assailants' escape route on it.

He said he passed the information he collected to the police.

"I wanted to give as accurate information as possible to them to speed up their investigations," he explained.

He said that while he understood that the investigations would take time, he was still frustrated by the lack of progress.

Though a year has passed, the details of the attack are still fresh in the minds of MrWong and Mr Liew.

Mr Wong recalled that at 11pm that night, the two of them and Mr Wong's girlfriend went to Balaclava, a pub at Suntec City, which has since relocated to Ion Orchard.

Around midnight, as they were leaving the pub, they heard a commotion outside.

Mr Wong said they saw four Caucasian men heckling a Comfort taxi driver, who looked to be in his 50s. One man then punched the cabby.

As they walked towards a waiting taxi that they had booked, they noticed about 10 people at the taxi stand watching the antics of the men with amusement. No one went to help the cabby.

Mr Wong said he had noticed the Caucasians behaving in a rowdy manner at Balaclava earlier.

Mr Tan, who was the cabby being heckled, ran up to Mr Wong, grabbed his arm, and pleaded in Mandarin: "Young man, save me!"

Mr Wong said: "I continued walking as I didn't want to get involved. They were making a fool of themselves."

High blood pressure

But as he got into the other cab, Mr Tan said: "I have high blood pressure."

Mr Wong recalled: "When I heard that and saw him clutching his chest, I just couldn't walk away."

So he got out and walked to Mr Tan's taxi and took a picture of the man inside with his mobile phone.

"He reeked of alcohol and looked like he was about to drive off. I said, 'Please leave this cab. You are committing a crime'," said MrWong.

Another man then punched Mr Wong.

When Mr Liew and their Comfort cabby, known only as Ah Heng, tried to help, they were also assaulted.

Mr Wong pursued the men as they ran towards the Pan Pacific Hotel. Along the way, he asked a motorcyclist for help.

When the men got into a taxi, the motorcyclist blocked the taxi's path. But Mr Wong, worried for his safety, told him to step aside. The taxi then drove off.

Mr Liew, who had a 9-cm gash on his head, and Ah Heng were taken to the Singapore General Hospital. Mr Liew said: "A few days later, Mr Tan called to thank me. He was crying."

Ms Tammy Tan, group communications officer for ComfortDelGro, said the two cabbies have made police reports and are assisting the police in their investigations.

"We are in contact with the cabbies and have asked them to submit their medical claims to us," she said, adding that they declined to be interviewed by TNP.

Though Mr Wong and Mr Liew have no regrets for going to Mr Tan's aid, they were traumatised by the incident.

Mr Wong said: "Paul still shivers whenever he's near that taxi stand. I just want justice to be served."

When TNP contacted one of the men who was allegedly involved in the incident, he denied that he had assaulted anyone. He said he had merely witnessed the incident, but declined to give details.

-------------

Publichouse.sg will have an exclusive piece on Paul Liew's struggles since the assault.

Stay tuned.

Andrew Loh

Andrew's passion are social and political issues. His writings have been reproduced in other publications, including the Australian Housing Journal in 2010. Andrew also writes weekly for Yahoo Singapore which nominated him as one of Singapore's most influential media persons in 2011 and cited him for having "pioneered a new form of journalism in Singapore - the kind that dared to speak truth to power."

*Article first appeared on http://publichouse.sg/categories/topstory/item/471-losing-faith-because-...

When news of the SIA’s “profitable” sale of Virgin Atlantic stock was announced, I found myself greatly dismayed by how one could “legitimately” buy stock at nearly four times the price one sold at and still have the gall to declare a profit based on “Generally Accepted Accounting Practices” (GAAP)1.

I would propose that a consensus be built for how we would like to have the returns for our SWFs accounted. That is to say, we should create a set of principles that spell out specific practices for the major accounting steps. This will increase the consistency of accounts and improve the accuracy of computed returns.

For instance…

(1) What valuation should we assign to a newly transferred state asset? We would like a set formula in terms to total funding inflows, withdrawals by the government, operating profit, and other relevant metrics. It may be necessary to distinguish between various cases, but these will have to be put down in that set of

(2) What valuation should we assign a newly purchased stake in a private company? How much goodwill is acceptable (if any)? If there is “goodwill”, should it be classified as a depreciating asset for the purpose of accounting?

Certainly there will be quite a number of such principles to nail down, and we need a knowledgeable group of academics and professionals in the field of accounting (and some from finance and general management) to iron these out. I emphasize that this has to be scoped to cover just the major accounting transactions relevant to computing returns for SWFs.

I encourage people to share this, and write to your favorite political party and tell them you support this. We need to know if our reserves are being properly managed, and a coherent set of accounts that do not contain accounting sleighs of hand that regular common sense would reject in spite of their being (somehow) within GAAP.

Whether you favour the PAP, DPP, NSP, PKMS, RP, SDP, SJP, SPP, or WP, inform your favorite politician and tell them you support the creation of such a set of guidelines and want it applied as soon as possible to the accounts of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and Temasek Holdings (TH).

—
1. Here’s an explanation why buying at SGD 1.65 billion and selling at about SGD 440 million can be classified as profitable. It is neither surprising nor pleasing, and certainly is not within the spirit of GAAP, which was conceived to make accountants’ work less onerous. There is even more to the story, and Christopher Balding, an “investigative academic”, seems to have made uncovering such and related dealings in Singapore’s Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) a personal cause. Many are already aware of these issues, but not many enough.

Jeremy Chen

* Jeremy is currently a PhD student at the Department of Decision Sciences at NUS Business School. Jeremy believes in the possibility of a beautiful synthesis of “social justice” and “the free market”. He also hopes for less politicking and more policy discussion in the political arena. He blogs at http://jeremy-chen.org.

It is quite surprising that Minister Khaw had not realised that all is not right with the EC scheme. (“Khaw hints at changes in EC scheme”, CNA 26 Apr)

The Association of Muslim Professional's (AMP) has had its fair share of rocky relations with the govt. Recently, it tried to form a Community Forum (ComFor) to discuss issues pertaining to the Malay-Muslim Community. That idea was shot down. By none other than PM. 



From the Straits Times Online dated 30 Aug 2012. You need to read between the lines of the report to understand the political implications. 

AMP drops proposal for new community forum

Plan had raised fears among some that it may rival existing platforms

The AMP struck a compromise in the wider interest of the community, said the chairman of the convention steering committee, Mr Nizam Ismail. -- PHOTO: AMP

That's a diplomatic way of saying, "We had to give the idea up because the PM thinks our objective is detrimental to PAP's."

AFTER concerns arose over a proposal to start a new forum for the Malay- Muslim community, the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP) has decided to drop the idea.

The group had in June talked about a Community Forum (ComFor) to discuss issues of concern to the community.

But this raised fears in some quarters that it could rival existing platforms with similar aims and cause divisions.

So the AMP will instead expand its own annual forum, called Community in Review, to take in some of ComFor's objectives, it said yesterday.

The move was quickly cheered by community leaders, with one calling it "a show of solidarity within the Malay-Muslim community".

The idea for ComFor was first mooted at an AMP convention in June.

One of its aims was to re-position Malay-Muslim organisations into groups that "engage a national, inter-ethnic, issue-oriented agenda".

But on hearing of it, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong urged AMP and other groups to "have a care if you are venturing into civil society issues which are not primarily to do with the Malay-Muslim community".

Who the *#@$! does the PM think he is, getting involved in the nitty-gritty ops and admin of NGOs? So free and overpaid that he must find some work to do, izzit?

He cautioned that AMP should not lose focus of its primary task to tackle social and economic issues in the Malay-Muslim community and improve the community's well-being.

Micro management from the PM. You can't get a higher VIP who's more involved in your affairs. AMP should be thankful for this privilege. 

AMP leaders later clarified that ComFor was meant to address issues relevant to the community.

There's nothing to clarify. PM saw where AMP was heading towards and he didn't like it. AMP should just admit that they have once again stepped on PAPpy's toes trying to encroach into PAPpy's territory. 

Yesterday, the association said it came to its decision after holding "rigorous discussions" with community and political leaders.

Why is there a need to discuss with political leaders? You think those Malay-Muslim MPs would support your renegade plan to compete with PAP's platform? Right after their boss said he didn't like it too?





PAPpy doesn't like competition -



AMP was trying to be too smart. But not smart enough. It wants to set up a platform because it thinks that it could set the direction for the Muslim community in Singapore. So it set up ComFor. But this is in direct competition to the existing PAP backed Community Leaders Forum (CLF). Here is CLF's vision and objective. 

Vision

To bring about confident, creative and self-reliant individuals and families, anchored in Islamic faith and values, for a Community of Excellence.

Objectives

The inaugural Community Leaders’ Forum (CLF) on 11 October 2003 arose from a series of dialogues and focus group discussions,amongst Malay Members of Parliament, community partners and activists, on strategies to enable the community to realise its shared vision for excellence. The event marked the beginning of a concerted, collective and conscientious pursuit by partners in the Malay/Muslim Voluntary sector (MMVS) to:

Work together to address community issues

Garner community engagement and support through dialogue and knowledge exchange

Build its capacity to help the community in effective and relevant ways

Saw that? CLF involves Malay Members of Parliament. AMP's ComFor if allowed to operate is therefore an affront to the PAP because:

1. It shows that many PAP's Malay MPs are sleeping (hey, as if we don't know that already) and there are sections of the Malay community who want to see more action.

2. It is a direct competition to PAP's authority because it snubs the Malay MPs (and other PAP linked groups) within the CLF.

3. It also implies that the PAP-puppet CLF, since Oct 2003, has not been working for the last nine years and hence, an alternative platform, ComFor, has to be set up.



So come what may, AMP can't have its ComFor competing PAP's CLF. Period. This ain't the first time AMP has had a brush with PAP in its long history that has also been troubled with its own internal squabbling. 





Rest of the article from ST below.

There were mixed reactions to the idea, it reported.

Some were in favour of an independent platform to add diversity to existing ones like the Community Leaders' Forum (CLF), of which AMP is a member.

The CLF brought together 132 partners as of last year, including Malay-Muslim organisations and community clubs. Self-help group Mendaki is the secretariat.

But others worried that "ComFor might be perceived as a platform to rival CLF and could potentially divide the community", said AMP.

So the association struck a compromise in the wider interest of the community, said the chairman of the convention steering committee, Mr Nizam Ismail, 45.

AMP's 12-year-old Community in Review forum will now take on some of ComFor's aims.

These include being an independent platform that takes a bottom-up approach to discussing community issues and tracking the progress of proposals put up at the convention.

"What guided us was the fact that we believe there is good for the community in pursuing these objectives," said Mr Nizam. "We just hope that by doing it in a different, current platform, it will remove some of the misperceptions."

Activities being considered include research and surveys "to feel the pulse of the community on various issues", setting up a debt advisory centre, programmes to deepen knowledge of Islam and a research network on education.

Malay MPs and community leaders yesterday welcomed AMP's move and encouraged it to continue its good work under the CLF umbrella.

Mendaki chief executive officer Moliah Hashim, who called it "a show of solidarity", praised AMP for listening to feedback from the ground.

ComFor's intent is not likely to be lost, she added, as AMP could continue to bring issues to the table through its existing platform.

Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports Halimah Yacob hoped that AMP would make more use of the CLF to raise issues.

MP Zainal Sapari called it a "wise decision" for AMP to work within existing frameworks, "so as not to send any mixed signals to the community".

Said MP Zaqy Mohamad: "It's not about the platform but about getting people to the ground to do the hard work, whether it's mentoring students or working with families. That's really the crux."

Note Zaqy's words at the end of the report. Well, Zaq, if you truly believe what you say, why didn't you support ComFor? After all you said that the platform doesn't matter. 



Disclaimer - I am neither pro or anti ComFor, whatever that is. I only came to know that such an idea existed when I read the news. My article is to highlight that PAPpy tries to control anything and everything it sees as a threat to its existence. The opinions and side commentary I gave are mine and mine only, and not supposed to represent any party or group, affiliated or not affiliated to AMP or PAP.

Barrie, Where the Bears Roam Free

*Article first appeared on http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.se

How many of you have spent hours of your childhood playing in these sand-based playgrounds with local-styled designs? Many of them, built in the late seventies, are the works of Khor Ean Ghee (born 1935), the former in-house designer of the Housing and Development Board (HDB).

The memories of these playgrounds are precious to a whole generation of Singaporeans born between the seventies and eighties. Today, most of them were demolished, with only a few of them forgotten in the corners of the old estates. It is a matter of time before they vanish and be replaced by the new plastic playgrounds with rubber mats.

Deemed safer and more hygienic for the children, the new playgrounds have been installed all over the island since 1993. But their designs, which are almost identical to one another, seem to be lacking of some local elements.

Dragon Playgrounds

Arguably the most iconic locally designed playground, there are currently only four dragon playgrounds left in Singapore. Two can be found in Toa Payoh, one in Ang Mo Kio and a small one is located at Circuit Road.

The majestic dragon playground along Toa Payoh Lorong 6 still retains its originality with its sand box, while the other two dragons have been refurbished with rubber mats. With ladders, slides and a long metal body, it is ideal for the training of kids’ agility and their adventurous spirit. Not forgetting it is also a perfect place to play catching or police and thief.

Most of the dragon playgrounds were built between 1979 and the early eighties, and last slightly more than a decade before phasing out.

Pelican, Tortoise and Rabbit Playground

This is another iconic representative of local playgrounds. The pelican, tortoise and rabbit playground were once commonly found in many neighbourhoods. Today, only one is left standing at Dover Road, awaiting for demolition this year.

The pelican, covered with blue or red mosaic tiles, was like a mini fortress for kids, allowing them to climb through the hole to the top, or they could simple lie inside its “beak”. This playground used to be accompanied by a set of swings and a merry-go-round.

Vintage Animals Playground

Without any movable parts, this vintage playground is simply made up of stone structures in the shapes of duck (green), elephant (green) and horse (blue) where kids can ride on them. Likely to be built in the early seventies, its simple design reflects the innocence of that era. Located at Toa Payoh Lorong 8, it has brought joy to countless children of yesteryears.

Until the mid-nineties, Bukit Merah still retained a set of these colourful vintage animals.

Dove Playgrounds

Another design by Khor Ean Ghee in 1979, this dove playground is still around at the sleepy estate of Datoka Crescent. The concrete dove is linked by a metal bridge to a pyramidal structure fitted with rubber tyres as swings underneath.

The other remaining Dove Playground in Singapore, now refurbished with rubber mats, is situated between Block 219 and 230 at Bukit Batok. There is no bridge linked between the dove and the pyramidal structure.

Clementi used to have the dove playground too, but it was demolished many years ago.

Elephant Playground

At one end of the Pasir Ris Park, an elephant-themed sand-based playground is situated within the compound of the Home Team (NS) Pasir Ris Chalets. Also being built at the same period as the dragon, pelican and dove playgrounds, it still looks relatively new, probably due to its isolated location where few children, other than the chalet tenants, will visit.

With no duplicated design elsewhere in Singapore, the elephant playground with its trunk acting as slides is an unique piece of work on its own.

Sparrow Playground

A small sparrow-shaped playground sits quietly at Clementi central, between West Coast Town Council and Block 444. A large part of Clementi central has gone through a major facelift in recent years, except for this area. Most of the tenants and residents here have already moved out, and the demolition is expected to be completed by mid-2012.

Watermelon Playgrounds

Currently there are two watermelon playgrounds in Singapore; the one at Pipit Road is sand-based (near the baby dragon playground mentioned above) whereas the other at Tampines Central Park has been refurbished with rubber mats.

Creatively shaped like a slice of watermelon, the playground structures are decorated with red, white (or yellow) and green mosaic tiles to resemble the flesh and skin of a watermelon. There are also holes on the walls to represent the melon seeds.

Mangosteen Playground

The mangosteen playground is just 20m away from the watermelon playground at Tampines Central Park. It consists of two giant purple mangosteen-shaped domes linked together by a thick horizontal bar. The swings attached to the bar were removed years ago.

Pineapple Playground

The pineapple playground is one of the three fruity-themed playgrounds at Tampines Central Park, but it is also the only one that has been torn down recently in 2009/10.

Wonder why there are no playgrounds in the shape of durians, the unofficial national fruit of Singapore?

Clock Playground

Located at Bishan bus interchange, the clock playground looks like a page out of a fairy tale, with colourful appearance and bold curvatures. It is likely to be built in the early eighties together with the bus interchange when Bishan was being developed into a new town in 1982.

Another similar clock playground once stood in Pasir Ris. Somehow the numberings of the clocks were missing.

Sampan Playground

Sampans used to be a common sight at the Singapore River in the old times. The idea was being incorporated into the design of this unique playground near Pasir Ris’ Elias Mall. “Eyes” and tyres are also added, making it looks just like a real sampan.

Rickshaw Playground

Another brilliant design modelled after a significant local transport of the past, this rickshaw playground, however, was no longer around found in Singapore. In the nineties, there was one with two huge red wheels outside Yishun Town Council at Block 845.

Dinosaurs Playgrounds

Certainly an innovative yet weird design for a playground in Singapore, the dinosaur playground at Kim Keat Avenue is built in 2000. The structures are shaped after two tyrannosaurus and a stegosaurus. Daring kids can attempt to climb up the back of the mother tyrannosaurus.

At Fu Shan Garden of Woodlands Street 81, there is also an old dinosaurs-themed playground. The main characters here are two ouranosaurus and the long-necked brontosaurus. Children can slide down in between these prehistoric creatures made of stones.

Crocodile and Kangaroo Playground

This was one fierce looking crocodile at the SunPlaza Park along Tampines Ave 7. Built in 1998, it was torn down recently and replaced by a new plastic playground. There used to be a kangaroo beside the crocodile too!

Teapot and Mushroom Playground

The teapot and mushroom playground was an award-winning design built at Woodlands Vista Park in 2001. It was done by the same design company that also created the Kim Keat dinosaur playground and the crocodile playground at Tampines. However, the teapot structure was replaced by a new plastic playground while the two mushroom seats are retained.

Adventure Playground

One of the most popular playgrounds among boys in the early nineties, the design of this playground is mainly made up of horizontal and diagonal metal bars, completed with two slides, swings and see-saws.

There is only one such playground left in Singapore today, standing inside the restricted compound of a HUDC (Housing and Urban Development Company) private estate called Lakeview Estate at Upper Thomson Road. (Editor Note: The photos are kindly provided by a reader named George Wong who has fond memories of this type of playground)

One of the favourite games that kids used to play in this playground was perhaps “catching”, or “police and thieves”, where the game was made difficult by having a rule that no one could come in contact with the sand, or he would be penalised.

As the height of the highest level was more than 3m, it could be quite dangerous for any kids to climb to the top. There were cases of children badly injured after falling off the bars, thus it is no wonder that this design was also being phased out like other local playgrounds.

In the nineties, there was a playground of the same design located near Yishun Avenue 6, and another situated at Block 144 Silat Road.

Train Playground

The interesting tilting train at the adventure playground is the product of an upgrade of the Tiong Bahru Park in 2000. Tiong Bahru Park was set up in 1967 to serve the residents of Tiong Bahru, Hendersen, Bukit Ho Swee and Bukit Merah.

Swings, See-Saws and Merry-go-rounds

Swings, see-saws and merry-go-rounds used to be integrated parts of local playgrounds. Due to safety concerns, they were slowly phased out, especially the large metal merry-go-rounds. Swings are still commonly seen but the wooden see-saws are a rarity nowadays. Below is a standalone set of swings at the junction of Jalan Kayu and Yio Chu Kang Road.

How many of you were ever bullied by some plump heavy kids who would sit on one end of the see-saw, leaving you suspended in the air at the other end? The old see-saws used to be made of long wooden planks, unlike the short ones found at the watermelon playground at Pipit Road.

Only three merry-go-rounds are left in Singapore. There is a yellow one at Tiong Bahru’s train playground, a large original type at the sleepy estate beside Begonia Road and the one at the Upper Seletar Reservoir has a non-traditional design.

Many of us will not forget the giddy sensation on a merry-go-round, where the naughty ones would frighten the others by pushing the merry-go-round at very high speed. For the kids, it was such an exciting yet dangerous experience.

Playgrounds Then And Now

The history of local modern playground goes back to more than 60 years back. It is interesting to see how the designs of our local playgrounds have changed over the decades.

A large part of the population still lived in kampong during the fifties and sixties so playgrounds were usually installed in the downtown. The playground at Hong Lim Park had monkey bars, a slide and a merry-go-round.

Swings and see-saws were the main attractions at this former playground located at Aliwal Street, near the former Chong Cheng/Chong Pun Primary Schools and the old Kampong Glam Community Centre.

A popular playground for many kids and students in the sixties, there were also public basketball and badminton courts nearby. The playground was prone to flooding during heavy storms, but that did not stop the playful children who would play with paper or wooden boats in the pools of water. Kite-flying was one of the favourtite pastimes for the teens in a hot sunny day.

The Aliwal Street Playground had since been torn down ages ago and replaced by an open-air carpark today.

When new towns were developed, playgrounds became essential facilities. This one was part of the estate when Toa Payoh was built in 1968.

Stunts of yesteryears would probably be deemed as too dangerous for kids today. In the past, bold boys and girls had no problem climbing up and sitting on bars 2m tall.

The local flavoured designs by Khor Ean Ghee from the seventies to eighties would probably go down as the representatives of playgrounds in the history of Singapore.

Moving into the nineties, beside the complete makeover in the designs of playgrounds, the materials used also switched from concrete to mainly plastic.

As the society progresses, what will the next generation of playgrounds look like? When they grow up, will our children have fond memories of their childhoods spent at the playgrounds? Only time will tell…

Last but not least, this is a modern playground in the abandoned estate of Neo Tiew.

Below is a beautiful clip contributed by reader Mervin Boey, a lover of nostalgic local playgrounds:

Incompetence still plagues the ruling PAP government despite their promises to make things better in their worst electoral performance in 2011.

Housing prices still going up
The PAP’s 2011 election promise made to ensure affordable public housing to Singaporeans has only worsen. Despite a series of property cooling measures introduced by the new Minister of National Development Khaw Boon Wan, HDB prices have continued its 11th year trend of increasing prices. According to the latest data published by the HDB, the sole indicator to track HDB prices, the Resale Price Index, increased 1.2% in the 4th quarter of 2012. There have been a number of “expectation management” political sales talk by the PAP though, with one by the Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam claiming a Singaporean with a $1000 paycheck could afford a HDB flat [Source]. That of course was responded with angry backlash from the public that several Ministers and PAP MPs had to step in to back Tharman’s claim.

Transport
The latest “un-PAP” measure(the word “free” is not in the PAP’s dictionary) to manage overcrowding is to provide free train rides before the morning peak hour. Although the move was welcomed by many, the overcrowding situation in the public transport is so bad that giving incentives to passengers could not even ease the overcrowding issue. Frustrations and negative sentiments are largely stemmed from the worsening state of public transport. Private transport has also became a non-option with COE prices breaking record and with the latest car population control policies, the COE became unbalanced(small car buyers pay more COE taxes than large cars buyers).

Propaganda, censorship and media control
Leslie Chew of Demon-cratic Singapore was arrested. Richard of Temasek Review was sent 2 letters of demands by the Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his brother. Former Temasek Review editor Joseph Ong was investigated for electoral-related charges. Singapore’s mainstream media’s independence ranking dropped further from 139th to 149th, clearly proving that the PAP’s intolerance for dissent has only delved deeper.

Breaking down of infrastructure
Flash floods and train breakdowns continue to persist and increased in frequency as compared to the past. Recently, there have also been cases of unprecedented phenomenons like sink holes appearing in Singapore roads. Hospitals have also seen a “bed crunch” and the average waiting time in polyclinics are getting longer.

Population control
Overcrowding tops Singaporeans’ list of concerns today. It is apparent the existing set up can not support the present 5.31 million population, and when the Population White Paper by the PAP claimed a 6.9 million population was the target, Singaporeans responded with a massive outcry. A protest was conducted in April and more than 5000 Singaporeans turned up for the event – very untypical of the usually self-subduing behavior of Singaporeans. The population continues to increase today at a “slower rate”, and the eventual social result is a rising anti-foreigner sentiment brewing among Singaporeans. Coupled with a government-controlled workers union, the influx of foreign labor have benefited local businesses who conveniently take full advantage by exploiting foreign labor, depressing manpower costs(salaries) and giving lesser HR benefits to workers.

CPF
More elderly are selling their HDB flats for a retirement, or simply going to the streets touting tissue papers for a living. The CPF annuity was introduced to patch the retirement loophole, however, the calculations were flawed with payouts not inflation-hedged and some people with very low CPF saving getting as low as $170 a month for retirement.

Healthcare
Singapore’s high cost of medical bills is largely resulted from PAP’s anti-welfare “you-die-your-business” stance. The percentage of the GDP spent on healthcare in Singapore, is one of the lowest in the world at 4% of the GDP, or a quarter that of the United States. This has prompted former Nominated Member of Parliament Dr Kalwaljit Soin blasting the PAP government for making Singaporeans pay too high for “out-of-pocket expenses” and denouncing the “much vaunted 3M” system(Medisave, Medishield and Medifund) for only representing 10% of the patients’ total healthcare expenditures. She also criticized the PAP for misplacing their priorities in their annual Budget, especially on the record Defense Budget:

 ”We can afford to spend more on defence, other things, but you have to look at health. Otherwise, what are you defending? You are defending sickly people,”

Final Grading: F9
None of Singaporeans’ basic necessities have been met, let alone talk about expectations. What the PAP has done so far is to manage public perceptions through the use of propaganda, lawsuits and fake feedback sessions called the “Singapore Conversation”.They deserve a F9 for politiking and not solving problems. It remains unknown if 60% of the Singaporeans will continue to be fooled by the PAP with old problems mounting and new problems surfacing.

WikiTemasek
 

Hi Minister Khaw, I understand that you claim that HDB is losing millions every year and MOF has to subsidize HDB because of these losses in MILLIONS?

Now can please elaborate on your statements by giving us the actual building cost and related cost for building a HDB flat, because it is hard to believe what you are saying when we don’t see the actual breakdown cost, don’t you think so?

It would be good to know every detail of this breakdown so intelligent Singaporeans can look in detail and understand what you are talking about.

This is like the nagging question on how Temasek or GIC pays for its losses or how are these subsidized, till today we don’t have transparency on this and we also wonder why we don’t get the profits from the return of investments since it was our CPF monies that used as seed money for these investments in the first place.

If MOF uses our money be it CPF or reserves for HDB, what will happen now, will we not have enough money to pay back, or do we have to accept the fact that the loan to HDB cannot be repaid back to our state coffers ?

The issue here is there is a lack of transparency, just like the case PAP Govt saying we need “foreign talent” but does not explicitly elaborate what is a foreign talent, and in the end our wages at most levels get depressed or we are made jobless!

Best part is they keep repeating that Singaporeans don’t want to work or are choosy, but why don’t the PAP govt publish the list of jobs and related salaries before making such statements, to qualify if this is true?

It’s like the China bus drivers who claim they were beaten, why don’t the SPF or MOM request to have recorded CCTV during questions or interviews, so that this can be used in court to counter what they are saying, ISA victims say they were tortured, don’t you think it’s important to have CCTV recorded footage to prevent such allegations?

What about the case of Nizam who had to resign from AMP, because PAP Govt claims his partisan, then how about all those who are registered PAP members and have similar working relationships in NGO?

What about Minister Teo, when asked in parliament by another member of parliament for the breakdown of foreigner statics, and his answer was like “not in our interest”.

The lack of transparency and information is what creates a lot of discussion on the internet and these questions need to be answered because the hold-back is actually holding back the progress of our nation.

Interestingly Nizam was speaking in his own capacity as a Singaporean and has to step down from AMP because his being branded “partisan”,  while LKY made the” HARD TRUTHS” undesired race comments in his own capacity, but our talented cartoonist Leslie Chew is being investigated for sedition?

The May 1st “Say no to 6.9 Million” has been labeled “xenophobic” but the irony is many Singaporeans are asking very practical questions that the PAP Govt is not able to answer except giving a “merry go around” answers or saying “what do you think?”

My brothers and sisters, answer the call of duty for your country, for your future generations, don’t expect others to stand up for you, please support the voices that speak for us, if not one day when they are gone, there will be no one else to speak for you, in your time of need!

Grow some balls and see you there!

Cheers,

Troy

Since Boon Wan’s revelation that HDB was losing money for every flat it sold and the amount was a scandalous billion dollar annually, he has been questioned and ridiculed by many bloggers who simply could not believe in what he said. Some of the attacks were quite personal and very unpleasant. What is more worrisome are the losses incurred by HDB now and later on.

According to Boon Wan, the annual losses over the last few years were about a billion, ie every year but no sure how many years he was referring to, no matter how many flats were built. The building programme was ramped up only last year after he came into office. The number of flats built was very small during the watch of his predecessor that led to the current housing problem and high property prices. So, how much is HDB losing for every flat that it sold? And how much will HDB be losing if the population increases to 6.9m? At 6.9, HDB will need to build another 400,000 units to house the increase of 1.6m people at 4 person per flat.

Let me hazard a guess. Taking a best case scenario to do a rough calculation, the building of 50,000 units under Boon Wan, and using his annual $1b loss, HDB should incur a loss of $20,000 for every unit sold. Tiok boh? If $1b is the loss when only 10,000 units were sold, then the loss per unit should be $100,000.

To build another 400,000 units, the loss could be in the region of $80b to $400b depending on which number one is using. This is a serious amount to lose and a big sum to save if the population is not increased and there is no need to build the 400,000 units of flats. Would it be prudent and make more economic sense not to increase the population to incur more losses? But this is not all. Boon Wan is trying to bring down the prices of HDB flats from an average of 5.5 years of the buyers annual income to 4 years. This would definitely add to the losses that HDB would have to incur. I am terribly worried as to where the Govt is going to find the money to subsidise these losses. Yes, this is a lot of money and it must come from somewhere and someone would have to pay for it.

Maybe Boon Wan has already worked out the sums and the public need not have to worry. The flats will be cheaper and the losses would be taken care of, somehow.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean

* Article first appeared on http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/

A distressed TRS Reader contacted us asking for help to publicise his case about how the Internal Security Department is trying to kill him. Read his story below:

“I have credible information that can prove the corruption within the Singapore Government.

In an effort to silence me the ISD has put me in jail for a crime I did not commit and then tainted my food, causing me 5 heart attacks. They are now still trying to kill me. I would like to make my case public so that the facts of my claims can be verified.

The matter is both very serious and inexplicably complicated (to be expected whenever the invisible hand of the ISD is at work).

I was a former teacher at the International School of Singapore (10 years) and United World College (2 years) from 1999 to 2001. Previously I was a professional musician and had toured Europe for 7 years. I was the band leader of "The Adaptors" and performed with Anita Sarawak and Rahimah Rahim at the Kasbah Nightclub in the Mandarin Hotel.

My problems started to occur when I founded the New York Acting School which was supposed to be located at 5C Cresent Rd Singapore. I had full accreditation from MOE for the school and was in the process of securing drama teachers for the school from New York.

A misunderstanding arose from a statement made by Singaporean consulate staff member (Ms Stacy Foo) to one of the prospective teachers. Following the incident, I went down to the consulate and vented my frustration at the lack of sensitivity of Ms Foo. This incident was captured by CCTV and from then I was marked by the ISD.

When I went to the Economic Development Board office to open a file on my company ‘The New York Acting School’, I was told that the premise I had rented for the school was now ‘illegal’ and the school was not allowed to operate. It didn’t make sense, especially when there was a kindergarten next door and several other businesses in the area.

They also tried to block me by refusing entry to the 5 teachers I had employed from New York. But after that matter was publicized, the head of Immigration, Ms Penny, allowed the grant of 5 employment passes to the teachers.

I fought the case tooth and nail and persevered through their resistance. I insisted on a meeting with the perm sec. They finally granted me the meeting but he could only advise that I should proceed with legal action against the landlords for deceiving me. I wrote a lengthy letter to then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong which I am sure did not impress them as I was pointing out their hypocritical reasons for not allowing me to use 5C Crescent Rd.

But the stubbornness against them came with a price and now they are after my life to finally silence me.

At the time, I was going through a divorce with my ex wife and the ISD used the lawyer representing my wife to cause me endless problems. I had taken the case to the Supreme Court (representing myself) and secured full custody and care of both my sons but it did not end there. After a long series of lawsuits and frustration, I lost my cool and I slapped my ex-wife’s lawyer, Ms Halijah, in Chambers on Feb 1st 2002 when she resorted to bullying tactics.

At that time, I did not know that the ISD was initiating my frustration using Ms Halijah. They charged me with grievous hurt although it was only a slap. Ms Halijah had immediately gone to a private doctor who confirmed that she was only bruised and did not have a fracture.

However the government wanted to put me away for a long time. Ms Halijah produced an MRI scan confirming that she had a fracture of the lamina paprycea. However this was a medical impossibility as the fracture was captured on MRI only on 28th May  2002 - more than 4 months after I had slapped her which was Feb 1st 2002.

Quite clearly Ms Halijah had a very small incision through an endoscopy operation at Camden Medical and an MRI immediately after to claim she a fracture from my slap. Incidentally the government claimed that the CCTV in chambers was not in operation or had no tape (it would have proved what exactly transpired in Chambers).

I was slapped with a 6 year imprisonment and not granted bail even though the offense is bailable. There was an attempt to prevent me from making my appeal, however at the last minute I had in fact secretly prepared my own affidavit. On the day of the appeal the prison authorities refused to allow me to bring any of my legal documents which could have proved that the government had resorted to forging all the medical documents and the written text of the case.

The Chief Justice on appeal raised my sentence to 10 years (for a crime carrying a maximum 7yrs). However there was an outcry from several members of the legal profession including foreign observers. The matter was then brought before the Supreme Court which overturned the CJ's term of 10 years. I had asked to submit a medical report from the US which would clearly prove that her alleged fracture was a medical impossibility. I was told that the prosecution had not made any application and therefore I could not tender my medical report. If the prosecution did not make any application then I should have been immediately released as the CJ's ruling was untenable and illegal. Instead the authorities knowing full well that a naive public would not understand the working of the law and believe that I would now have to resume the original sentence bundled me quickly and imprisoned without any ORDER OF COURT.

My food was tainted in prison and on my release had 5 heart attacks. They are still trying to kill me and each day is a nightmare. Please help me.”

Gilbert Louis

Editor’s Note: Not all the facts of this story have been verified, but have been published to allow for public scrutiny as requested by the author.

The lawsuits did occur and there is public record of Gilbert Louis’ Cases:

Divorce case: http://www.lawgazette.com.sg/2000-2/Feb00-37.htm

Appeal to Supreme Court: http://lwb.lawnet.com.sg/legal/lgl/rss/landmark/[2003]_SGCA_33.html

Past News on his appeal: http://soc.culture.singapore.narkive.com/t0plZWth/justice-bao-taken-a-notch-down

*The opinions and accusations contained in this article are those of Gilbert Louis and do not necessarily reflect the thoughts and opinions of TheRealSingapore.com.

The recent case of Nizam Ismail and his resignation from the AMP got me thinking, again, about the kind of single-identity politics that keep getting shoved down our throats. It's the you-are-your-affiliation card.

*Article first appeared on http://www.publichouse.sg/categories/topstory/item/875-single-identity-politics

From teh horse mouth, something interesting about PAP's directive to all ministers, MPs and the like....

Almost 1 mth old news that I just found out fm a PAP activist that I met over dinner....fm e horse's mouth:

"..::effective 1 Apr 2013, all PAP ministers, MP, activists & volunteers r advised not to engage any netizens they know personally or don't know on all electronic media thru FB, Tweeter, blogs, alternative media without HQ approval.

Posting in e form of status updates, links & photo sharing or upload of ward & ministry activities continue to be highly encouraged but direct response in own personal or otherwise party or ministry capacity to any positive & negative comments & notes online is highly discouraged.

Party members fm all rank & file r encouraged to report all abusive, defamatory, libelous, severely malicious or highly negative media content and responce to Committee of Media Relations under bro/sis Hri, Janil, Zaqy, Peiling & Vikram via email, phone or sms asap for legal action escalation by Committee of Legal Procedures....."

Patrick Lee Song Juan

Editor's Note: Article has been forwarded to the relevant authorities for clarifications.

Hi fellow Singaporeans, I know you are not interested in the Malaysian 13th. General election. All I want to share with you are two things.

1) The rallying theme is "Kali Ini". meaning, This is the time (to change the government).

2) To all MP's of the Singapore Parliament. I know that most of you are still sitting on your cushy chairs and not serving the people despite I wrote "Dear MP of Singapore Parliament,

Please do not fail yourself and your constituent (cy, typo error)" posted in The Real Singapore and parallelly in my personal blog at url http://ericwoonct.blog.163.com/blog/static/181911362201331505313606/

Please click the following link to see the stadium is full of audience listening to the Opposotion parties' rally in 

Sabah.

Fellow Singaporeans, Pls be aware that you can change the Singapore government, too. Please read "Ending Political Tyranny in Singapore" at url http://ericwoonct.blog.163.com/blog/static/181911362201336104641196/ This is the right way for change. Not playing into the hands of party politics.

A 32-year-old Singaporean man has been arrested for vandalising a national monument.

Source: The Straits Times

Straits Times Says Salaries Are Low Because of High Inflation

The Straits Times on Saturday carried an article which wanted to convince Singaporeans to believe that the reason our starting salaries have remained stagnant is because of inflation.

The article stated that, “rising prices, more so than competition from foreigners, are to blame for starting salaries flatlining in recent years.” Really, what do you think of this, readers?

For readers who have been reading this blog, you would know that I do not believe that we should think that foreigners are the cause of this country’s problem, nor should we blame them. As I’ve explained several times, the reason is with bad government policies, so rightfully we should blame the government.

I’m not one to believe in blaming, but for the intention of this article, let’s look at who we need to blame.

Why Did The Straits Times Write The Article?

First, what is the purpose of Straits Times’ article? When I read the article, the glaring question in my mind was – why did The Straits Times even put out this article? What was its purpose?

There was no clear conclusion at the end of the article. Sure, so now we know that The Straits Times claimed that inflation is the main reason for stagnating salaries, what does The Straits Times believe the government should do? What plans are there for the government to ameliorate rising inflation, or who should we blame?

As I’ve said, if the reason for stagnating salaries would be attributed to the influx of foreigners, rightfully, we would need to blame the government for bad policies. However, if the reason is due to rising inflation, who should we blame?

For the rest of the article, I hope to ask the reader some questions, so that we are able to have a better self-understanding to the most pertinent issue that surrounds Singaporeans at the moment.

But Who Caused Prices to Increase?

Think about it – what are some of the greatest rises in prices? Housing and cars? Who caused the prices of houses and cars to rise? The rich people? Ok, fine – but rising prices are finally starting to slow down this year, so why can prices suddenly slow down? Very obviously, because of new policies introduced in Budget 2013. So, who then caused prices to come down? – the government. Can you still blame the rich people for causing prices to go up? They are still buying the houses and cars, but why are prices coming down (slightly)? Because of government intervention which has introduced additional costs to purchase housing and cars, which has driven down price speculation. So, we should thank the government right? My question is this – the government had known that costs were ballooning out of control for the past few years now – if they could intervene to control the rise in prices, why did they not do so earlier? And if they did not do so earlier when they could, who is in fact the cause of the high inflation in Singapore?

Prices did not just start to rise out of nowhere. The prices rose because the government wanted to invite the rich to come to the Singapore. The government wanted the rich to come and spend on big budget items – housing and cars – so that the government can earn revenue from them. And in order for the government to be able to earn from them, the government wants prices to keep rising. Is there any surprise why the government didn’t want to introduce decisive policies to prevent price speculation, until this year when they were finally forced by the people to do so, and only because ordinary Singaporeans were priced out of buying housing and cars?

The Real Reason for Suppressed Salaries – Companies Did Not Want To Give Higher Salaries

Now, back to the article – The Straits Times had wanted us to believe that inflation was the cause of our salaries which have stagnated. If it was true that inflation is the main cause, who then is to be blamed for high inflation? Yes – the government.

But this is all on the premise that the assumption that the article made was true – that inflation caused stagnating salaries. If you look at the article and the chart below that The Straits Times had created, you can see that for the lowest growth in starting pay, the salaries had remained the same in 2008 and 2012.

Now, if salaries had stagnated because of inflation, how does this chart even explain how that has happened? Logically, if salaries had stagnated because of inflation, what The Straits Times should show is that salaries should have increased from 2008 to 2012, and then show in a third column how the increase in inflation has thus eroded the starting pay, shouldn’t it?

But what The Straits Times had shown is that salaries had remained the same in 2008 and 2012! Even without factoring inflation into the equation, any lay person can tell you this – salaries stagnated because salaries remained the same! Companies did not want to give higher salaries, simple as that.

What was The Straits Times trying to do create a false impression that inflation was the cause of stagnating salaries? What formula or calculation did The Straits Times use to prove that stagnating salaries are more likely due to inflation than other causes? I don’t see any. Was The Straits Times pulling fast one on us? Obviously.

Companies Did Not Want To Give Higher Salaries Because The Government Allowed Them Not To

Next, the question I want to ask is – do you know why companies did not want to give higher salaries? In the article, Kelly Services’ Mark Hall explained why – “By increasing the minimum salary of a Q1 Employment Pass holder, graduates may gain some bargaining power.” Amidst the truth that The Straits Times wanted to brush over, we are back to the real cause – companies wouldn’t pay Singaporeans higher salaries because they don’t have to – the policies were set at a bar where they need not increase the salaries of Singaporeans. They could simple employ someone else who would be willing to accept a lower salary, so Singaporeans were forced to accept lower wages.

But more importantly, do you know why the government isn’t interested in setting a policy that would increase the salaries of Singaporeans?

The Government Doesn’t Want To Increase Salaries Because They Own Singapore Companies

Because of this – do you know which are the largest and richest companies in Singapore? Do a search – you will find that most of them are Singapore companies.

Next, do you know who controls these companies? Do a search again – go look up the annual reports of these companies. You will find that Temasek Holdings has, directly or indirectly, majority stakes in them or that these companies have stakes in one another. And who owns Temasek Holdings? The government.

Now, do you know why the government doesn’t want salaries to increase? The largest companies in Singapore are owned by the government – these companies’ main market is in Singapore. They have hardly made significant inroads into the other international markets, so for the large part, they still rely on the Singapore market for their revenue and profits. Now, who makes up the Singapore market? You got it – Singaporeans (who for now, make the majority).

How Do Companies Increase Revenue and Profits?

If you are a company, what are two ways you increase your revenue and profits? First, you increase prices. According to The Straits Times, inflation has been going up faster – so prices are increasing.

And what is the other way to do it? Reduce, or suppress salaries.

Now, if you follow the logic here, the Singapore companies’ main market is in Singapore, so really, they can only earn from Singaporeans. So, as a Singapore company, you need to increase prices and you need to suppress salaries. If our salaries are being suppressed, who is doing it? Who controls these Singapore companies? Who employs the largest group of Singaporeans in Singapore? It doesn’t take too much time to draw two and two together, does it?

In an article that I’ve published on Saturday (link), I presented charts which showed that even though Singapore has the one of the highest GDP per capita in the developed economies, our people have the lowest wages among the developed economies, but not only that, we have one of the highest prices! – What this means is that even though we are one of the richest countries in the world, Singaporeans have the lowest purchasing powers in the economically developed countries. How can that be?

That can be because the government wants it to be that way. The only way that the government can, and know how to earn money, is from Singaporeans – since the Singapore companies haven’t made significant inroads into the international markets. So, Singaporeans have to be on the chopping board.

THIS IS WHY OUR SALARIES HAVE REMAINED DEPRESSED – BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT HAS DEPRESSED IT.

At the end of The Straits Times article, I found myself scratching my head as to why The Straits Times would want to write that article. When I told my friend about this article, he remarked – the government wants to say this, so that they can employ more foreigners. And he’s right.

Why Does The Government Wants Foreigners?

Now, do you know why the government wants to employ more foreigners? If you cannot bring your companies into the international market to earn more from other people, what do you do? Right – you bring them into your country. We are talking about another 2 to 3 million people, on top of the Singaporeans – the market size will double.

If Singaporeans are not creating enough babies to increase the size of the market, then we need to import people in to increase the size of our market.

This is the reason why the government needs foreigners – it needs revenue and profits. Not only that, it needs rich foreigners who are able to spend.

It’s very sad indeed that in Singapore, the people are looked at as two things by the government. We are either workers who should produce for the Singapore companies, or consumers who should spend for the Singapore companies. Amidst all these, we aren’t really seen as citizens – and this is why the government is so resistant towards providing social welfare for the people – because there are no citizens in Singapore. Providing support for the poor simply does not generate enough revenue back for the government, they think. There are only workers and consumers. There is no democracy. There is only capitalism. We’ve only gotten one of the two ideologies of freedom, and not the one that would benefit us. We got the short end of the stick.

Singaporeans Are Not Against Government. We Just Want To Be Treated Fairly

But no one is telling the government that they cannot earn so much money. Fine and well, earn enough as long as we know that whatever we are helping to produce for the economy, we get the returns back. In another article (link), I’d presented charts to show how we aren’t – where income inequality in Singapore is the highest among economically developed countries and where our government subsidises the lowest proportion of our healthcare bills as well.

Not only is the government increasing prices and suppressing our salaries so that they can earn more from us, they are also limiting how much they need to give back to us, so that they can save more for themselves.

Singaporeans are not against the government earning money. What Singaporeans want is that the government share with Singaporeans the wealth so that for what we’ve put in for the country, we can at least receive an acceptable standard of living back. If the government wants to keep saving for a rainy day, then when does the government want to give the money back? 2080?

This government is horrendously rich – they are hundreds of billions of dollars rich. What are they saving for? So that when the PAP MPs retire, they are able to live in big bungalows while Singaporeans still fear if they are able to buy their own housing?

What is the government keeping the money away from us for? I can think of no reason except for this – greed.

Roy

The author is a influential blogger in Singapore and also a gay rights activist.

*Article first appeared on www.TheHeartTruths.com

Why Did the Chicken cross the road? The real reason why the chicken crosses the road remains a mystery. But here are a few reason that a few famous people would say.
 

BARACK OBAMA: The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a CHANGE! The chicken wanted CHANGE!

JOHN MCCAIN: My friends, that chicken crossed the road because it recognized the need to engage in cooperationand dialogue with all the chickens on the other side of the road.

HILLARY CLINTON: When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little chicken cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to ensure -- right from Day One! -- that every chicken in this country gets the chance it deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn't about me.......

GEORGE W. BUSH: We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road or not. The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.

JOHN LENNON: Ima gine all the chickens in the world crossing the road together, in peace.

BILL GATES: I have just released eChicken2008, which will not only cross roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your check book. Internet Explorer is an integral part of the Chicken. This new platform is much more stable and will never cra...#@^(C% .......... reboot.

BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your definition of chicken?

AL GORE: Chicken shall not shit while crossing the road. This is for a green environment. .

LEE KUAN YEW: We have installed crossing lights at all traffic junctions. All chickens should follow instructions while crossing the road.

SAMY VELLU: Gantry points have been set up. All chickens wanting to cross the road are advised to top up their cash cards first.

NAJIB RAZAK: What chickens? I don't know any chickens... especially those from Mongolia ...

ABDULLAH BADAWI: We have to be fair to all chickens. Some want to cross over the road, some do not. ........ Zzzzzz .......zzzzzz ....... Now what were we talking about? Ah yes, chickens. We will form a Royal Commission to decide whether it is right for them to cross the road.

MAHATHIR: Now even non-bumi chickens want to cross the road! How can they disrespect and disregard apa nama bumi chickens? We must be allowed to cross over first. It is our special privilege and no one can challenge that!

ANWAR: We have enough chickens waiting to cross over in September.

SHAHRIR: All foreign chickens are welcome in Malaysia but they must not cross over the road within 50km of the border.

CHINA PROSTITUTE IN GEYLANG: 我的客在对面。 (My client is on the other side.)

Kindergarten teacher: To get to the other side

Admiral Teo Chee Hean: We'll teach the chickens to think for themselves, how to cross the road in the most effective way.

Aristotle: It's the nature of chickens to cross the road

BG George Yeo: In this age of information and technology, it is inevitable that the chickens get to cross the road.

Bill Clinton: I've met so many chicks. I can't remember.

Bill Gates: I have just released the new Chicken2000 Office which will not only cross the roads but lay eggs, file your documents and balance your cheque book.

Buddha: The chicken should cultivate good karma so that it can cross to the other side of the road safely. If it gets run down, this is due to bad karma and should try again in the next reincarnation.

Colonel Sanders: I missed one?

Darwin: Chickens over great periods of time have been naturally selected in such a way that they are genetically disposed to cross the roads.

Deng Xiao Ping: A chicken that crosses the road is a good chicken regardless of whether it is a black or white chicken.

Dr Richard Hu: DON'T PANIC. We'll monitor the situation and start worrying if the chickens get run down while crossing the road.

Einstein: Whether the chicken crossed the road or the road moved beneath the chicken depends on your point of reference.

Freud: The fact that you are at all concerned that the chicken crossed the road reveal your underlying sexual insecurity.

Lee Kong Chian: The chicken crossed the road because there are plenty of worms on the other side and it should help as many chickens as possible to cross the road.

Lee Kuan Yew: Every chicken should be given the opportunity to realise its full potential to cross the road. The brightest chickens should lead.

Machiavelli: The point is that the chicken crossed the road. Who cares why?? The end of the crossing justifies whatever the motive there was.

Mah Bow Tan: The chickens must pay before they use the roads.

Mahathir: We should let our own ethnic chickens which are slower cross the road first.

Mahatma Gandhi: It's a non-violent way for the chickens to gain freedom and independence.

Mao Zhe Dong: Whichever chicken that reaches the other side of the road first will be sent to the labour camp.

Philip Yeo: The chickens have a MORAL responsibility to cross the road. If they don't, we'll name them.

Shakespeare: All the world's a stage for the chickens to cross the road.

Sim Wong Hoo: Don't give up if at first you fail. The chickens should think of creative ways to cross the road.

Tao: It doesn't matter if the chickens crossed the road or not. What matters is that the chicken realised why the road is there in the first place.

Jason Neo

*Jokes first appeared on The Real Singapore's FB page.

The blogosphere has reacted with frenzy to National Development Minister (MND) Khaw Boon Wan's statement on television that HDB is losing millions in building flats.



http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/khaw-hints-at-changes-in-ec-scheme/654024.html?cid=FBSG



Of course the above link from CNA deflected the obvious elephant in the room by headlining changes to the EC (Exec Condo) Scheme as its title, instead of the Minister's dramatic pronouncements which appear later in the article.



In essence the Minister is saying that HDB is paying a lot (market rates) for land cost and construction, and also figures in things like design, infrastructure, building of roads and transport amenities etc.



Because of this pricing, they are selling flats below market rates and as such are incurring a loss of millions each which thankfully has been covered by the Ministry of Finance which gives HDB a huge grant each year. (You can pat yourself on the back Tharman Shanmugaratnam)



Now I am no economist just simple me, but I'm rather puzzled by all of this. First the land is the State's (the people's in other words). The State is acquiring its own land to build things for the benefit of the state, how can this be described as a loss maker? It's like a house owner having a small piece of land inside his gate, which he decides to build a garden in it. Of course he has to spend the money to build his garden and maintain it, but how can he say, that he has to buy the land for the garden, when in fact it's already his?



Now turning to this infrastructure thingy the Hon Minister has quoted. Errm aren't roads, buses and trains under a different Ministry, like the Ministry of Transport? Does HDB or the MND have to pay them for building all these? Are Govt Ministries giving loans to one another?



Then what about the monies collected from road tax, public transport fees, carparks, public utilities etc? Where does this money go? Does it mysteriously vanish, or is the Govt giving out some freebies that I am unaware of?



So because of this, the HDB justifies itself in rising HDB flat prices like $100k for a studio flat for the elderly for 30 years? I am not even gonna touch on 3, 4 and 5 room flats, if a studio apartment costs so much to begin with.



And by the way, since HDB is losing millions every year, why did they actually have to build themselves a spanking new HDB Hub in Toa Payoh? What was wrong with the Bukit Merah Twin Towers, now used by their design and contractor Surbana? Surely common sense would tell you that if you're in the red, you don't go and build yourself a new building, you either stay put or rent it out and maybe share the space with MND at Maxwell Road or any other Ministry's building like MOE's new building at Buona Vista or the SLF buildings at Thomson Road. Are all these buildings fully occupied?



And why doesn't HDB until today release the figures and cost of each flat they build, something demanded for donkey years by the opposition from Chiam See Tong's first foray into Parliament in 1984 until now? After all since you're losing money, you have all the reason to publish the costs and silence the critics once and for all?



Or perhaps since it's still April, the Minister was indulging us with a late April Fool's joke?

*Article first appeared on http://anyhowhantam.blogspot.sg/2013/04/heavens-to-betsy-hdb-losing-millions.html

We have had enough of bad dialogue. Enough of those politically correct utterances from staged puppets, spouting verbiage that no one is allowed to challenge without the consequence of a lawyer's letter of demand in the mail. Come on, who in real life lets another person spout off without interruption, especially when debating points he or she doesn’t agree with? It's only natural there’s a response if the parties agree and an even stronger response when the parties are in opposition. Anything else, it's plain wayang.

The task of dialogue does have responsibilities. Dialogue is supposed to:

Advance the plot

Dialogue can and should both direct and change the course of a storyline. A simple revelation, like how much does it really cost to build a HDB flat, will soothe the skeptics about the affordability of public housing. To suggest that the housing authority actually incurs financial losses, like the fairy tale of the $8 open heart surgery, merely stresses the plot and prolongs the agony of the spin.

Reveal character

Dialogue cannot be bland. Characters in play should not speak in dour, colourless monotone, unless you plan a career in announcing electoral results with a robotic voice. The absence of emotional engagement when addressing the concerns of a worried generation says a lot about the sincerity of the speaker. Just avoid rabble rousing theatrics like prompting the audience to assent with a "keechiu!"

Create or increase conflict

Dialogue should shake up the status quo, not prolong the perpetuity of the ongoing injustices. The misunderstanding of multifarious parties in contention — either by accident or deliberate ploy - is only evil when by promoted by participants with separate agendas, pursuing those agendas at the expense of others. Even the authorities have issued a statement declaring that if insensitive comments are made in the heat of the moment, or by relatively immature persons who did not know better, after the investigations uncover, “a more nuanced response may follow” by the police in handling the matter.

Break up passages of action or inaction

Like fiction in a novel, too much of any element is simply too much. The audience need a break from the drone of the official spiel; repetition ad nauseam - "we are on your side" - can only put one to sleep; exposition without pause is merely regurgitation of propaganda; and constant dialogue, as would constant conversation in real life, annoys people to no end and drives them to alternative platforms like the May Day gathering.

One of the answers to the Shell Thought Leadership Question "How can a meaningful dialogue between the Government and the people be sustained" suggest that dialogue sessions should not be restricted to just "politically correct" opinions and views, and the people should be given the right to challenge the Government (Student, Tampines JC, 430 Votes). The student may wish to add a disclaimer about personal views and partisan parlance, even though that declaration may afford scant protection from whispering ministers.

Tattler 

*Article first appeared on http://singaporedesk.blogspot.com/2013/04/dialogue-speech-of-fiction.html

Please ask the stall-holders of the air-con Kopitiam a cost breakdown of his expenses. Rental (because the Kopitiam operators bidded several million dollars for the right to operate each Kopitiam) comes out top, then foreign worker levy ($450 per worker per month), then etc.

Please ask the shops in our Shopping mall a cost breakdown of his expenses? Rental comes out top, then worker levy.

You can repeatedly ask any businessmen to make a cost breakdown of his operations. These two cost items always come out top.

Who pocketed these money? The Government.

If you bother to ask for the 3rd, 4th. or 5th most costly items, it points out to the government who pocketed these money.

Why? The government is stealing money from all of us in many hidden ways.

When the government steals from its own citizens, its citizens must suffer. This phrase is most fittingly: "The government of Singapore is raping its own citizens and at the same time, cajoling them to just lie down and enjoy being rape".   

This author had written a very good description of why salary is kept low in Singapore. Of course, it all points out to the same objective -- The government of Singapore takes it all and at the expense of the average people who had been foolishly voted for PAP to rob them repeatedly for 5 decades.

http://therealsingapore.com/content/do-you-want-know-real-reason-why-salaries-are-low-singapore