Singapore Heartlander

Internet access in Singapore severely affected by Taiwan quake

2006-12-28T00:44:00.000+11:00

SINGAPORE : Internet and phone services were disrupted in Singapore and the rest of Southeast Asia following Tuesday's earthquake in Taiwan.

The strong earthquake in Taiwan had damaged several undersea cables around the island.

Many internet users had difficulty accessing sites online, especially US sites.
The instant messaging service was also down.Internet users faced a long wait in downloading information on the internet.

Some e-commerce activities were also affected as a result of problems with internet and telecommunication systems.

Singapore internet service provider StarHub and Southeast Asia's largest telco SingTel say the earthquake caused disruptions to the undersea cables, resulting in slow internet access to some sites.

Both companies say internet traffic diversion and restoration works are currently underway. - CNA /ls

NTUC propose CPF increase of 1.5%

2006-12-24T20:02:00.000+11:00

Looks like our CPF is slated to recover, not by a lot though.

A mere 1.5% despite the "solid" economic recovery but it is not confirmed yet.

NTUC has repeated its call for the CPF to be restored in recent weeks but MOM is still reconsidering the case. Come on, it is not going to crash the economy and many employers have also stated that a 1% increase will have minimal impact on their expenses.

The government can cut the employer's CPF contributions during the economic downturn in such a swift and decisive manner, but yet so reluctant to increase it during the good times. Only all-round fare increases so far, and the best of all is the announcement of a GST increase of 2% for 2007.

It will be good for our government to heed the call of the NTUC top-brass, otherwise people are not going to swallow the bitter medicine of salary and CPF cuts so willingly come the next economic recession.

The social contract between the rich and poor is already straining at the seams. Current policies are still in favour of the rich, otherwise the GST increase will be scraped already. While we cannot "chase away" the rich people with uncompetitive personal and corporate taxes, it is time to do more for the poor and middle-class, instead of just talking.

Let's start with the CPF first...

SDP chief Chee Soon Juan addresses crowd at Speakers' Corner

2006-09-19T18:13:00.000+10:00

SINGAPORE : Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan and his supporters turned up at the Speakers' Corner for a planned march on Saturday.

Dr Chee addressed the crowd at Hong Lim Park and asked them to join him in a march to the Parliament House.

He walked to the junction of North Canal Road and South Bridge Road where he was advised by the police not to proceed with the march as outdoor demonstrations were not allowed.

Dr Chee and his supporters had been standing at the junction since Saturday morning.

The incident attracted the attention of passers-by and the media.

Police said they are investigating the matter.

They added that Dr Chee was still at the Speakers' Corner at 10.15pm, accompanied by his group of associates with a crowd of 20 bystanders.

- CNA /ls

Our maverick politician Chee Soon Juan seems to be getting a lot of coverage of late. If anything, he is courageous and persistent in exposing the "despotic" regime. However, is this kind of politics healthy for Singapore?

Well, i will comment at a later date. Too much work lately...

PTC approves fare hikes of 1.7%

2006-09-15T16:04:00.000+10:00

SINGAPORE: From October, adult EZ-link fares for buses and trains will increase by 1 to 3 cents, which amounts to an overall fare hike of 1.7 percent. Senior citizen off-peak EZ-link fares will correspondingly increase by 1 cent.
There are no increases in case fares for buses, single trip tickets for trains, child and student fares and monthly student and NS concession passes. In August, public transport operators SMRT Corp and SBS Transit applied to the Public Transport Council for these increases.
The Council says that given the positive economic outlook, it assessed that there were no "extenuating circumstances" to vary or reject the proposal. It has approved a "tiered increase," depending on the distance travelled so that those who make short trips or transfers will pay less. The Council added that of all the bus and train trips, six in ten will see either no increase, or an increase of 1 cent.
This also works out to be a quarter of all commuters who will not see any increase at all. The government has pledged to help needy families adjust to the increase. In a news release, the government said it has lined up the schemes that are available, including the Citizens'
Consultative Committees ComCare Fund.
This is part of the ComCare Fund launched last July to ensure that needy Singaporeans are not left behind. Since then, $1.95m have been disbursed, which helped about 12,500 cases. The two public transport operators have also contributed $1m for Public Transport Vouchers, which will also be available through the CCCs.
Each voucher is worth $20 and can be used to buy or top up EZ-link cards, or to buy monthly concession passes. The National Trade Unions Congress (NTUC) has also come up with $1.6m in "NTUC Care and Share Vouchers" to help union members from low-income families to cope with increases in utilities and transport costs.
Community Development, Youth and Sports Minister Vivian Balakrishnan commended these organisations for stepping in to help needy families. He said through the Comcare Fund, the government will also do its part. - CNA /dt

The PTC says the fare hikes are reasonable. Is that true?? The "commendable" effort these companies have gone to (giving out vouchers and capping the increase for child and students) are all for show as they have come under immense pressure from Singaporeans for their greed and profit-driven approach.

It is getting to the point of exasperation that every year we have to discuss this topic but yet the end result is the same, ie. the request from the transport operators are approved and fares are increased (only difference is the percentage of increase).

Seriously, the PTC is nothing but a paper organization which bows to the request of transport companies and protect their interests instead of standing up for Singaporeans. Questions should be asked of the need to raise fares if profits are already secured or when the price of crude oil falls. Has the overall service and travel time improved with these constant fare hikes?

The government should also explain why the bus sectors are not open up for more competition while the taxi companies are facing stiff competition in the over-saturated market. Rather than having a useless PTC, they should introduce more players into the scene and let market economics settle the pricing. With intense competition, transport companies may think twice about raising fares.

The current system allows for the freedom of transport companies to engage in useless multi-million dollars projects with no fear of affecting ther bottomline as they can just send in their request to increase fares and then pass on the cost/losses to passengers. Why is SBS still complaining about the EZLink system after spending millions of dollars on it?

If it boils down to cheaters amongst passengers, then why discard TransitLink in the first place when the problem is still not solved? By the way, how much of the extra 1-2 cents have they pocketed when they did not update the stations properly and most people are just too lazy to ask for refunds?

It is high time the government looks into the affordability of public transport for its citizens instead of pushing the blame to us that we want a world-class transport system and hence should pay for it.

It is not that Singaporeans want to have their cake and eat it. We are willing to pay for a reasonable standard of public transport and if fare increases needs to be implemented which results in improvement of services or due to external circumstances like rising crude oil prices, then it is alright.

But if the underlying reason of fare hikes is just to ensure profits/directors' bonuses and answer to shareholders, then shouldn't commuters have a right to be angry about the situation and demand a stop to this exploitation? The government will come out with their templated responses soon to appease the people but end of the day, nothing is going to change.

Reflections on the influx of Foreign Talents

2006-09-09T23:38:00.000+10:00

The controversy over foreign talents (FTs) in Singapore continues unabated even weeks after the National Day Rally.

PM Lee spoke at length on the merits of foreign talents in Singapore and how Singaporeans should help to assimilate the foreigners into our home land and make them feel welcome. Question is: should Singaporeans welcome FTs with open arms as what the government has called us to do?

Firstly, there is nothing wrong with the influx of FTs provided they add value to the local industries. Also, for jobs shunned by Singaporeans (cleaners, maids, construction workers), there is a dire need of these foreigners to supply the workforce. In this global economy, we cannot afford to adopt a closed-door or protectionist policy especially when we do not have natural resources nor a large domestic base to be self-sufficient.

Sad but true, we depend on foreign investments to sustain our economy and we have to bend over backwards at times to the needs of these investors who can shift their operations elsewhere. So, painful as it may be, FTs are here to stay and we have to accept it.

However, the government should be conscious of the fact that not all FTs are good for the economic or social well-being of Singapore. Singaporeans should not be expected to follow the same salary scale as FTs who can do the same job as us (also put in longer hours) but for only half the pay.

We have a life-long commitment to our home-land given that our roots are here but for the foreign workers, they are under no obligation to serve or sacrifice for Singapore when the going gets tough. When times are bad, they will move on while Singaporeans weather the storm and "bite the bullets" to steer the economy out of the doldrums.

The government laments about the population decline and hope that we can reproduce more to replace ourselves. Hello, this is not a factory production line where you can place orders and expect deliveries in a period of time.

There is the ever rising cost of living to contend with but the rate of increase for our salaries are more or less stagnant these days with the influx of FTs. It is difficult to sustain oneself as it is, not to mention the duties of taking care of parents and our children.

The financial responsibilites that come with the setting up of a family and having sufficient retirement funds are major concerns for Singaporeans while most of the FTs are free of such worries as their families are not here. They can keep a very low cost of living and remit much of their money back home.

The current job insecurities is also worrrying as more and more industries prefer contract workers rather than perm staff and that is not conducive to starting a family.

Singaporeans are expected to lay their lives down for the nation but the government does not feel obliged to look after our interests when it comes to employment porspects or medical benefits. Ever since WWII, when Singapore fell to the Japanese and our colonial masters deserted us, the government has resolved that the task of defending Singapore be left to Singaporeans as only we can be the masters of our own destiny.

While we do not close the door on foreign talents, the government should not take us heartlanders for granted and then count on us to defend the country against external threats. If the people feels that there is nothing much to fight for here, Singapore will be in a very vulnerable situation.

The social effects of attracting FTs to top-up the shortfall of talents and compensate for our declining birth-rate will be seen in a few years time. As far as i am concerned, instead of home, Singapore will only be a transit point for many people and the future of the third or fourth generation of Singaporeans is going to be very uncertain (despite the rosy picture the govt has painted), as they are going to face much more competition than us now and while the cost of living continues to go up and UP...

Unveiling Ceremony of World Bank Photography Exhibition

2006-09-04T00:56:00.000+10:00

Speech by Dr Lee Boon Yang , Minister For Information, Communications and the Arts, at the Unveiling Ceremony of World Bank “Imagine A World Without Poverty” Photography Exhibition

Mr Peter Stephens,
Regional Communications Manager,
World Bank Singapore Office
Distinguished guests,
Ladies and gentlemen.

Good evening,

1. It gives me great pleasure to join you here for the World Bank photography exhibition “Imagine a World Without Poverty”.

2. This exhibition is an inspiring and artistic prelude to the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank that will take place next week in Singapore. We are of course delighted and honoured to host the distinguished delegates and friends from all over the world for the Boards of Governors of IMF and WB Group Annual Meetings.

3. The World Bank is one of the world's largest sources of development assistance. It is focused on assisting developing countries achieve stable, sustainable and equitable growth. The World Bank works to reduce poverty worldwide. Through its numerous initiatives, the World Bank has helped many of the poorest people and poorest countries.

4. While most of Asia and many developed countries are experiencing growth, progress and prosperity, not all countries are enjoying economic development and growth. For example poverty is still a serious problem in Africa. Some 300 million in Africa live on less than one dollar a day. In Sub-Saharan Africa, 17% of children die before their fifth birthday. Every 30 second, a child dies of malaria in Africa. More than a hundred million children never go to school and half of all children in South Asia are under-nourished. Worldwide, five million people die each year from contaminated water and poor sanitation. Clearly a world without poverty is still a challenge which the global community cannot ignore.

5. It was not that long ago that Singapore also faced many of the challenges faced by today’s under-developed countries. When we became independent more than 40 years ago, we had poor economic infrastructure, inadequate education, high unemployment and little foreign investments. The government quickly identified these weaknesses and set about with political will and determination to correct these deficiencies. The World Bank played a part by supporting early infrastructural projects such as a power station, expanding the telecommunication network and upgrading the National University of Singapore,

6. We appreciate the assistance from the World Bank. They had helped us to improve the life of our people and created more opportunities for Singaporeans. Today we have achieved sustainable progress and prosperity for all Singaporeans. Key social needs such as education, health care, housing and employment are met by an extensive array of government programmes and services. Singapore therefore shares in the World Bank and IMF’s vision of helping countries to develop and improve the life of their citizens. As a member of the international community, albeit a small country with limited resources, we will play our part in support of countries embarking on their economic development and where our own experience may provide useful guidance to help them overcome poverty and create opportunities.

7. The world today is now a much smaller place. Globalisation, increasing trade linkages and the ease and affordability of travel are bringing countries and regions closer together. We live in the era of the global village with instance communication. Technology such as infocomm and the internet serve to empower millions throughout the world. If we work together, it is possible that one day instead of “imagining a world without poverty” we may be able to “live in a world without poverty.”

8. I understand that this photo exhibition will be held throughout the duration of the IMF-World Bank meetings. This is indeed timely. Given that the world’s financial leaders, media and civil society organisations will gather in Singapore, this exhibition is a powerful reminder that poverty exists. This exhibition highlights to Singaporeans and visitors the seriousness of poverty and how these can impact the world.

9. In closing, I would like to thank the World Bank Singapore Office for organising this exhibition. It is a most commendable effort to reach out to Singaporeans and visitors. It will create awareness of the challenges confronting the world’s poor.

10. It is now my pleasure to declare open the World Bank exhibition entitled “Imagine A World without Poverty.”

11. Thank you.

Labour Force Survey to involve 8,500 households

2006-08-19T00:10:00.000+10:00

The Manpower Ministry will conduct a Labour Force Survey from 24 August-7 October.
It will involve 8,500 households over a two-week period.
The purpose of the survey is to collect data on employment, unemployment and other economic characteristics of the population.
This is to help the government in the planning and formulation of manpower-related policies.
The survey will be done through the internet, telephone or face-to-face interviews.
Selected households will be notified by post.
Data to be collected include citizenship, age and education.
All information collected will be kept confidential and used for compiling statistics only. - CNA/ir

After the general household survey, we have the labour force survey coming up next. Looks like the government is really concerned about the welfare of Singaporeans. No doubt, all these data will be used to "improve" our livelihood and employment prospects.

Actually, all these surveys are nothing much than efforts for the government to trumpet its achievements or to serve as justifications for the next round of price hikes.

Never mind, just go ahead, since the government want to convince us that economy is booming and the good days are here again (despite the increasing job insecurities and lesser purchasing power of average Singaporeans) so everybody should just rejoice and feel proud that the government coffers are bursting at the seams...

Potong Pasir's Damaged Solar Lights

2006-08-12T23:20:00.000+10:00

Straits Times, 9 August 2006

Mah: Chiam should focus on residents
by Tan Hui Yee

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan yesterday accused Mr Chiam See Tong of raising "petty, non-relevant issue " instead of getting down to work to serve his Potong Pasir residents.

he made the comments in response to an ongoing public dispute between Mr Chiam and his defeated People's Action Party opponent, Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, over a set of damaged solar lights in the opposition wards.

The lights were installed on government land leased to Mr Sitoh, who is the PAP's grassroot adviser in the ward. The lights were vandalised recently but Mr Sitoh said he had to return the land to the Government, while the opposition MP said the are a where the lights are does not come under the jurisidction of his town council.

Said Mr Mah yesterday: "At this point in time, it is important for the elcted respresentatives, whether it is PAP or the opposition, to get on with the job of serviing their residents.

"The PAP MPs have already started work to draw up plans to fulfil the promises they made during the election. I think the opposition MPs should do likewise and stop playing games. "

Mr Mah was speaking after attending a National Day observance ceremony in the Botanic Gardens.

Mr Sitoh declined to repair the lights as he said the land's lease will run out on Oct 31.

Mr Chiam told Shin Min Daily News earlier this week he wanted to find out the terms of the lease agreement for the land, which he believed may include certain conditions like maintaining the lights.

However, the HDB has declined to reveal the terms of the lease, saying it is private information between the board and Potong Pasir Citizens' Consultative Committee, which Mr Sitoh advises.

Yesterday, Mr Mah accused Mr Chiam of "trying to divert attention from the real issue " .

"The main issue is this is a problem in the constituency.... the Member of Parliament should try to solve the problem as quickly and as efficiently as possible, " he said.

Mr Chiam is now seeking to lease the land to build a covered walkway for residents.

Meanwhile, Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, Mr Lim Boon Heng, told reporters at a separate event yesterday: "In Potong Pasir, you cannot have your cake and eat it. You've decided on Chiam See Tong, so he should solve your problems. You have rejected Sitoh, so don't expect him therefore to continue serving you.

"For all he has done, you have rejected him and you wanted Chiam See Tong. You've got a problem, then you go to Chiam See Tong."

Not for the first time, the opposition MPs are being cast in a bad light by the ruling party.

This may appear to be a storm in a teacup but there are far greater implications. Firstly, the facts in this case was that the footpath does not come under the jurisdiction of Chiam and his counterpart, Sitoh is holding on to the lease until Oct this year.

Since the PAP like to do everything in a "law-by-law" manner, naturally Sitoh should repair the solar lights which was incidentally, also installed by him and without the knowledge of Chiam's town council.

Yet Mah Bow Tan chose to accuse Chiam of diverting attention from the real issue and not "serving" his people and solving problems like what the rest of the good PAP MPs have done in their own constituencies. In typical PAP style, another heavyweight, Lim Boon Heng also joined in the fray and bully the opposition into submission. His message was more threatening though when he mentioned that the people who chose the oppositions deserved whatever problems they are getting and they should look for these candidates. Don't expect the PAP to solve your problems, period.

This is very petty politics the PAP are playing and if the characters of our leaders are as such (regardless of how capable they are), they do not deserve our respect.

Actually, by exposing this matter through the press and subsequently making an application to the URA to build a covered walkway on this piece of land, Chiam is doing his best for his residents with scarce resources and severe constraints (uncooperative bureaucrats).

Mr Mah should be more of a gentleman and don't twist the facts. This only make him stand out as a sore loser (he was the PAP candidate who lost out to Chiam in Potong Pasir and resulted in Potong Pasir being the longest held opposition ward). Come on lah, the people aren't stupid and can think for themselves. Don't insult the intelligence of us heartlanders, okay...

Singapore gays prepare to show their IndigNation

2006-07-31T17:45:00.000+10:00

Sunday July 30, 11:48 AM (AFP)
Singapore's gay community is about to show some IndigNation.

The city-state's gay and lesbian community begins its second annual pride festival on Tuesday in the face of what organizers describe as continued discrimination.

Scheduled around Singapore's independence day on August 9, the month-long IndigNation 2006 will include poetry recitals, art exhibitions, sessions in which gays share their experiences, as well as parties at "gay-friendly" establishments, organizers said.

"IndigNation is the gay and lesbian pride season in Singapore, reaffirming our participation in the intellectual and cultural life of this country, reminding all that we are as much a part of Singapore as anyone else," organizers said on the festival website.

They complained that "the state still gives short shrift" to the gay community.

"Through law, administrative policies, censorship and homophobic remarks by ministers, Singapore continues to discriminate against some of its most productive citizens."

Homosexual acts are still outlawed in Singapore under laws dating back to British colonial days, despite the city-state's being one of Asia's most advanced economies.

Singapore's penal code states that anyone who "voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animals," is liable to a possible life prison term and a fine.

Organizers said IndigNation evolved last year after the government banned an annual beach party organised by gay portal Fridae.com. The party moved to the Thai resort island of Phuket in November.

Singapore's ban on the party came three months after Senior Minister of State for Health Balaji Sadasivan said the festival may be behind a sharp rise in the number of new HIV infections in Singapore.

He said an epidemiologist had suggested that the party "allows gays from high prevalence societies to fraternise with local gay men, seeding the infection in the local community."

The IndigNation festival hopes to challenge the state's definition of Singaporean identity which has no room for gays and lesbians, said prominent gay rights activist Alex Au, an organizer of the event.

As Singapore celebrates its 41st anniversary, "we have our contesting ideas of what a nation should be as well, and it includes people who have been marginalised and criminalised by the state," he said.

On the festival's first day, Au will host a discussion about the May general election and its impact on gays. The ruling People's Action Party won the ballot, maintaining its 47-year hold on power.

Local playwright Russell Heng, an IndigNation organizer and founding member of gay advocacy group People Like Us (PLU), says one of the festival's aims is to raise public awareness about the homosexual community's contribution to society.

"There is a tremendous amount of energy and creativity among gays and lesbians," Heng said.

"The pity is that Singapore doesn't realise the contribution made by gay and lesbian Singaporeans unless one organizes a festival like this to showcase it," he said.

Au said the government has a contradictory attitude toward gays.

While homosexual acts are outlawed, gay pubs and saunas are largely tolerated but advocacy groups including PLU have repeatedly been denied official registration.

"You get these inconsistent actions and decisions... it's just gone very cloudy. They are not making a stand," Au said.

Singapore has a population of about 4.4 million but it is unclear how many of those are gay.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told the Foreign Correspondents Association last year that Singapore must evolve into a more "inclusive" society.

But gay-pride parades will not work in the city-state "because I think it would be offensive to a large number of Singaporeans and it will be very divisive," he said.

"I don't think we are homophobic."

Well, looks like the local gays and lesbians are also a planning a grand celebration of our National Day with a 'pride festival' termed as IndigNation. Dunno if Balaji (Senior Minister of State for Health) will come out and slam them again for increasing the number of HIV infections?

It would be interesting to see the government's response to this gay festival. Although PM Lee says that "Singapore must evolve into a more inclusive society", i don't think he has planned to include gays and lesbians but with Singapore already setting up casinos, there is really no reason why there should be any discrimination against these groups since the government has lost the moral high ground.

Given Singapore's conservative society, i can't see the government relaxing the regulations on gays and lesbians any time soon. In fact, i believe the only way they are going to do that is if they kena a scandal and one of the cabinet ministers or MPs come out of the closet and declare themselves as gays, then in order to "save face", they may say that gays and lesbians contribute a lot to the society, and they should be accepted in the civil service as well as be given more leeway :-P

An Eye For Talent

2006-07-30T01:52:00.000+10:00

Yep, let's take a short break from the boring political commentaries.

Hmm, good old Benitez sizing up the situation. Must be enjoying it...

SMRT plans fare hikes for its bus, MRT, LRT services

2006-07-25T23:50:00.000+10:00

SMRT Corporation is planning to raise fares for its bus, MRT and LRT services.

It will apply for a fare adjustment by the August 1 deadline set by the Public Transport Council.

The SMRT Corporation says its total operating costs have ballooned by 20% this year because of the increase in diesel prices.

The fare hike will follow the PTC's formula of a maximum increase of 1.7%, which translates to a rise of one or two cents, if approved.

SMRT President and CEO Saw Phaik Hwa says that its proposed fare hike will not be sufficient to mitigate rising diesel costs.

It however supports the government's call for smaller and regular fare increases. - CNA/ir

By now, i believe a lot of heartlanders are resigned, if not indignant, to the increases that are lining up one after another. Surely, this is not the last. Mr Brown brought up the price hikes issue in a satirical manner but was shot down by the government for being unconstructive and adding to the sense of cynicism and despondency. A bit too heavy-handed, i think.

I am loathed to beat a dead horse but i can't help it. They conveniently pushed the price hikes to the global crude oil problem which is undeniably true, BUT can the transport fares be decreased once the crude oil goes back to their original level? Hopefully, some MP can raise this question in Parliament for the people but sadly our MPs' do not like to risk the ire of cabinet ministers or they do not have propensity for debates.

There is something i hold fundamentally which is that price increases must be commensurate with the service provided. However, has overall service improved with the yearly increases? If yes, go ahead but if not, don't consumers have a right to request better service from them since we are contributing to their fat bonuses and glowing yearly reports? I have not even commented on the NEL farce a few days back as they already had their fill of embarrassment and i shall not pour scorn on their woe at this point of time.

SMRT also claimed that the proposed fare hike will not be sufficient to mitigate rising diesel costs so can i assume safely that next year, there will be another price hike to help them catch up on lost profits? Oops, better don't jump the gun, even if we see it coming, we still got to wait for the official announcements, lest we add on to the "sense of despondency".

The government is happily ignorant of the hardships of its citizens but don't worry this will not be the last straw that break the camel's back. We still can tahan a few more increases but the cost of living is really testing our limits and sooner or later, a lot of people are going to be quitters rather than stayers in Singapore.

SingTel CEO Lee Hsien Yang resigns

2006-07-22T15:50:00.000+10:00

Reuters - The chief executive of Singapore Telecommunications Ltd. , whose brother is the country's Prime Minister, surprised investors by announcing he would resign from Southeast Asia's biggest phone company.

Lee Hsien Yang, 48, who announced the decision on Friday after the stock market had closed, said he would stay on until SingTel had found a replacement. He gave no reason for leaving.

"It's certainly surprising, it's not something they've been telegraphing," said Hugh Young, managing director at Aberdeen Asset Management in Singapore.

He added "an emotional, knee-jerk reaction downward would be possible" in SingTel's share price when the stock market opens.

Lee, 48, is a member of Singapore's leading political family. His father, founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, still holds a cabinet position as Minister Mentor, while his elder brother, Lee Hsien Loong, is the country's Prime Minister.

Temasek Holdings [TEM.UL] -- the Singapore state investment firm which has a 54 percent stake in SingTel -- is run by the Prime Minister's wife, Ho Ching.

Fund managers and analysts dismissed suggestions that Lee's decision would herald a period of uncertainty for SingTel.

"There's unlikely to be any uncertainty going forward -- SingTel is a professionally run company, and with such companies, there is always a succession plan in place, and it's hard for one person's departure to have such a huge impact," said Bowen Phua, an analyst at DBS Vickers Securities.

Potential successors could include Allen Lew, the chief executive of SingTel's Singapore operations, and Chua Sock Koong, the chief financial officer and chief executive of its international businesses, Phua said.

"SingTel could get a professional guy from outside, but I think Allen is one of the most ideal internal candidates due to his experience in Australia and Thailand," Phua added.

Lew, 51, was appointed to his current position in February. Before that, he was the chief operating officer of SingTel's Thai mobile associate, Advanced Info Service Plc. , and managing director of the consumer division Australian unit Optus.

"A VERY LONG TIME"

Lee Hsien Yang has been chief executive officer of Singapore's largest listed firm since May 1995. The company said he would continue in his role as chief executive officer until a replacement had been found.

Lee told a press conference he did not have a specific reason for wanting to step down.

"It's really hard to find a reason. At some point in time you decide that you have been in a role for some time and you would want to look for change, and 12 years is a very long time for a tenure of any CEO," he told a media briefing.

"I have thoroughly enjoyed my role, it's been both challenging and great fun."

He added now was "as good a time as any" for him to step down. "I have always indicated to the board that I will not be here forever. There's now a strong management team in place, and given the strength of the company today, we would have both the options of credible internal candidates as well as serious external candidates who may be interested."

SingTel chairman Chumpol NamLamlieng said the board had only just started the process of searching for his successor.

"At the moment there is no time frame specified for this but we would take a thorough look at candidates internally and externally," he added.

Lee said he had not thought about what he wanted to do next. "At this point in time, I have neither solicited nor received any offers."

But politics was out. "I've said many times before that I do not think politics is something I am suited for. I have no great interest to pursue a career in politics," he added.

Lee joined SingTel in April 1994 as Executive Vice President of Local Services and took over at the helm a year later.

SingTel shares, which made their debut on the local bourse on Nov. 1, 1993, have traded below the price of S$3.60 at which they were sold to institutional investors for over six years. The stock closed at S$2.47 on Friday.

The company, with a market cap of $26 billion, paid Lee S$2.22 million in cash in the last financial year to March 31 -- representing an increase of 4.2 percent.

Facing a small home market of just 4.4 million people, where over nine out of 10 individuals own a mobile phone, SingTel has spent S$17 billion ($10 billion) in recent years buying operators in high-growth Asian nations with fewer cellphone users, and in the bigger Australian market.

It now derives about 75 percent of revenues and two-thirds of pre-tax earnings from operations outside Singapore.

SingTel owns 21.5 percent of AIS, 30.8 percent of India's Bharti Group , 44.6 percent of Globe Telecom Inc. in the Philippines, 35 percent of Indonesia's PT Telkomsel , and 45 percent of Pacific Bangladesh Telecom Ltd.

This really was a shock for many people as it came totally out of the blue. Could he be moving to Temasek or the GIC? Or did he foresee that SingTel has scaled the peak and now is the right time to step down? Political role next? Illness? Migrating overseas?

There are thousand and one possiblities but they are all speculations. He has not divulged much except to say that 12 years is a long tenure for any CEO and now is as good a time as any to hand over the reins. Well, if he wants, i believe that any of the statutory boards will be able to accomodate him anytime but definitely he should be moving into a bigger role as we are after all "short of talents" in Singapore and the "All L**" family are all talented people...

Just some thoughts

2006-07-21T02:58:00.000+10:00

Thought i will just share this pic which my friend send me a few days back. I had a good laugh when i saw it; haha... that little bugger, where is he looking? Anyway, no harm, maybe he is still breastfeeding or is just curious.

But seriously, girls these days are getting more and more liberated. Take a walk down Orchard Rd or Bugis and you see girls wearing skimpy outfits and the 'in' thing right now is no longer exposing the cleavage, it is also about showing the a** crack and the G-strings. I have no problems with that, for guys, it is good for the heart and blood circulation but i definitely would not allow my daughter to flaunt herself in this manner.

Where are all the parents by the way, are they aware of the children's attire or they approve of it? The situation can only get worse as we are exposed to more and more of the Western culture. When we read in the newspapers about teenage sex and rising abortion cases (kissing and holding hands at playgrounds, MRT, void decks are considered normal already), we really have to ask ourselves whether our education is a failure and have we done enough to impart life lessons of responsibilties to the children.

It has been a few years now since the govt encouraged sex education in schools but is it a success, well, Tharman would be in a better position to answer this question...

A World Cup Joke - Theo Walcott

2006-07-17T16:52:00.000+10:00

A friend of mine sent me this joke and i found it VERY amusing. You may not catch the joke if you are not a soccer fan. Here it goes:

What I did in the Summer -Theo Walcott

I went to a place called Germany with my Uncle Sven and some other grown
up's. It is a country in Europe where a bad man called Adolf used to
live with his nazties, he does not live there anymore, Uncle Owen does
live there, and the grown up's say I cant talk about the bad man as it
will make Uncle Owen cry if I do. In Germany there are lots of castles
and some mountains. We are staying in a place called Baden Baden that's
a silly name, Uncle Frank has the same name as his dad, that's silly
too, his mum must get their underpants mixed up all the time.

On the aeroplane Uncle Sol sat next to me, he got me some toffee and
wants to be my friend, he works at the place where I do my YTS, so does
Uncle Freddy but him and Uncle Sol are not best friends anymore.

Uncle Owen met us at the airport, he talks foreign, Uncle Wayne, Uncle
Steven and Uncle David also talk funny, my mum says Uncle David talks
like Orville, he is a duck, Uncle Sol say's uncle David wears dresses
and knickers, and asked me if I had ever worn them. Uncle Sol got me
some pop.

In Germany the grown ups are going to play football, my grandad says we
beat them in the olden days before my mum was born. That is a long time
ago.

While the grown up's went to play football so I went shopping with
Auntie Vicky and some other girls she bought me a big ice cream and got
herself a little one but she said she was full before she had eaten any
and threw it away. She bought lots of shoes and handbags and let me play
with Brooklyn. She say's she used to be in a pop band and sang me one of
her songs, I think she was telling fibs.

I told Uncle Sol about my day out with Vicky and he sulked, then he
bought me an even bigger ice cream with lots of hundred's and thousands
on it.

All the other grown up's have a girlfriend except Uncle Sol so he plays
with me while they go out. Uncle Sven says I must keep Uncle Sol happy,
that's why I got taken on holiday.

The grown up's went to play Football against somebody called Sweden,
Uncle Sol was crying as Uncle Freddy played for them and would not talk
to him. Uncle Sol bought me lots of toffee today and some crisps. Uncle
Sven is from Sweden and I heard him on the phone to their boss last
night. Uncle Michael hurt his knee and had to go home to his mum for a
plaster. Uncle Peter is a giant, a proper giant like you see in books,
he is rubbish at football though.

Uncle Wayne had a sore toe at the start of out holiday but it got better
so they let him play football. Uncle Sol got me a present but I do not
like it. He says all Germans wear leather underpants and I should while
we are here, they are too tight for me.

All the grown up's started to call Uncle Wayne a potato head who stood
on somebodys spuds. He got shouted at by the referee. They are all
saying that we have to go home now. Uncle Sol was crying again and I had
to sit on his knee to make him stop. He had his mobile phone in his
pocket, I think. And it weren't one of those new small phones, it was
proper big.

Foreign worker levy raised by 50 per cent

2006-07-16T02:30:00.000+10:00

Singapore's Manpower Ministry has announced changes to its foreign worker policy, to moderate its demand.Among them, an increase in the foreign worker levy for skilled workers.But the Manpower Ministry is also taking steps to ensure that companies don't suffer due to a shortage of workers, especially in the services sector.

The foreign worker levy was cut in 1998 and 1999 to help businesses tide over difficult economic conditions at that time, but Singapore's sustained growth over the past few years created a record number of jobs last year with 63,500 jobs going to locals.At the same time the number of foreign worker permit holders also stood at its highest - 43,000 - since 1997.So to moderate the demand for foreign workers, the levy for skilled foreign workers will go up from the current $100 to $150 from January next year.

Manpower Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen said this would ensure businesses bringing in foreign workers were careful in ensuring that the numbers also increase productivity."I don't think it is healthy for businesses to bring in larger numbers with no controls and this is a partial restoration of the levy cut and fairly consistent with the strong demand we saw last year for foreign workers."This also reduces the wage disparity between foreign and local workers; in other words if wages for local workers increase because of demand and your levy stays the same, then the gap between the wages for locals and what employer are paying actually widens.

This will 'incentivise' them to have a greater demand for foreign workers and that's one reason we are partially restoring the foreign worker levy to make sure the gap is maintained, it doesn't widen," said Dr Ng.But the Manpower Minister said some businesses had also given feedback that the tight labour market has in some instances restricted their potential to grow and meet new orders. They have had to reject orders as they could not find enough workers to expand.

To make it more flexible, the Ministry will also adjust some measures in its foreign worker controls.These include increasing the quota for the S pass category from five to ten percent in October, and raising the dependency ceiling cap for hiring foreign workers in the services industry, but at a higher levy from January next year. Dr Ng made the announcement after touring the Vivocity job fair at the Harbourfront Centre.Vivocity, which will have retail, lifestyle and food outlets is due to open in October with 7,000 jobs available. - CNA /dt

Well done, another increase... This time, it is to increase productivity and control the number of foreign workers in Singapore. Whether the employment rate of locals will increase correspondingly with this latest change is still uncertain. Nevertheless, it is a welcome move to protect the interests of the locals who are competing for the same jobs but may request higher salaries than the foreign counterparts due to the standard of living here.

It is ridiculous to expect Singaporeans to take the same pay as the foreigners as we have commitments like housing, insurance, car loans, children's education to consider while the foreigners do not have such worries in Singapore and can save up the bulk of their money and remit it back. And the exchange rate is so much better, as much as 5-10 times better back in their homeland, so is it a wonder that they are working twice or thrice as hard as Singaporeans??

Increases in Taxi Fares

2006-07-08T13:27:00.000+10:00

Fare increases again; this time under the pretext of helping taxi-drivers cope with increase in fuel cost. After the elections, increase in cost of living is as sure as night and day. It is no wonder that more and more Singaporeans, especially heartlanders are getting disillusioned with life in Singapore. The mounting bills are making life unbearable here and one day, something's got to give.

It is really difficult to identify with the nation-building effort when we look at all the price increases and they are nothing more than efforts to sustain profitability. The latest general survey shows that average household incomes are up and people are making more money. More jobs have also been created. Is it all so rosy here in Singapore? If yes, then i must be mistaken for seeing faces of incredulity when people read the news rather than cheers and adulation for the government.

The reason for giving us all these good news is to be a percusor to the rising bills we have to pay. As they say, the government is now going to take back what they handed out in Progress Package PLUS interest. The view from heartlanders is that the money (our money) given to us in the PP is not peanuts, it is akin to taking a piece of flesh from the govt and they will be taken back very soon (to balance the budget) while the high pay of the ministers and civil servants is "peanuts" and does not impact the budget.

The rationale for the increase in taxi fares is highly questionable, will taxi-drivers really benefit? If yes, i have no qualms about the issue but sadly that is not the case. Firstly, If the concern is the welfare of taxi-drivers, why can't the taxi companies decrease the rentals and help them tide over this difficult period? Oops, am i stating the obvious here, surely the interest and profit of the organization cannot be sacrificed for the taxi-drivers, there would be a serious fallout to the bonus packages and salaries of these directors. Secondly, if fare increase is unavoidable, then is there any chance of it being adjusted downwards when fuel cost return to their normal level? No chance again, sad to say. It is all about profits, profits, profits,.... and it is made all the more disgusting when they use the taxi-drivers' plight to cover up the true intentions.

If anybody is still unclear about the intentions, it was reported in the news recently that after the increase of taxi-fares,the taxi rental fees are going to increase as well. So, pray tell, where is the help for taxi-drivers???? Who is the real beneficiary of these increases at the end of the day???? Here is also a statement from Comfort which will be pleasing to shareholders: 'Comfort delgro's taxi- derived earnings make up the single biggest contribution to its bottom line. The group made $200 million in net profit last year - a repeat of 2004 's performance despite higher fuel costs.'

Despite higher fuel cost, they maintained the profit margin. Well done!! Taxi-drivers slog like hell all day and night to rack up profits for these blood-suckers. A lot of taxi-drivers whom i have come across have expressed their difficulties in making ends meet and they have to dig into their savings at times to pay the rentals. The bottomline is this, unlike the past where a taxi-driver can be the sole breadwinner for the family, it is nearly impossible to do that today. The government is even praising the old generation of taxi-drivers who keep on driving and they want to increase the retirement age, what a nice spin to the reality. They drive because they have no choice, either they need to support themselves or they still need to resolve the education fees of their children.

A lot of taxi-drivers are contemplating the decision to return back the taxis as the burden is too much to handle. If these old "money-making machines" no longer provide their service and the younger generation do not want to drive, then the taxi-companies will be in trouble. Never mind lah, the government can just get foreign labour to come in or just put pressure on the youngsters and tell them not to be choosy (ignoring the fact that a lot of these youngsters may be poly or university grads).

On the consumer side, there is also no clear benefit to the fare increases. The problem of long waiting time for taxis is ever present and the service is not much better either. The government talks about measures for heartware, to reconnect Singaporeans but all this is pure wayang and it smacks of hypocriscy when you are squeezing heartlanders from all angles while talking about caring and concern.

The festering of disillusionment and discontent will continue and it will be reflected in the elections one day. The swelling of ranks in the Worker's Party is already a strong indication as slowly but surely, they are gaining the support of Singaporeans and their step by step approach is the right way forward. The young voters are more educated and will not be easily bought over by the rhetorics of the government. The government has surrounded itself with scholars and elites and want to convince us that the future of Singapore is safe only in the hands of the best brains. However, if these talents can only increase prices all round to solve whatever problems they had, then the plan is not impressive.

Singapore Heartlander has to say this one more time, you don't need a scholar to implement price increases, a road sweeper will do and he will not need a hefty salary. By the way, taxi fares will not be the last of the price increases, more should be on the way, afterall we are earning more already, why worry...

Reflections on Police Investigation of Blogger Char for Sedition

2006-06-23T14:33:00.000+10:00

The Straits Times reported on this story last week where this "21 year old accounts assistant is being investigated for allegedly flouting the Sedition Act by publishing pictures on his blog that were thought to depict Jesus Christ in an offensive manner. The blogger, who used the online moniker Char, had found the cartoons on the Internet and began posting them in January. He told The Straits Times last week that he was called in by the police for questioning in March, after they received a complaint."

My basic stance is towards moderation and tolerance for all religions and nobody should belittle anybody's religion, either out of malice or discrimination (I am a Buddhist btw). That is a tenet which i live by. However, at the same time, i am secretly pleased with the blogger community's strong support for 'Char'. There are very compelling and valid reasons being spoken out in his defence and i agree with most of them.

Is there a contradiction here? No, because of my moderate stance, in fact, i have a very open mind about such matters and satirical cartoons, free religious discussions, will not bother me. If you were to tell me now that a monk has committed cardinal sins, i will really lambast him instead of covering him up. Or even if someone were to write an article about, say the 'unclean' life of Buddha before he attained Nirvana, i will just read it with an open mind and if this is absolute nonsense, i will not be agitated but just ignore it.

The internet has a lot of such garbage but at the same time, also rare insights into the workings of certain cults, which a lot of people will not have access to if not for the internet, so it is really up to the readers to judge the merits for themselves.

Back to Blogger 'Char'. To be frank, i wasn't happy that the police has gotten involved in this case. Yes, Char's actions may be wrong, irresponsible, insensitve, or whatever, but leave it to the internet community to put it right rather than the use of prosecution.

Right now, Char's case is a situation where a person or a minority group with certain agenda can launch a complaint against anybody and get him/her into trouble with the law. Justice and taxpayers' resources can be misused easily and there is no way of stopping such abuse at the moment. There are more offensive cartoons on the net which can be accessed with just a search, so why isn't the person who lodged the complaint against Char also complaining about these pictures? By the way, Char's blog wasn't that popular or influential a blog in the first place so the heavy-handed manner in which he is being dealt with is really disproportionate to the crime.

There is always a danger when it comes to comments on religions or races that an innocuous remark can be taken out of context, interpreted wrongly and becomes inflammatory. The government may want to prevent a small incident from becoming serious before it intervenes but somehow, I just got a nagging doubt of whether this could be the government's warning shot to the online community to toe the line.

If we are to prosecute people for posting religious content with the slightest twinge of impropriety or because one person is offended, what kind of message are we sending to the world? We will be moving towards a fundamentalist and intolerant society which will unravel the good work which had been achieved over the years. Bigotry will be tempted to rear its ugly head by the government's actions.

We should in fact give ourselves a pat on the back when religious pictures or comments which cause temperatures to rise in other parts of the world do not cause as much as a ripple in our society. If the day comes when our citizens take to the streets to protest over a satirical picture, then the government is in trouble. We should not cultivate 'sensitive' citizens as it is the first step towards intolerance and social unrest whenever religious topics are brought up.

The movie Da Vinci Code, controversial as it is, has not caused widespread mayhem but one will imagine the author being sentenced to life in Singapore's case. Instead of sensationalising these issues, desensitize is the word when it comes to religious issues. Only when there is a very serious case of malice or sedition, does the prosecution moves in. For a secular nation to prosecute its people for very mild religious jokes does seem out of place and not befitting with our global image.

I also find it an irony that the government just came up with an initiative a couple of days ago to speed up the IT development in Singapore. If the desire is to get more people connected to the net, then you will also have to be prepared for more internet activities and comments, so a change in mindset is required. Regardless of the importance or triviality of the matter, if police investigations can be called in at any time to settle personal online vendettas, then the system is going to be overwhelmed.

As this case is not cast in stone yet, investigations are still ongoing and neither have most of us seen the pictures for ourselves, we just got to wait and see what will happen...

Upgrading issue again

2006-06-15T01:35:00.000+10:00

A few days ago, Mr Mah Bow Tan promised that all old housing estates will be upgraded by 2015 but till then, PAP wards come first.

It has been pointed out time and again that there are flaws in the PAP defence of such a policy. But first thing first, if all wards will be upgraded as promised, then don't make the upgrading an election issue anymore. Why must voters be faced with such a dilemna of voting in a PAP candidate just to jump ahead of the upgrading queue instead of looking at the what the candidates have done or will be doing for the constituency?

A letter in the Straits Times forum pointed out correctly that when elected, the government of the day has a fiduciary duty towards all citizens, regardless of their political stand. Now, i can accept that resources are limited and someone would have to come first. The problem is in the selection process. If all things being equal and it boils down to a single factor of PAP or opposition ward, then the PAP decides to give their own ward the priority. Well that is fair enough for me and it is their privilege for being elected as the government with the majority votes.

Unfortunately, that is not the case right now. Opposition wards do not even factor in the equation at all, straightaway, they are being placed at the back of the queue without any careful consideration of their needs, which may have placed them ahead of most PAP wards being upgraded currently if this whole issue is not being colored by political affiliation.

This is really an intractable situation with the PAP defending its stand and refusing to accept any counter-arguments or feedbacks. The opposition as well as some heartlanders on the other hand are also refusing to accept the PAP's side of the story.

Conclusion: Victors call the shots. Nothing is going to change and come the next election, this will again be the hot issue, regrettably...

"Fixing" the Negative Internet Part II

2006-06-07T22:09:00.000+10:00

It has been only a week but it seems like ages since i updated this blog.

Much has happened, ministers have been sworn into office and the government announcing that a lighter touch will be applied at the next election. I guess the PAP has come to its senses and realise that self-regulation on the internet may work out better than its intervention. It cannot stop the technological advances which will be even more pervasive nor turn the tides of ideological changes come the next election.

A lighter touch at the next election is a step in the right direction but at the same time, the PAP also voiced reservations on the free-for-all scene. It is apparent that the relaxations are ceded grudgingly (more out of helplessness) and PAP is still uncomfortable with the presence of political sites. Hence, it remains to be seen how the future legislations will be tabled out, despite the assurance of open-mindedness. As they say, the devil is in the details.

Nevertheless, it is heartening to see the PAP's shift to a more moderate stance. It is true that certain sites have misused the annoymity the net has conferred on users to mislead the public and to further their own agendas. The PAP says that it is difficult to tell fiction from facts on the net but that is not true. In fact, because of the easy access of the net's information, in most cases, for every fiction/myth, the truth/counter-argument can be found with just a click or a search away from us. Of course, some people can research information better than others but that is no reason to regulate this free flow of information and try to sterilise the place. If the day comes when the PAP requires the ISPs to control what we can or cannot read, leaving us to imbibe only the government's press releases, then it would be a sad chapter in the history of Singapore.

We are thinking individuals and should be able to judge for ourselves instead of the PAP bossing us around and acting like it is the only savior of the nation and without them, our paths to enlightenment and success will be threatened. Those who disagree with the system are deemed as undesirable characters while those who agree are considered as good and loyal citizens. In this day and age, this old school of thought and system must change. In fact, the priorities of the youngsters these days are to see a fairer and more efficient government; this is considered much more important than bread and butter issues as a recent survey reported in the Straits Times has shown. At later stages in their lives, the priorities may shift but at the moment, the PAP will have its hands full dealing with the aspirations of this group of young voters who are more idealistic and fervent about a level playing field.

The government is worried about rumors and half-truths on the net and yes, rumors if left unattended, have the potential to be the unspoken truth and influence people's thoughts. However, i feel that the best defence against rumors is to come clean on all the details, rather than to clamp down on dissenting views and make a topic taboo. Where transparency and accountability are concerned, the PAP should make them a rule rather than the exception.

Our investments in Suzhou, are they are a failure or success? How much of taxpayers money have gone into this venture? The government has insisted that most of the money comes from the private sector and very little of it is from public funds. How is it then that a lot of heartlanders do not buy this argument but rather to believe that a lot of public funds have been lost in this venture? Is it the government's disclosure which is at fault or the heartlanders are simply hardcore dissidents who want to sing a different tune with the government just for the sake of it?

When drawn into a dispute, the government makes a distinction between commercial and nation interests (for eg. the deal done between Temasek and Shin Corp) but again, a lot of people are not convinced. A few years back, the term "Singapore" seems to get much currency and goodwill globally and to link up with a GLC will put a business in a strong footing in most of the overseas ventures. Somewhere along the line, something has changed or gone wrong as it seems to be better nowadays for businesses to disassociate themselves from the GLCs and Temasek in order to close out a deal. The PAP should reflect on why this trend (loss of goodwill) is taking place and though Temasek has tried to strengthen their PR, it is still insufficient.

However that is not my main concern here. I am actually more interested to know whether the shoppping spree which Temasek and GLCs have embarked on has indeed been good for Singapore. In any investments, they carry an element of risk and by stepping up our investments, we are going for higher returns but also exposing ourselves to higher risks. The government has a duty to safeguard the assets and make sure that there is no immense losses while squande.., sorry investing. This is not a private corporation where losses can be written off as bad debts and the company filed for bankruptcy if creditors sue them. Our money is at stake so we need to know more, especially in light of the billion dollar purchases over the last couple of years.

Also, the internet has actually allowed us to explore the views of people like Francis Seow and Mr Tang Liang Hong and judge for ourselves whether their arguments hold any merit. Should this right to read be taken away from us and let us be deprived of their opinions? People are free to form their own impressions or convictions after looking at the alternative views which no mainstream media will publish. I have read their articles but i will not impose my views on anybody. What i can say is that there are relevant points in their arguments which the government can reflect upon and hopefully improve, so that we may also enjoy a better image abroad, which is increasingly important in this global economy.

Right now, all these alternative views are at our fingertips and it is easy for us to research on such materials. This situation shoud not change because of one or two person who are irritated by these remarks. Rather than having a group of brainwashed and easily manipulated citizens, it is better for the nation to have people with analytical skills and be able to think and fend for themselves. By controlling such views on the net, we may also be cultivating a group of people who are disconnected from the world and the ill-effects may be long-lasting and difficult to undo years later.

That will be all for now. Due to the demands of my work, I will be updating my blog on a weekly basis, so stay tuned...

Reflections on the "No NS Deferment" saga

2006-05-29T03:37:00.000+10:00

Last week, Mindef has the final say on this issue by rejecting the deferment appeal of Ike. A lot has already been discussed on this topic, in forums, newspapers and blogs and seriously, i feel that all the views for and against the deferment are valid to a certain extent and there is really no perfect solution to this matter.

I am for the deferment of Ike but i can't help but feel that our opinions doesn't matter in the larger scheme of things. Naturally, Mindef made the "right" decision of rejecting the deferment on the basis of equality for all NS eligible males, otherwise the floodgates will be open and it will be embroiled in greater controversy. This is also an important decision where troop morale is concerned, so they have made their call.

Nevertheless, has the NS system been fair all along or will it be fair in the future with this decision? I don't think so. In the good old days, Mindef granted deferments to PSC scholars, medical students and certain sportsmen so long as the letters of recommendations are strong enough. So the deferment of those people then was fair while now a budding musician's case is deemed to be important enough to shake the foundations of the institution?

If Melvyn Tan's case was not reported last year and subsequently received the bad press, will Mindef have reviewed its deferment policy and now rejected Ike's case? Isn't this more of a wayang (for show) to the people to show that Mindef is impartial? I still remeber the saying 'you can do anything in NS, just don't get caught'. Similarly, inequalities in the system will be allowed to continue so long as nobody make noise. The sacrifice of Ike's case is more of an appeasement to the outcry last year than Mindef's desire to be impartial to all NS men.

People who call for all to suffer, sorry serve, is not really a call for loyalty (though a small number may be). It is more a communist thinking, where everybody must be equal, regardless of circumstances. If the worry is that Ike may not come back to serve, then how about the scholars who were granted the privilege? The government invested resources in these "future leaders" but it cannot even control the number of bond-breakers (except to publicise their names and embarassing them), how can they control the scholars who chose not to come back and serve their NS? They have seen greener pastures and a brighter future outside of Singapore and they will be foolhardy to come back here and waste the 2 years. That is so much for equality.

By the way, I think it is better if those scholars who do not want to come back and serve to stay put; if they come back, they are bound to be high-ranking officers and one can only imagine the consequences of these scholars leading the troops into the battlefield. Fighting on the battlefield is a matter of life and death and entire troops can perish based on the character of the leaders. If you do not have the passion, no amount of legislation, arm-twisting or monetary rewards will save the nation. No point forcing people to serve or rejecting deferments, serving the country is based on integrity, trust and a sense of belonging. If there is distrust now, then it is also not safe to trust the citizens on the battlefield.

If Mindef is so intent on ensuring that all of us have a more or less equal footing in terms of education, then make sure NOBODY gets deferment, certainly not making leeway according to the nation's needs. We already have enough of double standards ( i am not even going to elaborate about the white horse system within NS, that will be for another day). All of us have parents who are concerned about us and when parents entrust their kids to Mindef, they expect their kids to be treated equally (regardless of whether you are a prince or peasant) and to return safely from the training. No special treatment or privileges should be granted to anybody.

According to Mindef's latest statements, they will make concessions only for very exceptional cases. Well, Mindef has claimed the moral high ground of equality but the people will be scrutinising even harder from now on, and we will be keen to know who gets the next deferment and how special is that person going to be.

"Fixing" the Negative Internet Part I

2006-05-25T19:54:00.000+10:00

24 May 2006
'Today' newspaper
PAP must address 'negative Internet'
by Derrick A Paulo

She was a new face representing the People's Action Party, but when Ms Denise Phua surfed the Internet during the recent General Election, the tone of the postings stunned her.

They were overwhelmingly slanted against the ruling party.

"I know that something has gone wrong when more than 85 per cent (of the traffic) writes negatively about the PAP," she said at a post-mortem of the GE organised last night by the National University of Singapore Society.

"This is something that the PAP would do well to take into account ... and to manage this channel of communication," she added.

Ms Phua stressed that she was not dismissing the views posted on the Internet nor even disagreeing with them. Her concern was more that the coverage was not balanced.

Nowhere, for example, was it mentioned that this particular GE was not a snap poll or that the Opposition had the freedom to hold rallies of its own. But given the fact that cyber-traffic goes out to the world, Ms Phua felt that a foreigner reading about elections in Singapore would only have a chance to hear one side of the story that too, a somewhat skewed one.

Again, she mentioned that her party would do well to think about this medium.

One member of the audience pointed out that if the Internet was skewed in one direction then, surely, the local media had gone in the other direction, giving far more coverage to the ruling party.

Perhaps, rebutted Ms Phua, this was on account of the fact that the PAP had fielded far more candidates in the GE than the Opposition and the coverage was a reflection of that.

Dr Chee Soon Juan, secretary-general of the Singapore Democratic Party, objected not merely to the extent of coverage that his party had received in the media, but also to the tone of it. He said that even the photographs of his party's candidates used in local newspapers were "not flattering". Someone from the audience mentioned that Dr Chee sounded more "reasonable" than the image he had formed of him. "That is because what you read about me is a relentless campaign of character assassination," said Dr Chee.

A member of the audience observed that the local media, during the recent GE, had been more balanced than in the past.

Another issue that cropped up related to voting secrecy. Mr Perry Tong from the Workers' Party acknowledged that he had no doubt whatsoever that the vote was secret and it was "as good as impossible" for someone to find out how an individual had voted.

Political scientist Dr Ho Khai Leong then said he was surprised that the Opposition had not used this fact to their advantage to persuade more people to vote for them.

But Dr Chee said the fears did exist.

"And even if people's fears are irrational, you still have to address them," he added.

As a fellow blogger, i am really moved to write something on this article after reading it. The issue here does not just concern individual bloggers but the future direction which the country is going to take.

Dr Lee Boon Yang and his ministry (MICA) were entrusted after the elections with the task of studying the effects of the internet on the elections. That was already a clear signal by the government to move into this arena and rein in the negative views so it comes as no surprise to me that a rookie has now also picked up the line and argue for tighter control.

I do not want to speculate on the reasons for Denise Phua's speech, whether she really feels this way or she is trying to be politically correct or she just want to impress her bosses. If she has fast-tracked her fledging career with these remarks, i congratulate her (but that is not my concern here). Her remarks have caused a widespread anger among bloggers simply because to "manage this channel of communication" is just a nice way of saying censorship.

Pray tell, how are you going to manage our views? By legislating bloggers to apply for licenses on political content or setting up a task force to review all posts in blogs and forums? Isn't that a waste of time and taxpayers' money when there are other more pressing issues like education, medical, economy, aging population, rich-poor divide, etc. to deal with? The government laments Singaporeans political apathy and calls for us to step forward and participate actively in the remaking of the nation. That is what Singaporeans have been doing in forums, feedback sessions, meet the MPs sessions, and now blogs.

Why can't the government keep an open mind and put its heart and soul into listening to these views, treating them as valuable feedback instead of anti-PAP messages? Is it that the government can only adopt the views of professionals, academics, world-class consultants while the views of heartlanders are pushed aside? During the election, PM Lee says it is okay to put up white elephants to make a point even if the Home Minister is not agreeable to it. Yet it cannot tolerate alternative views from bloggers. This is sending mixed signals to foreigners and locals to the true nature of the government, are we heading for a more open and consultative leadership or regressing to a repressive style?

By the way, if the government is intent on controlling the internet's activities, why haven't the government put a stop to more harmful and deviant materials like pornography, gambling and other adult contents on the web? Yet it is willing to expend the time and resources to keep track of bloggers and read between the lines of our views for any seditious or treacherous content.

By controlling bloggers, the government is preparing itself to gain international recognition but for the wrong reasons. Foreigners are again going to pity and mock at the plight of Singaporeans and this whole episode will just be more fodder for their attacks on the government. Well done, PAP!!

More to add later.

Reflections after the Elections - Part III

2006-05-21T01:50:00.000+10:00

The elections over and the price hikes issues which were cautiously avoided by the PAP, have now turned into a reality. It is disappointing that the PAP did not want us to be 'worried' during the elections and did not explore these issues at length but instead choose to dwell on James Gomez's character and upgrading. Why not thrash out these bread-and-butter concerns and if the people still vote overwhelmingly, the mandate is even stronger for the PAP because Singaporeans have understood the issues at hand, how the PAP is going to solve the problems as well as the preparation for future challenges.

One may argue that it is not the government's fault that oil prices and commodities have spinned out of control and the government should not be subsidizing or absorbing all the hikes. From the economics point of view, that is true, as we do not want the budget to go into deficits year after year. That would be a vicious cycle which will eventually destroy the competitiveness of the country and bankrupt our reserves.

Having said that, what then should the government be doing to alleviate the hardships and sufferings of Singaporeans, especially the heartlanders. We gave you the vote, a strong mandate, to lead us, if not to prosperity, at least out of the doldrums. The rosy economic outlook has not been felt on the ground, all the percentages (5%,6%, whatever) is the macro side of the story. By and large, our salaries are still stagnant and CPF cuts have not been restored while prices have gone up. So what has the good news got to do with us, our purchasing power has remained the same, if not already diminished.

If the government is to adopt the strategy of increasing prices just to cope with the problems, then anybody can be the government. You seriously don't need scholars or the elites. We can simply vote in a road-sweeper into the government, if he faces problems, well all he needs to do is pass down the message that prices will be increasing. We expect more from the government than this.

We keep hearing from the government that we are not realistic, we need to manage our expectations, not be choosy, don't price ourselves out of the market, be competitive, productive, if no businesses we stay here and rot.....

All well said and certainly true. But does the government really understand what Singaporeans are going through at the moment. I for one can't see a prosperous future in Singapore. We keep on working with a constant salary (kena capped, cannot increase anymore) but prices keep going up, so year after year, we end up with lesser and lesser purchasing power, yet the government still pushes for world-class infrastructure and systems, which further increase prices. What then is the point of working and what is the future for our kids in Singapore if we as parents today are struggling to make ends meet?

In the past, our parents are not so well-educated, so hopefully a good education will make a better life for us and that is what they have done painstakingly by giving us the best education we can have. Now, we have the good education but things doesn't seem that much better and i fear what will happen to the fourth generation because now a lot of graduates are feeling the heat, so where does that leave our kids? We can only hope to put them through masters and doctorates to distinguish themselves, but that is no guarantee of success as we can't predict what will happen then but it definitely will put financial strain on us (an ordinary university degree is already rising and one cah only imagine how much it cost ten years later)

The crux of the matter is the rising education prices but yet education is no longer the answer. It will no longer be THE guarantee of jobs or success in life (with globalisation and talents aplenty). What then is the government going to do about this? We need the answers, not the inquiry into what kind of person Gomez is or how much money is going be budgeted for upgrading. While the government is finding the answers, we will tolerate with the daily announcements of price hikes.

I was once an avid supporter of PAP and its policies while in my schooling days but after working for some years, my mindset has changed. I believe there are many more people like me and the PAP should reflect on its policies and see where it has gone wrong. We are the heartlanders but with more education than our fathers, so why has this segment of people switched camp and no longer in support of the government's policies. The PAP should have already have a feel of the feeling of these people through the interaction between MM Lee and the journalists (though i feel that it may have got a bit out of hand).

The PAP has till the next election to work out the solutions. In five years time, the people will be out to judge again and this time, the votes will speak differently if the end result is that all prices go up but citizens lives have not changed for the better and gone for worse.

I have some more to add but for now, that will be all. See y'all soon.

Increase in transport charges - Part II

2006-05-18T13:55:00.000+10:00

No i am harping on this topic, just forgot to add some points in the first post.

I think the best way out is not nationalisation but for the government to introduce more players into the field to let market economics keep the situation in check. The government has done a pretty good job with the telecommunications sector and it has been really good for consumers with the competition (kudos for the whoever made the decision years ago). The bus sector should be further liberalised to give people a wider choice (i mean taxis licenses were given out in the last couple of years why not the bus licenses).

The new entries could focus on a different market by offering the budget buses, which is without all the frills while SBS and SMRT can focus on the premiere services. One thing we have to study is why the budget airlines are wildly successful when they first pop out on the scene. Ryanair was a good example. They started out in Europe which is a developed country and the fact is that there are plenty of people who just want the basic services and not all the add-ons (definitely enough for Ryanair to pose a strong challenge to established counterparts)

There is nothing to be ashamed of in taking budget flights or buses and it doesn't mean Singaporeans are cheapstake, the people from developed nations also want cheap things (China products are also gaining in popularity there for their cheap prices). Why must we pursue so strongly a world-class system, the trend now is to move into the budget market, so give consumers a choice.

By applying market economics into the picture, the government saves itself a lot of explanation and the PTC can be 'more relaxed' and the bus companies would think twice about any price hikes and go out to improve its serivces, instead of the present 'take it or leave it' attutude.

Right, that is all i have say, for the time being.

Champions League Finals

2006-05-18T12:48:00.000+10:00

What a topsy-turvy match! Barcelona ends up the winner against Arsenal with a scoreline of 2 - 1. Samuel Eto'o (76) and Juliano Belleti (80) scored for Barcelona while Sol Campbell (37) scored the only goal for Arsenal.

Arsenal was down to ten men in the 18th minute with Jens Lehmann fouling Eto'o just outside the penalty area. The referee should have given advantage play then as Barcelona scored despite the foul. But he flashed the red card and gave a free kick instead (correct lah, since the foul was just outside the box). Almunia came on and Pires was taken out. Barcelona must have rued the disallowed goal as it did not score from the freekick.

Despite being down to ten men, Barcelona did not really threaten the defence of Arsenal even if they created a lot of chances. In fact, Arsenal looked more threatening when they counter-attacked and Henry has the ball. In the 37th minute, against the run of play, Arsenal scored with Sol Campbell heading in the ball from Henry's freekick (classic header and a powerful one, hopes it gives Campbell confidence for the World Cup).

The goal settled Arsenal's nerves and they showed championship form with fluent passing and movement. Barcelona poured forward and Ronaldinho tried his very best to work his magic but Arsenal's defence held on. Arsenal was even able to counter attack and cause a few problems to Barcelona on several occasions.

The more they played, the more it seems like a lost cause and a bad day for Ronaldino and Barcelona as they looked bereft of ideas to break Arsenal's defence. I think the turning point was when Henrik Larsson came on for van Bommel as Barcelona decided to go all out. In the 76th minute, Eto'o cut in from the left flank and collected a flick from Larsson and squeezed a goal into the tiny gap at Alumia's near post.

Barcelona's confidence came back and Arsenal was still reeling from the first goal when the second was scored shortly. Five minutes later, again from Larsson's feet, subsitute Belleti latched on to the ball and scored from a impossible angle. I will say this is really a freak goal but it didn't matter. Barcelona is the new champion!!

They are rightly crowned the king of Europe as they shown consistency in winning their domestic title (with almost the same result as last year), have shown a flair in playing attacking football and really a joy to watch in full flow, especially the magic of Ronaldinho. It was a waste for Arsenal as they have come so close. Previously they have made so many attempts on the title, this year they are able to come all the way to the Finals, but it was not to be. But they have a chance to make it again next year and hopefully, they have broken their curse of being kicked out before reaching the semi-finals.

Increase in Transport Fares

2006-05-18T03:57:00.000+10:00

First, let me apologise for not updating over the last couple of days. In fact, i have gone over to a forum to better understand the sentiments people have for this topic. And the reactions range from indifference("elections over, to be expected") to anger ("me causing unnecessary unhappiness") and to people in support of my views. All in good order, that is a free forum and people can air their views as they like.

A lot of the views have set me thinking, which i will elaborate later. The main thing is i have decided not to make any more posts on that topic, in respect of the forum and the members. Why? Because i do not want my views to dominate the discussion and that topic ends up a mud-slinging battle between 2 or 3 characters. The tit-for-tat responses will only result in me hogging the thread and other people's views are clouded out. That is not healthy and i do not desire to take centrestage or impose my views on anybody. What i have to say have more or less already been said and people are free to decide for themselves.

For the benefit of readers who are not aware, i was posed with a few interesting questions. Firstly do i advocate the nationalisation of bus services. No, i do not but is this so important in the first place? Does it mean that the bus service has to be run by the government and as taxpayers then do we have the right to raise issue with the fare increases? As users of the transport system, don't we have the right to ask the corporations of the questions on the policies which affect us? Let's face this question and answer it truthfully, what is the role of a public transport system?

State run enterprises is the not the way to go. You lose the motivation to innovate, be productive and cost effective since the state is looking out for you. Even now, this is a partially nationalised condition (as one member rightly pointed out) since there is no competition and they do not really need to rack their brains on the cost-savings measures. If the need arise, just press the button "Increase fares" and the problems are solved.

I can't blame people for being indifferent, after discussion of this topic, i too am tempted to be indifferent. What to do, just take it as it is. There is nothing we can change. But seriously, if Singaporeans are no longer concerned about issues which should concern us, then the future is bleak. If we are not even concerned about our own things, how can we be bothered with the nation?

Reflections after the Elections - Part II

2006-05-15T10:20:00.000+10:00

Hi, guys, i am back. Give me a moment to recollect my thoughts....

Ok, Gomezgate and upgrading overshadowing the important issues. Well, i do not know what the foreign observers will make of our election. Some of the bigger topics were not fully debated. Nobody brought up the NKF issue. For the benefit of those who do not know, Mr Durai, the CEO of NKF had misappropriated the donation funds to fatten his own wallet and that of the directors; money was paid out for unfulfilled contracts, lavish expenses were paid out of the NKF fund, including the court fees for suing a guy who had accussed him...., (there seems to be more but i can't recall so much).

I know this is a particularly sensitive issue, situation not helped by Chee Soon Juan who has to make those claims that the government was fully aware and abetting the misdeed. (please lah, I mean you got a doctorate, so you should know how to research and substantiate your claim, we "uneducated" people don't know how to research but will hail you as a hero if you can find any evidence, not make baseless comments).

Well, thanks to Dr Chee, this topic was "out of bounds" to the opposition. Nevertheless, a proper debate can and should be conducted during the election. Much of the fury, shock and disbelief had dissipated as time heal all wounds. The NKF interim management getting the accounts back in order, the Health Minister facing the scandal and explaining to the public instead of avoiding it as well as the prosecutor who has decided to bring Mr Durai to court have more or less put faith back into the system.

However, Singaporeans want to know why such a thing has been allowed to happen and what are the future checks and balances in place to prevent charity organizations from pulling off the same trick. The whole scandal happened right under the nose of the government, i mean NKF is such a high profile organization and has always got the support from government offcials at major functions. Because of this association, it gives the NKF management a sense of legitimacy, authority and impregnability from inquiring eyes of the media and public (sorry i have to say this).

If the NKF fiasco can happen, then what about the other government or semi-government organizations where public funds are involved? I am not advocating that all the reserves be returned back to Singaporeans as that would be a sure recipe for disaster but we want accountability and transparency. Be it donation funds or public funds, the public have a right to know that there is no misuse. (So far, the issue of NKF has not shaken my confidence in the integrity of the government, it will have to take a real big scandal to do that). By the way, since the PAP is so concerned with "dishonesty" and "liar" which i think Durai fits the description, what will be the outcome of the Durai case, hmm....

Oops, time flies, i will continue again tommorrow. See y'all soon.

Happy Mother's Day

2006-05-14T11:25:00.000+10:00

Happy Mother's Day to all mothers out there!

You know what, i really have a deep respect for mothers and i feel that a mother's love for her child is really great simply because it is totally unconditional. They do not expect anything in return for the efforts they have given to their children and the family. When you are young, you just don't appreciate this and take everything for granted but as you get older and take stock of your life, you repent on the recklessness of youth and regret the agonies and heartaches your waywardness had caused (those were the days...).

Anyway, I brought my family out for lunch at a seafood restaurant (on the East side), and it was totally packed. Good thing we booked our table two weeks in advance. The meal really burned a hole in my pocket but the food was nice and the main thing was of course that my mother enjoyed it. She didn't want to go initially as she feels that all the hype from the media and advertisers had commercialized Mother's Day and she didn't want to waste hard-earned money. I agree but since it is once a year kind of thing, i told her that it is okay and also that i am doing my part to boost our economy by paying all these jacked-up prices.

Can you imagine what will happen if everybody stay at home and there is zero spending for these businesses after all the advertisements, the economy will lose steam, maybe Depression will be round the corner (don't think the government can handle that).

So that is our little celebration for Mother's Day. Hmm, i happen to be quite free today, maybe i will update more on my reflections of the elections later in the night.

Later,
Marcus

Reflections after the Elections - Part I

2006-05-12T20:57:00.000+10:00

It is a week since the General Elections and whatever excitement, passions or conflicts evoked during the 9 days of campaigning have simmered down as people went about their normal tasks. It is a good time for us to do some analysis and probably some soul-searching on what the election is all about and what the future holds for us.

To be frank, i am disappointed that the main focus of the election (until 2 days before voting) was on James Gomez and the slew of upgrading plans being dished out. First on Gomez, I have seen the video (it is impossible to miss unless you do not watch tv), and it clearly shows that Gomez did not hand in the minority form. I do not want to speculate on the reasons but if there is anything more sinister, then it is something which should be frowned upon. This may seem to be a pro-PAP stance but i believe in calling it like it is; if there are any underhand methods being employed, it diminishes the whole election and the participants involved. Victory is only sweet and to be savoured after a hard battle and overcoming impossible odds (as in the case of Chiam See Tong).

So we should not judge whether the act was due to distraction or criminal intent, that is something for the police to investigate. However the latest news today is that the Attorney General have decided not to press any charges against Gomez (as he had cooperated fully and has a clean record) but instead let him off with a "stern warning". This may not be the end of the story though, as MM Lee is still calling him a liar and dishonest guy so we will have to see how the situation pans out.

The next issue here is the upgrading plans. Chiam See Tong mentioned that it is a "divisive" action by the PAP. While i won't go so far as to use the word divisive, i do feel unhappy that whenever the going gets tough for the PAP, they start announcing UPGRADING PACKAGES for the residents. This shouldn't be the case and is an affront to the characters of us citizens, especially the heartlanders. Upgrading is something which any self-respecting government should do, otherwise what will our foreign friends think of the run-down estates in a world-class city? That the government is not doing anything or mismanaging the country?

I also find the PAP line of "someone has to come first" a bit old. Let's not forget that all of us have a role to play in Singapore's future and we pay our due taxes. Why must there be a distinction where PAP wards come first and opposition wards come last? Shouldn't the basis of upgrading be on the age of the estates and demographics and NOT political affiliations?

If we give the government the mandate, is it because of the upgrading or because we agree with the policies implemented (or to be implemented) and we know the country is in safe hands? If it is the former, then we are a 'poor' nation and society because we have given up on the intellectual aspects in exchange for materialistic benefits. The unfortunate thing is the government has a hand in cultivating this undesirable trait in Singaporeans.
(Luckily, as the election results in opposition wards show, Singaporeans have integrity and loyalty and are not so easily bowled over by the overwhelming "million-dollar" goodies).

I would really like to see the government keeping to its promise of upgrading the opposition wards. For several reasons. Firstly, it is not right to 'punish' the residents who voted for the opposition as they are just exercising their right to vote and make a choice between the candidates. Secondly, the government is likely to gain popular votes, especially in the opposition wards as they have shown themselves to be magnanimous. By now, it should already be obvious that Singaporeans are smart voters (as quoted from SM Goh), so if the PAP has done good things for the people, we know and we will be the final judge on its performance.

Well, sorry guys, i have spent too much time here. I will update more of my thoughts at a later date (i am a slow typist). Stay tuned....

Have a nice day.
Marcus.

Welcome to Singapore Heartlander

2006-05-12T02:44:00.000+10:00

Hi, everybody,

Welcome to my personal blog. This blog serves as my journal where i can record interesting events which happen to me or around me. When i write, it also helps me put in focus past events and set out my future plans. Occasionally, I will share with my readers some interesting articles which i have come across and add some commentary, so this blog will not be just the mundane me and the daily doom-and gloom news.

To a very large extent, this blog involves my personal thoughts and opinions which i am initially reluctant to divulge as my conservative upbringing has always been to keep our opinions to ourselves. Nevertheless, i have seen a few blogs on the web and i feel that they are of a high quality, witty and well-researched. With the advent of the internet, we are now able to speak freely on issues which are dear to our heart so long as we keep to the basic tenets (no post containing racism, religion, hatred, libel, pornography and other adult contents). This has always been my policy in my online activities and will set the tone for my blog.

Well, that is about all for today. I will make my proper post tomorrow.

Have a nice day.