GE2020: The Bane of Progressivism

While I still hope people will vote WP in Sengkang GRC, I think people still need to be educated on the danger of american political leftism/progressives.
We should denounce any attempts at focusing on electing someone on their "political alignment", especially one that promotes electing "progressives".
Let me tell you who are the progressives in Singapore: SDP/CSJ. Lim Tean even. Reform Party. Kenneth J.
These are the progressives/left wing politics.
You want these people? Seriously?
In the USA, among the top 20 cities with the worst crimes (meaning most poorly run), 19 are democrat cities. Democrats are the left wing party / progressives.
Progressives are often poor taking care of everyone, and they often discriminate against people who do not share the same ideology.
All activism are progressives. This is why some people argue when I make noise about banning straws - and when they cant win, the slander me. Thats what progressives people tends to do. They cant take no for an answer.
Progressives also tends to virtue signal, and wants to appear to be on the moral/ethical high ground. They willing to destroy anything anything that stands in their way, dismantle existing systems as well as taking money from other people - as long as it is not their own. But eventually, progressives always begets more progressives and eventually, even the original progressives are seen to be too conservative - more and more people will get sidelined or sent to the proverbial concentration camps.
And what happens when progressives and leftists take power? They start abusing it, regardless how you feel. People getting left behind or ostracized are often just "collateral damage" for a greater good.
You know what lies at the tail end of the political spectrum, all the way to the left? Communism. Thats what progressives extremists are.
Look at Hong Kong today, this is what communism will do with absolute power.

Presidency of Reservations.

Its been a long time since I wrote anything here. And I really wish I can "not need" to write any more "complains" against the PAP. Keeping quiet through all the nonsense over the past 2 years, this one is really one that I cannot take it.

Halimah is President.

The problem however is not with her. The problem is how she is "elected".

It is virtually absolute in sentiments on the ground that the entire "reserved presidency" was created by the PAP to bar Tan Cheng Bock from running. From how they count Wee Kim Wee as the "first elected President" to how they raised the bar to half a billion in managed asset - it created an unassailable criteria that left virtually no Malays being able to qualify for, barring a small handful.

Across all the social media channels, almost no one is celebrating and no one is happy about this. This election had been easily 10 times more gloomy than SR Nathan running uncontested. A great number is calling this election "Kelong". How can the PAP "defend" with the sort of "dignity"and "righteousness" by saying that took a political risk to do they right thing?

Not even the Malays are happy that they are a recipient of an affirmative action that they were taught all their lives that we are better than Malaysia; that we are better than this - that the Malays do not need more than what they already getting - they have the pride to tell their Malaysian counterparts that they made it on their own. But no longer.

If this racial representation is so important, why do we not have the same rules for the Prime Minister's position? Why the insistent that Singapore is not ready for a Non-Chinese Prime Minister? Everyone knows we would choose Tharman over any of the candidates for the next Prime Minister.

Halimah, serving as the "Deputy Secretary General, Director of the Legal Services Department and Director of the Women's Development Secretariat, of NTUC", does not put her in charge of the finance of NTUC. How is she qualified to be the President when the main job is to manage the country's reserves?

What if there is a billion dollar MNC, creating a position call "Director of Jokes", whose job is a executive role of just entertaining everyone in the boardroom - then run for the Presidency - he/she would still be qualified!

What is the point of an elected Presidency when all the PAP want is just to place their own people on the seat? If that is really the case, then why not just scrap the entire Elected Presidency and just appoint anyone that's qualified. Seriously, Singaporeans don't really care; we are not "democratically starved" - we just want to be treated with dignity and respect - not all these condescending political moves that treats the people of Singapore like as if we are idiots. We do not care if its appointed or its elected, we just want qualified people on it.

The same as for the General Elections, we do not like the PAP's attitude, but we nevertheless elect the best candidates in our respective wards that we believe can bring our country forward. We are pragmatic and meritocrats ourselves, the people. But to pull this reserve presidential elections joke on us, just to bar a popular choice for President from running, man... PAP, you just gave up much more for too little. 因小失大。

The strategic mistake for this Presidential Election, the fumble, is the same nonsense the mars the legacy of LKY for all the stupid reasons given not to tear down the 38 Oxley Road; its the same missteps that caught us in the crosshair of China; its the same mistake that caught us out in the open when Philippines left us for dead when we tried to speak for them.

This 1 stupid move is going to cost PAP, and Singapore, greatly, in the near future. The people are not happy - it could very well spawn the birth of a new political party that would surpass even the Worker's Party. I do not know who this new party is - but I'm sure there will be Singaporeans, very qualified Singaporeans, that could not stomach things anymore.

We shall see.

A Little India Riot - really little.

A week ago, an incident of "epic" proportion happened in our Little India District: A Riot!

A significant event considering that it is the first riot in over 40 years since the 1969 racial riots.

As usual, for any sort of "mishaps" or "gossip-worthy" piece of news coming out of the little red dot, the netizens rushed in to give their opinions and commentary on the event while it unfolds. Interestingly, this is one event that got people getting emotional and agitated, that evolved into a series verbal skirmishes across the cyber landscape.

• There people berating the foreign workers
• There are people blaming the government for bringing too many foreign workers in
• There are people getting racist, with racist comments about a specific community's lack of "drinking grace"
• There are people blaming Singapore for this instant for being too dependent of foreign workers
• We have people blaming the police force for not acting fast enough (or violent enough)
• We have people being amused (like me)
• We have people defending our Indian and Bangladeshi brothers as they are the ones who tolled to build our nation (literally)
• We have people blaming our government or the system for not providing better for the foreign workers
• We have people deciding that it is because we are treating them like slaves, which is why it sparks off the riots
• We have people blaming Chinese Nationals for whatever its worth
• We have people blaming Little India for being Little India
• We have people blaming alcohol as the cause of the violence
• We have people asking people to stop blaming the world
• We have people asking people to be calm

So what's the problem here?

The problem is that we are all debating at different frequencies and different magnitude of things. Its like the saying, "Ask the right questions and you will get the right answers."

People aren't asking the specific questions and start diving into the sharing their opinions to people who aren't at the same frequency or having the same perspective of things.

Fact:
An Indian National who got drunk, try to board a bus. The bus can no longer accommodate him especially not when he is making a nuisance of himself. He got invited out of the bus, and the bus drives off without him. He, being drunk, chase after the bus (alongside the bus). And when the bus turns, he got drove over and trapped beneath the bus. 

So this is the first part of the drama. Nothing really special. Just another accident.

Fact:

The police and SCDF are notified and arrived at the scene promptly. Police control the crowd (and requested for reinforcement as the crowd is swelling), the SCDF personnels and paramedics tries to extract the body from under the bus. The crowd then starts to get rowdy (perhaps due to misinformation spreading among themselves) and started attacking the police and SCDF personnels.

This is the 2nd part, where the accident escalates into senseless attack on the people who are trying to save a trapped "kin" of the crowd. 

Fact: 

The mob started to riot, overturning police cars and ambulance; setting them on fire. Riot Police (SOC) forms up and disperse the mob. It took an hour plus for the mob to be fully disperse and the area under police's control. They also arrested 27 people during this operation.

The 3rd part, basically the riot itself. On its own, it also aren't very special.

Suggested Fact:

The foreign workers are underpaid, treated badly and living in poor quarters. They are frustrated and it is a because of this underlying issue that resulted in the "explosion" into a riot.

This is where a lot of contention came. There are NGOs fighting for these foreign workers' rights; and many people arguing and linking this perception (may be true, may be not) to the riot itself. 

And if you break it down as above, you may see, it is like a free-for-all for people to make up their own conclusions and stories. 

I can even imagine: "Living like a slave in this prosperous country, the victim had little to smile about but to drown himself with the little money he earn in beer and hard liquor. He cant even be treated like a human being, being kicked out of the bus who he have the money to pay by some Chinese pigs despite there is plenty of space for him to squeeze in. Chasing the injustice, he fell to the rolling wheels of an uncaring society! Fellow kins saw his death, and their pent up frustration boils to the surface awakens the vendetta in them! Down with the Society!!! And they pelt the lackeys of their uncaring society with their fervent anger and fire. We shall make a statement, they cried. And all of Singapore shall be cursed upon these flames...."  

And seriously, the story above sounds really legit. 

But as pragmatic citizens of Singapore, please, look at the facts again. We have one drunk guy, being drunk, making a nuisance and got himself kill trying to run alongside a bus. A handful of people (probably drunk too) got pissed and takes the opportunity to vent and make trouble (which could explain why they attack the very people who are apparently saving their "kin"). 

What is a true riot? What is real boiling issue? A true boiling issue would have triggered a much bigger and objective-focused riot. Even if the accident is a trigger to some underlying problem, its apparently only big enough to trigger a handful of people (which in numbers would not even have been bigger than the gangs we have in our heartlands).

IS A HANDFUL OF MOB = SERIOUS ISSUE?

I have to clarify, I am not turning a blind eye as to the possible plight and definite hard life these people are living (they probably would live just as hard a life back in their home land); but are we looking at this in the correct perspective?

I am absolutely against linking foreign labour's living standard to this riot. This riot is not 400 people strong. Its probably 25-40 people with 300 over people having fun looking at the spectacle. 

If the issue is truly serious (to a boiling point), the riot would be way into the hundreds and thousands. And the riot will be better planned, with a specific objective they would like to achieve at the end of the riot after negotiation with whichever authority that is handling their issues.

The Riot IS significant (as its the first riots in decades); but it is NOT important. 

Fight for the rights of the foreign labours? Go ahead! 

Fight for the rights of the foreign labour and speaking for them because of this riot and the fear that it will spark more riots? Forget it, dun waste your pretentious and self-righteous time.

If you cared, you would have cared way before their riot, whenever you passed by a construction site or their accommodation. 

I personally always wondered how hard their life must be, living in those container-like dorms, working in the mud and the blazing sun; every single time I walked, jogged and passed by their accommodations on the bus. I reflect it upon my army days and decided that these guys are really having a hard life. But its definitely better than stories I have heard of the foreign labours being REALLY treated like slaves and have their wages owed by the rich Arabs whom refused to pay (many of them trapped in foreign lands).

The issue of whether the life provided to these foreign labours are really not good enough or humane enough, is one hell of a complicated and difficult issue to resolve. But this riot? Just forget about it, I doubt it will happen again that easily (if it does, then I will perhaps stand corrected and write another opinion post on it)

Population White Paper : Simply Flawed.

I just going add one last comment on this Population White Paper debate before I going to shut my mouth (or rather my fingers) for good on this (since the white paper going to be passed regardless, no thanks to those who voted PAP in in such majority:

Its not even abt the figure 6.9 million. Its about the concept of using immigration as the resort to replace the ageing workforce and the lack of babies.

It is the hallmark of 1st world developed society that birth rate will drop drastically upon reaching the status of educated and developed society. And its no surprise most of the 1st world countries have less than 2 for 2 replacement for their population.

So what makes you think that immigrants who finally settled in Singapore (lets say that they are all 100% loyal to Singapore and would rather die than to leave Singapore) would do otherwise than what we Singaporeans chose : to have 1 or 2 babies only. Or even not getting married?

Wont the immigrants also have the same cost of living and comfort of life concerns once they settled in Singapore. What makes anyone think that these foreigners would choose having a large family over material comfort, in contrary to us local bred Singaporeans? Do these immigrants can escape the daily traffic congestions and public service failures that we Singaporeans facing today?

So ask yourself, by 2030, when all these artificial population increases completely sets in, and the reality of each individual's personal desires reflected thru their choices in life and their future : isn't PAP going to set about yet another artificial population increase to remedy the yet-another series of ageing and lack of babies issue?

And if PAP decides that in 2030, we should try something different like - NOT artificially pump up the population and try encourage the couples of today to have more babies; why not we simply do it now instead? Rather than when the social fabric of Singapore is already totally torn beyond recognition, and with the Singaporean Identity all in tattles.

Artificial population increase (or you can call it prostituting ourselves) will never solve this 1st world problem, without the genuine allegiance from the people who picks up the pink card and their sincerest desire to fit in to become one of the coolest people on Planet Earth: we, the Singaporeans.

*prostituting ourselves : devalue the value of Singapore Citizenship to the point that its so cheapo and pointless to have it, to give to ppl whom just barely wants it; and deny those people who would truly treasures it*

(p.s: this is a status update i posted on my facebook after debating and sharing a lot on this issue in facebook. I kindda give up on it, so I want to just move on; although not before i final word on this matter.)

PAP Town Councils - AIM controversy.

I have been laying dormant and unwilling to write more on political stuff.... but this Town Councils - AIM thing is really giving me plenty to be angry about.

I shall quote the entire Today Paper's article of Dr Teo Ho Pin's (Coordinating Chairman for the 14 PAP Town Councils) statement, posted on the Today website on 2 Jan 2013.

Coordinating Chairman for the 14 PAP Town Councils Dr Teo Ho Pin has issued a statement on why the town councils entered into a transaction with Action Information Management for the redevelopment of their computer system. This follows a dispute over the termination of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council's former computer and financial systems. Here is the statement in full:


1. On 28 December 2012, I issued a press release in response to Ms Sylvia Lim's statement on the website of the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council. Ms Lim had made various assertions in her statement. However, her statement was made without citing the relevant facts. I now make this further statement to set out fully the relevant facts. 

2. I am the co-ordinating Chairman of all the PAP-run Town Councils ("the TCs"). The PAP TCs meet regularly and work closely with one another. This allows the TCs to derive economies of scale and to share best practices among themselves. This improves the overall efficiency of the TCs, and ensures that all the PAP TCs can serve their residents better. 

3. In 2003, the TCs wanted to harmonise their computer systems. Hence, in 2003, all the TCs jointly called an open tender for a vendor to provide a computer system based on a common platform. NCS was chosen to provide this system. The term of the NCS contract ("NCS contract") was from 1 August 2003 to 31 October 2010. There was an option to further extend the contract for one year, until 31 October 2011. 

4. In 2010, the NCS contract was going to expire. The TCs got together and jointly appointed Deloitte and Touche Enterprise Risk Services Pte Ltd ("D&T") to advise on the review of the computer system for all the TCs. Several meetings were held with D&T. 

5. After a comprehensive review, D&T identified various deficiencies and gaps in the system. The main issue, however, was that the system was becoming obsolete and unmaintainable. It had been built in 2003, on Microsoft Windows XP and Oracle Financial 11 platforms. By 2010, Windows XP had been superseded by Windows Vista as well as Windows 7, and Oracle would soon phase out and discontinue support to its Financial 11 platform. 

6. The TCs were aware of and concerned about the serious risks of system obsolescence identified by D&T, and wanted to pre-empt the problem. In addition, as the NCS Contract was about to expire, they sought a solution which would provide the best redevelopment option to the TCs, and in the interim would allow them to continue enjoying the prevailing maintenance and other services. 

7. As Coordinating Chairman of the TCs, I had to oversee the redevelopment of the existing computer system for all TCs. It was clear to me that the existing computer software was already dated. The NCS contract would end by 31 October 2011 (if the one year extension option was exercised). However, assessing new software and actually developing a replacement system that would meet our new requirements would take time, maybe 18-24 months or even longer. We thus needed to ensure that we could get a further extension (beyond October 2011) from NCS, while working on redevelopment options. 

8. D&T also raised with the TCs the option of having a third party own the computer system, including the software, instead, with the TCs paying a service fee for regular maintenance. This structure was not uncommon. 

9. We decided to seriously consider this option. Having each of the 14 individual TCs hold the Intellectual Property (IP) rights to the software was cumbersome and inefficient. The vendor would have to deal with all 14 TCs when reviewing or revising the system. It would be better for the 14 TCs to consolidate their software rights in a single party which would manage them on behalf of all the TCs, and also source vendors to improve the system and address the deficiencies.

10. The TCs thus decided to call a tender to meet the following requirements: 

a. To purchase the software developed in 2003, and lease it back to the TCs for a monthly fee, until the software was changed; 

b. To undertake to secure extensions of the NCS contract at no extra cost i.e. take on the obligation to get an extension on the existing rates, until the TCs obtained new or enhanced software. This was put in to protect the financial position of the TCs; and

c. To work with the TCs to understand their enhancement and redevelopment needs and look for a suitable vendor to provide these upgrades.

11. Under the tender, the TCs sold only the IP in the old software. The ownership of the physical computer systems remained with the individual TCs. We wanted to sell the IP rights in the old software because it had limited value and was depreciating quickly. Had we waited until the new system was in place, the IP to the superseded old software would have become completely valueless. 

12. The TCs advertised the tender in the Straits Times on 30 June 2010. Five companies collected the tender documents. These were CSC Technologies Services Pte Ltd, Hutcabb Consulting Pte Ltd, NCS, NEC Asia Pte Ltd and Action Information Management Pte Ltd ("AIM"). 

13. I am aware that NCS considered bidding but in the end, decided not to do so as it was of the view that the IP rights to software developed in 2003 on soon to be replaced platforms were not valuable at all. 

14. Another company withdrew after it checked and confirmed that it was required to ensure renewal of the NCS contract without an increase in rates. The company did not want to take on that obligation. The others may also have decided not to bid for similar reasons.

15. In the end, only AIM submitted a bid on 20 July 2010. 

16. We evaluated AIM's bid in detail. First, AIM's proposal to buy over the software IP would achieve our objective of centralising the ownership of the software, consistent with the model suggested by D&T. 

17. AIM was willing to purchase our existing software IP for S$140,000, and lease it back at S$785 per month from November 2010 to October 2011. The lease payments to AIM would end by October 2011, with the expiration of the original NCS contract. Thus after October 2011, the TCs would be allowed to use the existing software without any additional lease payments to AIM, until the new software was developed. 

18. This meant that the TCs expected to gain a modest amount (about S$8,000) from the disposal of IP in the existing software. 

19. Second, AIM was willing to undertake the risks of getting an extension of the NCS contract with no increase in rates. This was the most important consideration for us, as it protected the TCs from an increase in fees. 

20. Third, we were confident that AIM, backed by the PAP, would honour its commitments. 

21. Given the above considerations, AIM had met the requirements of the tender on its own merits. We assessed that the proposal by AIM was in the best interests of the TCs, and thus awarded the tender to AIM. 

22. Under the contract with AIM, the TCs could terminate the arrangements by giving one month's notice if the TCs were not satisfied with AIM's performance. Similarly, AIM could terminate by giving one month's notice in the event of material changes to the membership of a TC, or to the scope and duties of a TC, like changes to its boundaries. This is reasonable as the contractor has agreed to provide services on the basis of the existing TC- and town-boundaries, and priced this assumption into the tender. Should this change materially, the contractor could end up providing services to a TC which comprises a much larger area and more residents, but at the same price. 

23. Since winning the tender, AIM has negotiated two extensions of the NCS contract until April 2013, at no increase in rates. The first extension was from November 2011 to October 2012, and the second from November 2012 to April 2013. The TCs received a substantial benefit in terms of getting the extensions from NCS beyond the original contract period, without any increase in prices. 

24. AIM has also been actively working with several vendors to explore new software options and enhancements for the TCs. AIM has identified software from a number of possible vendors, and has invited them to make presentations to the TCs in order for a suitable option to be chosen. 

25. Following the expiry of the initial lease arrangement for the software from AIM on 31 October 2011, no further lease payments for the software were made to AIM. During the period of its contract extension from November 2011 to April 2013, the management fee payable to AIM for the whole suite of services it provided was S$33,150, apart from what was payable to NCS for maintenance. In the end, inclusive of GST, each TC paid slightly more than $140 per month for AIM to ensure continuity of the existing system, secure the maintenance of this system at no increased costs, and identify options for a new system to which the TCs could migrate. 

26. We entered into the transaction with AIM with the objective of benefitting the TCs. Over the last two years, the intended benefits have been realised. There is thus no basis to suggest that the AIM transaction did not serve the public interest, or was disadvantageous to residents in the TCs.

Dr Teo Ho Pin
Coordinating Chairman
14 PAP Town Councils 

I read it sharply, with extra care taken when coming to "legal-like" phrasings... and I found it to be a tremendous play on words.

Let me go thru all the dubious points:

"The term of the NCS contract ("NCS contract") was from 1 August 2003 to 31 October 2010. There was an option to further extend the contract for one year, until 31 October 2011. "
"In 2010, the NCS contract was going to expire. The TCs got together and jointly appointed Deloitte and Touche Enterprise Risk Services Pte Ltd ("D&T") to advise on the review of the computer system for all the TCs. Several meetings were held with D&T. "
" However, assessing new software and actually developing a replacement system that would meet our new requirements would take time, maybe 18-24 months or even longer. We thus needed to ensure that we could get a further extension (beyond October 2011) from NCS, while working on redevelopment options. " 

The contract was from 2003 to 2011, and it takes them until 2010 before realising that it will take 1.5 - 2 years to develop the software???

And then, in the past: "In 2003, the TCs wanted to harmonise their computer systems. Hence, in 2003, all the TCs jointly called an open tender for a vendor to provide a computer system based on a common platform."

So why isnt it that they call for the same open tender for a vendor to provide that new computer system???


------

 "10. The TCs thus decided to call a tender to meet the following requirements: 

a. To purchase the software developed in 2003, and lease it back to the TCs for a monthly fee, until the software was changed; 

b. To undertake to secure extensions of the NCS contract at no extra cost i.e. take on the obligation to get an extension on the existing rates, until the TCs obtained new or enhanced software. This was put in to protect the financial position of the TCs; and

c. To work with the TCs to understand their enhancement and redevelopment needs and look for a suitable vendor to provide these upgrades."

First, they expect that a private company can negotiate with NCS to get extension on existing mantainence rate from NCS to remain the same. You mean Town Councils dun have enough power to do that???

2nd. To work with the TC to understand enhancement and redevelopment needs of what? the existing software?


------

 "3. In 2003, the TCs wanted to harmonise their computer systems. Hence, in 2003, all the TCs jointly called an open tender for a vendor to provide a computer system based on a common platform. NCS was chosen to provide this system. "

So in the case of "provide a computer system" - why is the IP with TCs? Providing and developing a computer system is 2 different thing.


-------

"17. AIM was willing to purchase our existing software IP for S$140,000, and lease it back at S$785 per month from November 2010 to October 2011. The lease payments to AIM would end by October 2011, with the expiration of the original NCS contract. Thus after October 2011, the TCs would be allowed to use the existing software without any additional lease payments to AIM, until the new software was developed. 
18. This meant that the TCs expected to gain a modest amount (about S$8,000) from the disposal of IP in the existing software. 
19. Second, AIM was willing to undertake the risks of getting an extension of the NCS contract with no increase in rates. This was the most important consideration for us, as it protected the TCs from an increase in fees. 
20. Third, we were confident that AIM, backed by the PAP, would honour its commitments. "

So, for 8000 dollars, TCs decide to do this complicated business. And since when the TCs are not backed by the PAP??? So now because its PAP, NCS will give special price???

So PAP = special price?


Another thing, if TC expects to earn 8000, that also means AIM will lose 8000 SGD.

Which company do this kindda loss making business?

-------

 "24. AIM has also been actively working with several vendors to explore new software options and enhancements for the TCs. AIM has identified software from a number of possible vendors, and has invited them to make presentations to the TCs in order for a suitable option to be chosen." 

2010 until now 2013 liao, still dun have a new software?

And why is AIM becoming the sole vendor for the new software project?

Isnt that already going around what was fair trade and virtually constituting to a corruption or under the table deal?

Putting a ridiculous terms which no business can take up, and then benefiting the only company that can take it up with a probable million dollar project (software development are expensive)???

The terms of the tender, and the "action" is not congruent.

--------

 "25. Following the expiry of the initial lease arrangement for the software from AIM on 31 October 2011, no further lease payments for the software were made to AIM. During the period of its contract extension from November 2011 to April 2013, the management fee payable to AIM for the whole suite of services it provided was S$33,150, apart from what was payable to NCS for maintenance. In the end, inclusive of GST, each TC paid slightly more than $140 per month for AIM to ensure continuity of the existing system, secure the maintenance of this system at no increased costs, and identify options for a new system to which the TCs could migrate. "

So first, they say, no extra fees to be paid to NCS, or rather, the TCs will pay no extra fees for the extended maintenance. Then they also say, they will pay no lease for the software after October 2011.

Now suddenly, we have management fee to be paid to AIM, apart from the maintenance fee for NCS.

So the TCs paid 33,150 SGD for the 18 mths contract extension for this management fee. Is there management fee for the original contract? So in addition to the "leasing", isnt it losing money for the TCs?




==========================


 IMPT QUESTIONS:

- So what about the contracts of TCs which have boundary changes? How was it dealt with, for example, my GRC: PM Lee's AMK GRC?

- Why is there isnt a open tender for the next version of this sofware? Why is it done only under AIM?

- Why from 2010 to today (2013), the new software still arent ready?

- Is there management fee on top of the lease back by AIM during the initial contract?

Its not just a matter of serving public interest or not. Its a matter of integrity and if there is corruption or not.




There is a simple rule to many things: if you feel that something is wrong, more often than not, something is definitely wrong.

A Review of LKY's Hard Truth Interview

Watch the entire interview here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihiE4oGyYlQ

THE REVIEW
I totally concur with whatever was said by Mr Lee Kuan Yew.

As for the highly disputed topic on Muslim integration, my take is that, its being taken out of context and that because of the way how the question is ask and the incomplete snap answer that Mr LKY gave that created the misunderstanding.

Muslims "separate-ness" to me is best described as like a "Vegetarian-Christian with brotherhood (gotong royong)". Just like our vegetarian friends, they have unique needs in the stuff they eat (halal); they are religious like our Christians whom goes to churches; and uniquely, for the Malay Muslims, they have this unbreakable bond between them which is widely known as Gotong Royong, or the Kampung Spirit.

Muslims "separate-ness" to me is best described as like a "Vegetarian-Christian with brotherhood (gotong royong)"

But the separateness and distinctness would just be as starking if the Chinese is the minority, whom eats pork, drinks alcohol and dun go to the places of worship every week.

But ultimately, that's the beauty of Singapore - the beauty of diversity. And I sincerely believe if we were to go to war, we will fight alongside each other as brothers and be proud to die for one another. =} (hope that day wont never happen though)

[READ THIS] GREATEST FEAR after GE2011

source: facebook, http://www.facebook.com/notes/windy-voice/spread-this-greatest-fear-after-ge2011/104752662945762

GREATEST FEAR after GE2011
by Windy Voice on Friday, April 29, 2011 at 1:47am

Dear fellow Singaporeans, friends, Alternative (Oppositions) Parties, PAP supporters and PAP moles who will be reading this.

This note is not going to tell a tale of whether to fire our maid anot or whether PAP is fair or unfair in the past elections or how badly or how good PAPhave perform for past 5 years but this note is going to highlight my GREATEST FEAR which so far I have yet seen any netizens posted out.

After watching TV broadcast about the WP rally host @ HG SMC, I have a chat/ discussion with my dad.I found out that for the past few elections, there're always so much viewers @ Opposition parties rallies. But however in the end, every elections, the Opposition parties do not get enough votes to get into the parliament. Hence, our parliament never have enough (>1/3) alternative voice to cancel any bills proposed by PAP.

After some research online, I've concluded something: That this election is not a joke! And do you know what I fear most? The unstoppable bills by PAP in Parliament House!

Kindly vote for all Alternative (Oppositions) Parties in your area! No matter if they are good or bad, new or old, even you trust or do not trust them! Why? Because this election we really need at least need 1/3 non-pap members inside parliament. Why?

Because if after this election, PAP still take >80 seats. Any bills proposed by them will passed through and cannot be block because we do not have enough non-pap members to voice out and reject those bills. If in the next 5 years, PAP suddenly make a bill like in Hong Kong (SAR) where they let all Permanent residents (PRs) to vote. Next election, we, the TRUE BLUE BLOOD Singaporeans' voting powers will be totally gone.Kindly take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Hong_Kong

If in the next 5 years, PAP suddenly make a bill like in Hong Kong (SAR) where they let all Permanent residents (PRs) to vote. Next election, we, the TRUE BLUE BLOOD Singaporeans' voting powers will be totally gone.

[...Any Hong Kong permanent resident (PR) aged 18 or above may register as an elector in the geographical constituency in which he/she resides, except those mentally incapacitated and those serving in an armed force...
...Article 21 of The Basic Law of HKSAR stipulates:
Chinese citizens (PRCs) who are residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be entitled to participate in the management of state affairs according to law. In accordance with the assigned number of seats and the selection method specified by the National People's Congress, the Chinese citizens among the residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall locally elect deputies of the Region to the National People's Congress to participate in the work of the highest organ of state power...]

So, am I just another Chicken Little crying that the sky is falling? You may think PAP will not dare to create such a bill and even if they will, they would have created it long before. But think twice, if PAP create such a bill in the past, Singaporeans will be alert about there's a large inflow of PRs who can vote in elections. And the limited amount of PRs would not be able to vote and support PAP even if elections were held.

But story is different now, after these few years of largely import of Permanent Resident (PRs), we are totally surrounded by PRs, PAP are now able/ ready to propose such a bill. Anytime, just one time, they can just create a bill to allow PRs to vote in coming election 2016 and we are dead meat. These PRs will definitely vote for PAP to ensure they can stay here and replace ALL SINGAPOREANS.

Anytime, just one time, they can just create a bill to allow PRs to vote in coming election 2016 and we are dead meat.

That's why for this GE2011, if PAP are still holding at least 2/3 of the 87 seats, the Bills proposed by PAP will pass through like flowing water. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Parliament

In fact, there should never ever be any single party in a parliament in the first place because they act like a monarchy with total government powers in their hands. Any bills is exactly an orders. Whatever voting process they may go through are for public show. Tell me have you seen before who from PAP will dare to stand out and opposed their own PAP policies bill?

Hence, this GE2011 is very important, no, maybe I should say this is the MOST IMPORTANT election ever! PAP has already note on that this time the ground is not that sweet and there are many citizens are not happy with their policies. After GE2011, they try their best to make any bill to pass in Parliament in order ensure itself staying as incumbent. One of such bill maybe to let Permanent Residents (PRs) to vote to support them.

Wake up, my dear fellow Singaporeans. Do not overlook these details. Kindly avoid the same mistake again and again.We can not afford to make mistake again or we (PAP supporters and PAP moles included) will be totally replaced by PRs! Never give absolute power to a single party. Dun just think/ focus on PAP policies of economic growth, they are "icing on cake", PAP are going to replace us ALL with PRs after GE2011.

Hence, above briefly mentions my GREATEST FEAR for GE2011. Every Singaporeans, dun joke about for this election. Every vote counts. This is not a game. Vote wisely.

Vote the Alternative (Oppositions) Party in! Vote for any party! WP, SDP, SPP, NSP, RP, SDA!
Trust our future in their hands! In fact, actually we dun have a choice! It's now or never!
WE MUST REALLY HAVE >1/3 of the 87 seats filled with Alternative (Oppositions) parties!
In order to not get replace by the PRs!

Let us have a First World IDEAL Republic of Singapore - Majulah Singapura!

= Windy Voice 2011 =

---------

Above article is the work of Windy Voice. He/She happened to be advocating the same view as Majulah! ; but he/she went even further to highlight the potential threat that exist for Singapore - honestly, I am totally shocked by the prospect and the possibility, in fact, the existence of such law in Hong Kong already.

I strongly urge EVERYONE to VOTE AGAINST THE PAP.

PAP already have a lot of loyal votes, they wont get kicked out so suddenly. It is the undecided voters like you that will make the difference.

VOTE FOR THE OPPOSITION REGARDLESS WHO ARE THE CANDIDATES! WE NEED TO DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION!

Sylvia Lim's Parliamentary Speech against Ministerial Salary Hike

If you never knew that Worker's Party had ever raised a speech against Ministerial Pay hike, you should watch the fantastic speech by NCMP Sylvia Lim in the Parliament.



Do you still want to vote for PAP?

The Sim Ann Phenomena

Today (technically, its yesterday), on Nomination Day at Greenridge Secondary School, SDP Holland Bukit Timah team lodged an objection against Sim Ann of PAP's candidacy as she is still under lawful employment in the Civil Service while she reportedly identified by herself as 'unemployed', thus effectively proved to be a 'misrepresentation' by the PAP team for the Holland-Bukit Timah team.

However, the objection is over-ruled without reasons by the Returning Officer at the point of time. There after, the Elections Department said in a statement later that the Public Service Division has confirmed that she is no longer in the civil service.

Based on understanding thru the sources online, the PAP candidate is still serving out the rest of her Notice of Resignation from the Civil Service and is technically still a civil servant at the point of nomination.

"The employee serving the notice of termination is still considered an employee of his current employer."

According to the Employment Act (http://www.mom.gov.sg/employment-practices/employment-rights-conditions/contract-of-service-termination/Pages/contracts-of-service-and-termination.aspx)

Starting Work with New Employer while serving Notice of Termination with Current Employer

The employee serving the notice of termination is still considered an employee of his current employer. Unless his current contract of employment allows him to work with another employer before the date of termination, he has to seek written permission from his current employer to do so.

So technically, She is still a civil servant no matter what the Civil Service answered. Just like we guys in the military, we can only get back our pink IC on the very last working day of our service.

Right or Wrong, you decide.

Gazetting of TOC - a sign of weakness?

"The first reaction I had was that the Ruling Party is attempting to "shut down" TOC."

The breaking news yesterday was the announcement of the gazetting of The Online Citizen.

Based on the article, the TOC is required to reveal all the ppl behind the site as well as being gazetted as a political association - thus cannot receive any fundings for overseas at all.

The first reaction I had was that the Ruling Party is attempting to "shut down" TOC.

TOC, is infamous for their extremely one-sided and anti-PAP stance; to register with MDA, gazette as a Political Association and at the same time revealing everyone's identity is as good as opening themselves to potential lawsuits and even the controversial National Security Act.

"...revealing everyone's identity is as good as opening themselves to potential lawsuits and even the controversial National Security Act."

I personally do not endorse the sort of reporting by TOC, but do give them credit for doing a pretty good job at revealing the plight of fellow Singaporeans and mis-doings under the current Government's imperfect rule.

But on the other side of this developing story, the leadership of the PAP apparently had revealed indirectly of their vulnerability ahead of the coming election. They apparently know that their profit and GDP driven rule for the past 4 or more years is rated very badly by the people. In addition, last year (2010) was the worst ever year for PAP for as long as any Gen Y babies (1983 and later) can ever remember.

"They (the ruling party) actually knew that they had pushed the envelope too much."

They (the ruling party) actually knew that they had pushed the envelope too much; they finally realised that they can actually and possibly sank into their worst ever performance in an General Election since our nation's independence; they are afraid the status quo will no longer be able to be maintained. The gazette of TOC reveals all this.

The PAP had, since under Mr Goh Chok Tong's rule, started to play with carrots like HDB upgrades, Lifts Upgrade, Before-Election-Cash-Payouts, and many other less than impressive ideas... They assumed that most Singaporean are daft and will not be able to tell that they are manipulated through the use of these carrots; that even if they knew, they would still vote the PAP in because the oppositions just cannot make it...

"...a new Generation of voters (the Gen-Y) that a high percentage are expected to vote nay to PAP."

But the coming General Election is different... it would going to go down in history as the first election in a long time to be fully contested without a single walk-over. It is going to happen at the back of the worst ever "living-condition" and happiness level since independence... as well as a new Generation of voters (the Gen-Y) that a high percentage are expected to vote nay to PAP.

I just wonder, if TOC refuse the register, what is going to happen? =\

CPF becoming Income Tax

CPF was originally conceived as a mechanism to help Singaporeans save money for their retirement, in case they didnt do it themselves - a very legitimate and right thing to do, like many of the other policies created during the time when LKY is still in his prime, thinking clearly, connected to the ground and when the government is serving the people.

But over the years, after the government changed their philosophy from "serving the people" to "economic growth over everything", good intended policies starts to get corrupted and perverted.

"...the government changed their philosophy from "serving the people" to "economic growth over everything""

In recent times, the Government had announced that the retirement age will be raised from the original 55 to 65. As a result, the CPF will be freeze for another 10 years. That also mean that my mother whom is approaching 55, whom should be retiring soon, CANNOT retire and have to work for another 10 years. I wonder where...

In a country where prosperity was promised to be shared among everyone to make everyone's life better, it can't be further than the truth.

By raising the retirement age to 65, it effectively made CPF a form of Income Tax. And the payout, a form of welfare system which.... you actually paid it yourself - like Insurance with minimum interest rates.

"By raising the retirement age to 65, it effectively made CPF a form of Income Tax."

According to the statistics (http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/keyind.html), only less than 20% of the people at the moment now can live to the age of 65. It should increase in the near future BUT think abt this: in the modern day of polluted world, increased stress, increase health problems, and curse of diseases - how many can actually live past that 65. How many can still enjoy their life of retirement at 65?

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement), even in European countries, almost all the countries have less than 50% of the people past 60 still working in the work force. These are countries which also had their normal retirement age set at 65.

"...almost all the countries have less than 50% of the people past 60 still working in the work force. These are countries which also had their normal retirement age set at 65."

As a boss, would you want to hire even a 50 year old employee to work in positions in the lower rang of your company hierarchy? In the new economy (post 2010), the world is going to be increasingly competing through the use of innovation and design - in such a world, how does the older workforce find employment when everyone is looking for creative and trendy thinkers. Must a former director really go to be a taxi driver or a former manager become a kopitiam worker to fulfill that 65 retirement age?

What is retirement?
Retirement is the moment when people stop working and enjoy the fruit of their labour after over 30-40 years of toiling and struggling.

Even if I'm just 27 now, the thought of working to 65 is scary. CPF means nothing to me but just another name for a separate Income Tax (its based on your income isnt it?) and retirement age of 65 is simply the "marker" to qualify you for the welfare system camouflage as "CPF" (which the government kept saying they dun want to be a welfare state).

"...its just a branding exercise to make a 2nd Income Tax sounds NOT like an Income Tax."

Its simply the same thing as another country, setting a higher Income Tax level but have a welfare system to ensure you have money to stay alive after retirement - just that the government make it sounds like its doing it for you, but its just a branding exercise to make a 2nd Income Tax sounds NOT like an Income Tax.

The PAP politician I admired the most.

He is the former deputy prime minister; the former (and most well loved) president, the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong.

This great man is one, whom advocated the construction of the MRT, fought against the PAP against messed up accounts during his reign as the President. No other PAP politician had come closed to his greatness, perhaps with very few exceptions like Dr. Tony Tan.

I am reminded by him, of all places, from SDP's Chee Soon Quan article on his party's website - http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/3500-st-and-lhzb-censor-chees-letter-on-pap-undermining-singapores-interests

(on the site note, for the first time, i have to endorse his views. its a fair article from him that i concur)

Chee mentioned a part of history which i'm never aware of:

But perhaps the clearest indication that the PAP Government works against the interest of Singapore and her workers came from the late Ong Teng Cheong. In January 1986 Mr Ong, then deputy prime minister and NTUC secretary-general, had sanctioned a strike by the shipping industry which he did not inform the cabinet.

This was Mr Cheong's account: "The minister for trade and industry was very angry, his officers were very upset. They had calls from America asking what happened to Singapore - we are non-strike."

Why do American bosses need to call the PAP Government about a strike carried out by Singaporean workers? Why does it have to account to American businesses for what it does in Singapore? Who does the Government listen to, American MNCs or Singaporean workers?

Mr Ong Teng Cheong, actually, as the head of the trade union, did what trade unions should be doing - to fight for the rights of the workers; and actually sanctioned a strike. I'm hearted to know that my fav. PAP politician had always been that righteous and "for-the-people".

Younger PAP politicians, i hope you guys know what you guys are doing. learn from the right ppl...

Locals lost again to "foreigners talents"; this time in football

In the press conference held just hours ago by S-league, they announced the identity of the 12th team for the new season.

To the surprise and amazement of all the S-league fans, the winner of the coveted final spot went to Beijing Guo-An, rather than the highly committed and motivated, successful in previous 2 season, and now going ALL LOCAL, Yishun Super Reds (Super Reds).

Being a member of the hardcore local football fan forum, KallangRoar.com , the anger and disbelieve is evident.

I understand that this blog, is meant as a political blog, but I cant rub off the connection of how Football Association of Singapore (FAS) & S-League is ran, with how the Singapore Government works.

This probably "unnoticable" saga (very few Sleague fans) is in my opinion, a bigger indication of our government policy and how foreigners and money is rated way higher of the development of our local and very own Singaporeans.

If any one from the media whom read my this post; I strongly urge you to condemn the selection of 2 foreign teams over a local team.

[RECOMMENDED READ] Level the playing field for locals and foreigners in employment?

I would like to recommend this read from The Online Citizen

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/level-the-playing-field-for-locals-and-foreigners-in-employment/

Its about the inequality between Singaporeans and Non-Singaporean when comes to employment and certain "rights". The implications is that, it would cause business owners to have preference in employing foreigners than Singaporeans.

It also created a question, which is always on my mind... And its NOT "What it meant to be a Singaporean" (as in being proud of being Singaporean)... BUT, "What differentiates us Singaporeans from non-Singaporeans?"

Although, it can also be questioned as "What it meant to be a Singaporean" (but as in, why the fuck Singaporeans arent treated like we from this country).

Seriously, I have no idea whats the diff between PR and Singapore Citizen... NS and Polls? Somemore?

[READ THIS] Who Holds the Sovereign Wealth of this Nation and Why? --- by Reform Party

This is a recommended read by me.
Its an article from Reform Party's website, which I find really good.

source: http://www.thereformparty.net/?p=283

Who Holds the Sovereign Wealth of this Nation and Why?
August 8, 2009 by admin

excerpt from the article:

Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) are not a new idea. According to Wikipedia, the term Sovereign Wealth Fund was first used by Andrew Rozanov in an article entitled, ‘Who holds the wealth of nations?’ in the Central Banking Journal of May 2005. A SWF may be broadly defined as a state-owned investment fund composed of financial assets such as stocks, bonds, property, precious metals or other financial instruments.
Theoretically one can distinguish two types of SWFs. The first, and the oldest form of SWF, is one set up to manage revenues from an exhaustible resource such as oil, or one which derives its assets from government budget surpluses. An example of one based on resources, and arguably the first SWF was the Kuwait Investment Authority, a commodity SWF created in 1953 from oil revenues before Kuwait even gained independence from Great Britain. A more recent example is the Norwegian SWF which was set up primarily to ensure that the wealth represented by Norway’s oil reserves was not squandered on current consumption but turned into financial assets which would benefit future generations.
Temasek could be said to be an example of the first type of SWF. It was set up in 1974 to hold stakes in the various government-controlled companies, such as DBS, SIA and Singapore Technologies, that had previously been held by the Ministry of Finance. The Temasek Holdings website states that “Our investments are funded through dividends we receive from our portfolio companies, our divestment proceeds, commercial borrowings, a maiden Yankee bond issue in 2005 and occasional asset injections from our shareholder, the Minister for Finance (Incorporated).”

continue reading here: http://www.thereformparty.net/?p=283

Singaporeans = Contemporary Coolies???

This was an article link which was posted on Facebook by Reform Party's General Sec, Kenneth.J. Then after i read it... i have to say, it resonates with every common man and I want to reproduce it here.

source: http://singaporeanskeptic.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-this-life-you-want-your-children-to.html

THURSDAY, JULY 23, 2009
Is this the life you want your children to have?

More than a hundred years ago, some of our ancestors were coolies. These peasants had a hard life working for little pay. At the end of each hard day's work, they would go home to their cramp squalid accommodations to rest and prepare for another day of back-breaking labour. Life was hard but they were powerless to do anything to change. No one helped or protected them. They had no labour union to protect them and they lived in constant fear of losing their only means of survival- their jobs.

Now in the 21st century, this coolie mentality is still prevalent in our society. We wake up every morning from our cramp HDB dwelling so that we could squeeze inside a tight MRT train to get to work. Because of the recession, we no longer work from 9 to 5 but 8 to 7. The hours are longer because of the unfortunate souls who got retrenched. But what can we do? If we complain, we could be the next to lose our jobs. Our unions are ,for all intents and purposes, non-existent. Why should our NTUC chief care? He receives a fat pay-check for being a minister and pleasing the government.

But we do nothing because it is in our cultural legacy to suffer. We only know how to endure suffering and not how to enjoy life. We learn it from our parents and they learnt it from their parents all the way back to the coolies. Nothing has changed except that instead of being ruled by an overseas master, our masters are now fellow Singaporeans who are overseas educated.

Yes, for some of us, our lives are miserable and this has to stop. Do you want your children to inherit this cultural legacy of servitude? Do you want them to break free from this cycle of lower wages and endless skills retraining? Do you want them to not go through what you have gone through.

If you want the best future for them, then educate them. Educate them not for the purpose of serving our PAP masters. Educate them to give your children the resources/skills to leave this Island. Imagine how much happier your son (and his sons) would be if he doesn't have to serve NS. Imagine how happy your daughter would be because she wouldn't need to work in a stressed out environment or live in a cramp HDB apartment.

Educate them so that they can leave. Because if they don't leave, some day they may have to explain to their own children why their manager father had to become a taxi driver.

After all, what is the point of your suffering if they have to experience it themselves when they grow up?


Excerpt from The New Paper. July 22 2009

--- quote ---
THE man had a simple question for his MP: I will be a security guard if I must, he said, but how can I encourage my children to do well in school if I can't find a good job despite my (tertiary) education?It was a statement that shook even a battle-hardened MP like Madam Halimah Yacob (Jurong GRC).'When he responded in that manner, I also started thinking,' she said.

Madam Halimah was raising this example with The New Paper last night after a hotly-debated Parliamentary discussion on how to help retrenched Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs).The man, a former manager in his 50s with an engineering diploma, was retrenched late last year. Unable to find a job, he became a taxi driver.

Madam Halimah said she told him to look at the positive side and show his children that despite the setbacks, he is still doing his best.'Look, this is reality. In life, there'll be ups and downs,' she said. 'It is important not to lose hope, to do our best, stay on course, and try to improve ourselves.'
--- quote ---

The Original TNP Article that inspired the above post.

PICKY? GRAD EXPECTATIONS IN DOWNTURN

TRICKY
- We focus on those willing to be helped, says Minister
- PMETs aren't simply being choosy, say MPs. This recession has hit them especially hard
By Ng Tze Yong and Ho Lian-Yi
July 22, 2009

THE man had a simple question for his MP:

I will be a security guard if I must, he said, but how can I encourage my children to do well in school if I can't find a good job despite my (tertiary) education?

It was a statement that shook even a battle-hardened MP like Madam Halimah Yacob (Jurong GRC).

'When he responded in that manner, I also started thinking,' she said.

Madam Halimah was raising this example with The New Paper last night after a hotly-debated Parliamentary discussion on how to help retrenched Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs).

The man, a former manager in his 50s with an engineering diploma, was retrenched late last year. Unable to find a job, he became a taxi driver.

Madam Halimah said she told him to look at the positive side and show his children that despite the setbacks, he is still doing his best.

'Look, this is reality. In life, there'll be ups and downs,' she said. 'It is important not to lose hope, to do our best, stay on course, and try to improve ourselves.'

Is enough being done for PMETs like him? MP Ho Geok Choo (West Coast GRC) told Parliament that she had received feedback that PMETs who do not go to job interviews arranged by career centres are given warnings that they will not be considered for future job vacancies.

'I'm wondering how we can guide the career centres to do a better job,' she said.

Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong replied: 'There are a lot of workers we need to help, and we need to be focused on workers who are prepared to be helped.'

He told Parliament that the Government has taken effective measures to reduce unemployment.

Tangible results

In just six months since Spur (Skills Programme for Upgrading and Resilience) started, more than 19,000 jobseekers have been placed in jobs, he said.

He said the Spur-Jobs scheme, implemented in May, saw 50 companies committed to hiring 1,200local workers in various industries in just one month.

He pointed out that, as of end-May, the Professional Skills Programme (PSP) had about 36,000 PMETs and fresh graduates trained or committed to training.

But the sense on the ground is that this is an especially tough recession for PMETs.

MP Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) noted: 'Whereas in the past, PMETs may be more nimble and adaptable, the same does not hold true this time around.'

He added that nowadays, everything has a shelf life - even a degree.

Madam Ho urged more to be done for PMETs.

For example, she said retrenched PMETs can be teamed up to carry out stock checks and review procedures in companies.

'PMETs have the experience and they can return to the workforce as consultants,' said Madam Ho.

She also feels better training will be useful for staff helping with job-matching at government agencies.

'A bit of psychology training may help them understand how to handle someone who has just lost his or her job,' said Madam Ho.

Asking the right questions

They can also be trained on how to ask the right questions and phrase them the right way, and have the tenacity to follow up on the cases.

'It cannot be just a clerical staff telling people we have a vacancy here and a vacancy there,' she said.

Peter (not his real name), a grassroots leader who works closely with retrenched workers, said that 'people are not being genuinely helped'.

Government agencies like the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) are 'too focused on the numbers, because numbers equal more funding' from Spur, said Peter.

It has resulted in a lot of frustration on the ground, he said.

Instead, government agencies should be working more closely with employers to find out the nature and number of jobs that are available, to make their training more targeted, suggested Peter.

'After all, WDA and e2i have a lot of resources and a wide network of contacts in various industries,' said Peter.

'But they are not listening. Instead, it is always about training, training and training because that's the easier thing to do. What is the point of training thousands of people without knowing where the jobs are?'

Peter added that there are many organisations, such as the self-help groups, that want to help but are unable to 'because all the training is put under one roof, which is e2i.'

'Is this the many helping hands approach we always talk about?' he asked.

I will have my personal follow up post on this issue.

Childish Saga of Aware.

AWARE. So are you aware now? Of AWARE? Or AWARE being aware?

=X

The EOGM (Extraordinary General Meeting) of AWARE at the SUNTEC had became the national sensation and talking point. The fervent crowd opposing the allegedly "Un-Aware" ppl who won in their election to become the new Exco (executive committee) is probably the next most incredible scene of Singaporeans voicing out, after the Worker's Party's Election Rally.

Ppl were discussing and arguing, are the supporters of the Old Guards (the previous Exco) being ungraceful in the way they boo and disrupt the speeches of the "New Guards"? Or are the "New Guard" conspiring something that will hurt the reputation and meaning of AWARE? "SHUT UP!" and "Feminist Mentor" trash talk?

In my opinion, the entire saga resembles just like children's quarrel; simply childish. In fact, if the "New Guard" have ideologies of anti-gay rights and such, and thus joining AWARE to prevent, the alleged pro-gay education materials from continued used, are they going to prevent gays and lesbian from appearing in our society? I doubt so...

[side tracking warning] if in our conservative society, gays and lesbians can continue to appear, I dun see the point, going anti-gay or not mentioning of gay-ism, is going to change anything.

Somehow, the booing and discrediting on the ground of the EOGM reminds me of what i did during football matches at the stadium. LOL~ Just find it hilarious happening in a General Meeting. To say the truth, if the New Guards get their way, and speak all their hearts all, without interruption, about their Feminist thingy and ting-tongs which I apparently dun understand much (gender equality is already is tip towards the fairer sex in our law already anyway): are the ground going to cast confident votes for them? NAH!

Its already over even before it started, so why bother talking all the 大道理 （Big Meaning “literally”），all their philosophy and watever, when ppl already discredited them beyond repair. What's worse is the Thio Thio whom self-styled herself as "Feminist Mentor".

Being successful in your own life doesnt make you a "Female Rights Leader". Abuthen, who is the "Masculinist Mentor" then? Maybe in Singapore is our dear, All Singaporeans Fav: MM Lee Kuan Yew. He made Singapore from nothing to really something. He can be the true "Masculinist Mentor" thus also MM. So he can be MM&MM Lee. =D (sarcasm)

You cant just start to call yourself something which includes other ppl, without other concurring with you.

Wat the hell is Feminist Mentor anyway? Girl are already female; you cant make a female more female right? And if my gf is going to mentored by that Thio Thio, I going to be very afraid....

----

At first, I was in support of AWARE to respect their electoral result, for the same reason, why we must support the PAP as long as they are in power, because they are whom majority had voted in.

But when revelation of most of the New Guard are from the same Church, and their Senior Pastor Derek Hong urged the women in his flock to ‘be engaged’ and support new president Josie Lau and ‘her sisters’ at AWARE; its apparent that it is something that was being said or probably instigated by their Pastor or in their sermons, or maybe someone whom is also from the same church, maybe that Thio Thio, that resulted in the sudden surge in membership of AWARE before the election and thus the surprise result in the election. And because of this, I agree with the supporters of the Old Guard that this Exco had to be replaced.

AWARE despite being well-reputated, isnt exactly a big organisation despite their great contributions to the society. So, to cause such a "problem" in election is quite easy, given the fact that a Church can have easily more members than a NGO like AWARE.

And thus, the voting of no-confidence vote in the EOGM can be seen as a more true reflection of the views of Singaporean women who cares.

So AWARE, pls add a new line to your "Constitution" - you cannot get elected without joining AWARE a year prior to the election, and must be involved in at least 1 "AWARE activity".



For those interested in how this Saga can become a lesson for PAP, read here: http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-1018.htm
Yawning bread's view is something i concur with~ =}

NTU Tragedy - Continued

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/04/team-is-confident-that-davids-death-was-not-due-to-suicide/

Just for info for those interested. Apparently, the Indonesian side had a verification team whom examined the alleged antangonist, David Widjaja (NTU Student), and declared that he is murdered instead of the suicide as claimed in the papers in Singapore and by the local authorities.

Intriguing. But I have to say, there is very little they could do in my opinion.

If what the Indonesians said is true, that suggests cover up on the Singapore side, and in anyway, the cover up will be complete and thorough since it is deliberate. The local media will said nothing at all of the case anymore, and as I predicted, the media black-out will be complete.

Sorry for the family, but my guess is that, whatever they do, the "host" will win.

(disclaimer: I am speaking on the neutral point of view; everything written here is just my opinion, and SHOULD NOT be used as evidence or reference in court or any lawsuit.)

-edit-

I changed the word "alleged killer" to "alleged antagonist", because the "victim" did not die. Sorry for the mistake.

Just for those, like me didnt read very closely, the verification team comprises of 12 bloggers, led by Mr Iwan Piliang, a citizen journalist. (source: http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,198202,00.html) And their main thus is to simply "verify what was really going on" (in their own words).

Thus their conclusion is not to be viewed on the same level as a statement by official authority or experts.

And if all the hoo-ha in Indonesia is simply for a lost cause or even an attempt to "confuse" everyone; i still think its a "interesting progress" to the tragedy that should made it to tabloids like The New Paper, as it could fans up more readership like what Huang Na did. Of course, this could happen if there is not media blackout and if the papers are interested; as of now, no one can be bothered abt it~

=}

AWARE not aware.

Reading the drama of the women group, AWARE's AGM surprise shuffle in the papers really kindda sums up a lot about human nature.

As we stay in a job or organisation for sometime, we were then regarded as senior and expect respect from ppl whom just joined. But its also the reality of life that this hierarchical concept of thought does not always stay fixed.

So after many years of mingling in AWARE, the supposed leaders of the group got kicked out by a organized mass of newly joined. Now the defeated "clique" questions the intention of these newbies and pointed out that they should form their own grouping since they have differences in philosophy.

But if thats the case, why have AGM? Why have ppl to vote in the committee? And why give entry to the organisation so easily if you want to limit thus freedom? Its an irony and also a fact of life.

In another perspective, now that these "newbies" got voted in by majority vote, which thus means they are now the leader the majority wanted, thus they have the legitimacy to lead. They are like the Thai Rak Thai Party led by Thaksin few years back where he commands the majority support in the country. But these "elites" or "old birds" resents the new order, much like the Yellow Shirts, whom successfully ripped down the legitimate voted-in party (twice) to install their opposition politicians.

So in summary, not respecting the majority results in? ---> Chaos. Resentment. Hatred. Ultimately, Failure...

So the lao jiao of AWARE, I understand your pain, but perhaps, your time is up. Your opponents got more support. What you should do is to get MORE supporters of yours to join AWARE, and hopefully win back the seats in the next election. If not, just continue to do your part in the organisation and see how the new leaders do. Dun whine in the newspapers anymore; you simply lose more than you probably think you gain.

NTU Tragedy Review.

Apparently, if anyone does read this blog, or you happen to chance upon the current post; I had previously posted regarding certain suspected cover up regarding the bizarre NTU tragedy where a Indonesian student was allegedly accused of stabbing his lecturer before "committing suicide", as well as the suicide of another guy whom are related to the two fore-mentioned person.

As I had predicted, there is a media blackout on this case ever since the initial reporting for the first week of the 2 incidents. Subsequently, in anti-tabloid style, the case had suddenly disappeared off the subsequent editions of ALL local newspaper. 

With this case being more bizarre than Huang Na or the SAF Medical Officer's death, its unusual that it is no longer covered by the press or chased upon for more newsbreaking information by any of the reporters.

Neither did any of this conspiracy theories or flare ups online made it to any papers...

Bizarre case indeed.

p.s: I am not suggesting anything of controversy, just stating facts as it is. Dun sue me.