Chen Show Mao banned from attending 7th month dinners with residents by Paya Lebar CCC
Temasek Review
Workers’ Party MP Chen Show Mao has been banned from attending Seventh Month dinners in his Paya Lebar division of Aljunied GRC by the Paya Lebar CCC (Citizens’ Consultative Committee is under the People’s Association)!
The Seventh Month dinners are organized yearly in Singapore during the Seventh month of the Chinese Lunar calender to celebrate the ‘Hungry Ghost Festival’. They are usually held in open fields and courts which are under the purview of the People’s Association.
In a note posted on his Facebook yesterday, Mr Chen wrote that the organizers were not allowed to use venues in their neighborhood if they invite their MP to the event.
“The last such dinner I was scheduled to attend took place last week, a few weeks after the organizers called to let me know that they could no longer have me show up at the event as they had originally hoped. The organizers as in previous years had planned to hold the festivities on a hard court in the HDB estate, but this year were told by the Paya Lebar CCC that, as a condition for receiving CCC approval to use the venue, they may no longer invite their MP to the event. Future approvals will be withheld from errant organizers.”
However according to one Aljunied resident, ex-Aljunied MP Cynthia Phua had attended such dinners during her term as PAP MP in the last ten years and there was never any issue with the CCC.
One Aljunied resident Wilson Pang whose father is a member of the Seventh Month Organising Committee for the Blk 18 Hougang Ave 3 first highlighted the matter to Mr Chen on his Facebook two weeks ago:
“While applying for the permit this year, they were informed by the PA that they will only be allowed to use the open space if opposition MPs did not participate in any of the activities. Mdm Cynthia Phua, as MP for the ward, has always participated in the celebrations and been present at the dinners in previous years.”
“It pains me that they felt so embarrassed to pass me the news. Regrettably, this is not the first time it has happened since I was elected,” he added.
In contrast, PAP MP Tin Pei Ling attended a 7th month dinner in Aljunied Crescent (under Marine Parade GRC) last night and even made a speech on stage.
Ms Tin also attended a 7th month dinner in MacPherson on 11 August 2011:
Why are PAP MPs allowed to attend 7th month dinners to mingle around with their residents but not non-PAP MPs? How are they supposed to perform their duties as MPs if they are not given the opportunity to know their residents better?
The People’s Association is supposedly a statutory board funded by taxpayers’ monies, but has been ‘converted’ to become the PAP’s de facto ‘grassroots’ branch over the years.
CCCs, CCs and RCs are usually led by PAP branch secretaries and members. In the case of Aljunied GRC, losing PAP MP Ong Ye Kung was appointed as an ‘adviser’ of its grassroots organizations though Aljunied voters had clearly rejected him in the May election.
Speaking to a delegation of visiting Chinese officials two years ago, PAP supreme leader Lee Kuan Yew boasted that “all CCCs, CCs and RCs are part of the PAP.”
While Aljunied residents are not allowed to invite their elected MPs to grace their 7th month dinners, RC boards are allowed to hang banners of PAP-endorsed presidential candidate Tony Tan.
With the CCCs, CCs and RCs under the iron-fisted control of the totalitarian PAP regime, it will be an impossible task for Singaporeans to vote the PAP out of office via the ballot box in the future especially with the increasing number of new citizens the PAP is currently recruiting into these “public” organizations funded by taxpayers’ monies.
The incumbent has never failed to amused and disgust me with their unfairness, under the belt shot at their oppositions, their childishness, their arrogant and their total lack of connection with the ground.
Yet again the Men In White are doing themselves harm but making life hard for the Worker Party MPs to work in their wards.
For GOD’s Sake, just let them do their job and be treated with dignity and fairness as may I remind the incumbent that they did win the Votes of the people of Singapore to be in parliament. Not like that MG Chan whatever who piggy backed his way into parliament and has been talking cock since.
OK and thanks for the reminder on how ridiculous Tin Pei Ling is and how amazingly she got away with the cooling off day incident. Now whenever I seen a Kate Spade bag I will have a vision of bimbo Tin with her Kate Spade bad and the V post. (GOSH this is your MP People of Macpherson!)
A person with good integrity and has the heart to server the people of Singapore should be in the parliament of Singapore no matter what political party he or she is from.
These little moves by the PAP is only making the party look worst and lost more vote from Singaporean and I do hope your Tony won’t moving in to Istana despite all the advantages he got.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Thursday, August 18, 2011
What the President's candidates symbols meant for me.
I like Tan Jee Say’s symbol. As least he shows he got heart.
Tan Kin Lian make me feel he like to connect to the people in a fun way.
Tan Cheng Bock’s makes me think he is trying to reach out and provide shelter and smart enough as it has his Chinese character of his name.
Tony is just outrightly put himself in the centre of attention, self centre one might say?
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
4 in the Running
So one of the four Tan will be the next President of Singapore.
If you ask me er.... Tony look a bit weird in this picture from Straits Time.
PAP openly endorse Tony
PE: PM Lee on what Presidential Election is about
16 August 2011
SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said that getting a Certificate of Eligibility to contest the Presidential Election does not necessarily mean that candidates are all "equally qualified to be President".
Four hopefuls have been issued the Certificate of Eligibility. They are Dr Tony Tan, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Tan Jee Say.
Mr Lee stressed that his government will work with the man chosen by voters, whoever he is.
The Prime Minister weighed in on the Presidential Election just a day before Nomination Day.
Meeting the local media at the Istana on Tuesday, Mr Lee said he felt the need to speak on the issue not because of what any of the presidential hopefuls has said, but because he felt Singaporeans need to know his views and to give them something to think about when they go to the polls.
Mr Lee reiterated the role and responsibility of the President under the Constitution.
The President has blocking powers in only five areas, such as over the country's reserves and key appointments.
In all other areas, the President must act in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Mr Lee also took the opportunity to talk about how his government has worked with President S R Nathan.
He cited the example of how the government had drawn on the reserves during the 2008 global financial crisis.
The proposal was put to the President and the Committee of Presidential Advisers.
Mr Lee said: "They asked questions, they spent several days thinking the matter over, asked and finally, only after satisfying themselves that this was in Singapore's best interest and the situation was serious enough to need the draw (on the reserves), that they approved the draw.
"The result was we were able to stabilise the economy, to boost confidence and to recover strongly when the storm passed, but also importantly, we were able to demonstrate how the Presidential safeguards were meant to work and could work in a tight situation."
Mr Lee said it is important for both the government and President to have a mutual understanding and constructive relationship and this is how he hopes to work with the next President.
He added that given the troubled global economic landscape, it is important that Singaporeans choose a capable President who can make well-judged decisions in the country's best interests.
The President also plays an important ceremonial role.
Mr Lee reminded Singaporeans that the President is a unifying figure and he also represents Singapore on the international stage.
For example, Mr Lee said President Nathan's grasp of international relations helped greatly to enhance Singapore's friendly relations with many countries.
Asked if a candidate's association with the ruling People's Action Party could work against him, Mr Lee said "no".
"When he becomes President, then he is in a different role, he's no longer a PAP member and he no longer takes instructions from the party. He's his own man, as Mr Ong Teng Cheong showed when he became President, and I think that is the way it has to work," said Mr Lee.
"Singapore is a very small society, and if you say you want people to come from completely different corners of the world and never had had any connection with one another, and then that counts as being independent, I think that is not possible," added Mr Lee.
Of the four presidential hopefuls, three have links to the PAP. Dr Tony Tan had served as deputy prime minister and Dr Tan Cheng Bock was a former MP, while former NTUC Income chief Tan Kin Lian was a former PAP member.
While Mr Lee did not want to be drawn into commenting what he thinks of the aspirants, he did repeat his endorsement of Dr Tony Tan.
"I think Dr Tony Tan is eminently qualified and a very good candidate. But I leave it to Singapore voters to make their judgement and I have every confidence they will make a good judgement," he said.
If there is a contest on Nomination Day, Singaporeans will go to the polls on August 27 in the country's first Presidential Election in 18 years.
Ah… no PM is adding his 2 cents worth on the President race on the eve on nomination day.
I was questioning his purpose ask he talk on old issue and again emphasis how idiotic PAP think Singaporean are assuming we can’t think for ourselves.
But his true intend for this press conference came at the end. His endorsement for Tony.
So in summary, Hsien Loong is tell you and me that although all 4 president hopeful got the COE but there is one that is more qualify and you know the President is very important one as he er… do….er….hmm… but he has blocking blocking powers in ONLY five area ,such as over the country's reserves and key appointments plus he can have informal talk to air his view privately to Hsien Loong but end of the day he can’t do nothing if the cabinet want something out of his wish.
Hsien Loong then go on about how the President represent Singaporean internationally and he prefer someone with this experience for President. Then he openly supports Tony.
Well Hsien Loong this is only your view.
One man one vote, we are all entitled to vote for someone who will not be a PAP yes man and demand a better Singapore’s society that is really Democratic, have real Justice, as well as Equality, and able to achieve Prosperity and Progress.
16 August 2011
SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said that getting a Certificate of Eligibility to contest the Presidential Election does not necessarily mean that candidates are all "equally qualified to be President".
Four hopefuls have been issued the Certificate of Eligibility. They are Dr Tony Tan, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Tan Jee Say.
Mr Lee stressed that his government will work with the man chosen by voters, whoever he is.
The Prime Minister weighed in on the Presidential Election just a day before Nomination Day.
Meeting the local media at the Istana on Tuesday, Mr Lee said he felt the need to speak on the issue not because of what any of the presidential hopefuls has said, but because he felt Singaporeans need to know his views and to give them something to think about when they go to the polls.
Mr Lee reiterated the role and responsibility of the President under the Constitution.
The President has blocking powers in only five areas, such as over the country's reserves and key appointments.
In all other areas, the President must act in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Mr Lee also took the opportunity to talk about how his government has worked with President S R Nathan.
He cited the example of how the government had drawn on the reserves during the 2008 global financial crisis.
The proposal was put to the President and the Committee of Presidential Advisers.
Mr Lee said: "They asked questions, they spent several days thinking the matter over, asked and finally, only after satisfying themselves that this was in Singapore's best interest and the situation was serious enough to need the draw (on the reserves), that they approved the draw.
"The result was we were able to stabilise the economy, to boost confidence and to recover strongly when the storm passed, but also importantly, we were able to demonstrate how the Presidential safeguards were meant to work and could work in a tight situation."
Mr Lee said it is important for both the government and President to have a mutual understanding and constructive relationship and this is how he hopes to work with the next President.
He added that given the troubled global economic landscape, it is important that Singaporeans choose a capable President who can make well-judged decisions in the country's best interests.
The President also plays an important ceremonial role.
Mr Lee reminded Singaporeans that the President is a unifying figure and he also represents Singapore on the international stage.
For example, Mr Lee said President Nathan's grasp of international relations helped greatly to enhance Singapore's friendly relations with many countries.
Asked if a candidate's association with the ruling People's Action Party could work against him, Mr Lee said "no".
"When he becomes President, then he is in a different role, he's no longer a PAP member and he no longer takes instructions from the party. He's his own man, as Mr Ong Teng Cheong showed when he became President, and I think that is the way it has to work," said Mr Lee.
"Singapore is a very small society, and if you say you want people to come from completely different corners of the world and never had had any connection with one another, and then that counts as being independent, I think that is not possible," added Mr Lee.
Of the four presidential hopefuls, three have links to the PAP. Dr Tony Tan had served as deputy prime minister and Dr Tan Cheng Bock was a former MP, while former NTUC Income chief Tan Kin Lian was a former PAP member.
While Mr Lee did not want to be drawn into commenting what he thinks of the aspirants, he did repeat his endorsement of Dr Tony Tan.
"I think Dr Tony Tan is eminently qualified and a very good candidate. But I leave it to Singapore voters to make their judgement and I have every confidence they will make a good judgement," he said.
If there is a contest on Nomination Day, Singaporeans will go to the polls on August 27 in the country's first Presidential Election in 18 years.
Ah… no PM is adding his 2 cents worth on the President race on the eve on nomination day.
I was questioning his purpose ask he talk on old issue and again emphasis how idiotic PAP think Singaporean are assuming we can’t think for ourselves.
But his true intend for this press conference came at the end. His endorsement for Tony.
So in summary, Hsien Loong is tell you and me that although all 4 president hopeful got the COE but there is one that is more qualify and you know the President is very important one as he er… do….er….hmm… but he has blocking blocking powers in ONLY five area ,such as over the country's reserves and key appointments plus he can have informal talk to air his view privately to Hsien Loong but end of the day he can’t do nothing if the cabinet want something out of his wish.
Hsien Loong then go on about how the President represent Singaporean internationally and he prefer someone with this experience for President. Then he openly supports Tony.
Well Hsien Loong this is only your view.
One man one vote, we are all entitled to vote for someone who will not be a PAP yes man and demand a better Singapore’s society that is really Democratic, have real Justice, as well as Equality, and able to achieve Prosperity and Progress.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
The talk cock Banker.
Many clients welcome telemarketing calls, replies bank association
ST Forum 16 Aug 2011
WE THANK Mr Lee Pheng Soon for his feedback ('Bank's reply omitted vital details'; Forum Online, July 26).
From time to time, banks offer new products and services to their customers through telemarketing calls.
Feedback from our member banks reveal that many customers have found such calls beneficial as they serve to inform customers of the new products and services being offered by their banks.
Customers who do not find such telemarketing calls beneficial can request their banks to put them on the do-not-call list. Banks subscribe to the telemarketing guidelines for the financial industry issued by the Contact Centre Association of Singapore (CCAS). Under the telemarketing guidelines, banks are committed to maintain a do-not-call list.
Customers who have requested not to be called by their banks or their telemarketing agents will be put on the do-not-call list. Banks and their telemarketing agents will refrain from making telemarketing calls to such customers.
If customers have feedback on any telemarketing issues, they can e-mail ABS at banks@abs.org.sg and provide details such as the name of the bank/telemarketing agent and the date and time of the call.
ABS will follow up with the relevant bank to ensure that the bank in question adheres to the telemarketing guidelines.
Ong-Ang Ai Boon (Mrs)
Director
The Association of Banks in Singapore
This is the most ridiculous statement by the Association of Banks in Singapore. Well guess this Ang Ai Boon is just trying to save the business she is in.
I have talked to many people and most and if not all find telemarketer are a bunch of pests.
This Ang Ai Boon claims that you can request your bank to put you on the do not call list if you do not want such harassments (Service) but judging from my own experience, I got call from Banks who I totally have no dealing with.
Moreover, these banks sub-contract this telemarketing service to multiple 3rd parties companies who do not follow to the rules. I personally receive caller who refuse to indentify themselves, hang up immediately when I question where they got my contacts and I even received call from different companies representing the same bank in the same day. Heck! I even receive call from company representing Standard Chartered Bank 1 year later after I told them to put me on their DO NO CALL LIST.
So the banks are big corporations like APPLE and NIKE that sub contract their job to 3 parties sweat shop and scum companies so these big corporations on the paper have a clean set of rules but they will claim ignorance of what their sub contractors are doing.
I will appreciate if this Ang Ai Boon can share where the hell did she get the evidence that MOST of the clients welcome telemarketing calls? Else she is just talking for the sake of talking. Dumb.
ST Forum 16 Aug 2011
WE THANK Mr Lee Pheng Soon for his feedback ('Bank's reply omitted vital details'; Forum Online, July 26).
From time to time, banks offer new products and services to their customers through telemarketing calls.
Feedback from our member banks reveal that many customers have found such calls beneficial as they serve to inform customers of the new products and services being offered by their banks.
Customers who do not find such telemarketing calls beneficial can request their banks to put them on the do-not-call list. Banks subscribe to the telemarketing guidelines for the financial industry issued by the Contact Centre Association of Singapore (CCAS). Under the telemarketing guidelines, banks are committed to maintain a do-not-call list.
Customers who have requested not to be called by their banks or their telemarketing agents will be put on the do-not-call list. Banks and their telemarketing agents will refrain from making telemarketing calls to such customers.
If customers have feedback on any telemarketing issues, they can e-mail ABS at banks@abs.org.sg and provide details such as the name of the bank/telemarketing agent and the date and time of the call.
ABS will follow up with the relevant bank to ensure that the bank in question adheres to the telemarketing guidelines.
Ong-Ang Ai Boon (Mrs)
Director
The Association of Banks in Singapore
This is the most ridiculous statement by the Association of Banks in Singapore. Well guess this Ang Ai Boon is just trying to save the business she is in.
I have talked to many people and most and if not all find telemarketer are a bunch of pests.
This Ang Ai Boon claims that you can request your bank to put you on the do not call list if you do not want such harassments (Service) but judging from my own experience, I got call from Banks who I totally have no dealing with.
Moreover, these banks sub-contract this telemarketing service to multiple 3rd parties companies who do not follow to the rules. I personally receive caller who refuse to indentify themselves, hang up immediately when I question where they got my contacts and I even received call from different companies representing the same bank in the same day. Heck! I even receive call from company representing Standard Chartered Bank 1 year later after I told them to put me on their DO NO CALL LIST.
So the banks are big corporations like APPLE and NIKE that sub contract their job to 3 parties sweat shop and scum companies so these big corporations on the paper have a clean set of rules but they will claim ignorance of what their sub contractors are doing.
I will appreciate if this Ang Ai Boon can share where the hell did she get the evidence that MOST of the clients welcome telemarketing calls? Else she is just talking for the sake of talking. Dumb.
Monday, August 15, 2011
A thought on NDP rally 2011.
I did not actually sit through the entire speech by PM yesterday as I don’t find him sincere and basically he said the same time last year and last last year and even during his GE speech in May.
He really shows us that PAP has disconnected from the people and ok they are trying to connect back but are too lost or proud to do it properly and therefore came across as insincere.
I read his speech carefully and there are a couple of his points that really bother me.
4. So from personal perspective, many citizens feel pressures in daily lives. They ask themselves:
a. Why has my cost of living gone up?
b. Can I or my children afford to buy homes of our own?
c. What about my healthcare costs when I grow old?
d. In sum: Singa¬pore may be progressing, but can I be part of the success story?
5. Fully understand and empathise with concerns. We are tackling them
a. Building more flats
b. Improving public transport
c. Managing inflow of foreign workers and immigrants
d. Will take a while, but things will get better
e. Please be patient
So why did we end up here? Where cost of living gone up? Why there are flat shortage? Expensive health care and long wait for public Health care? Why we have a screwed up Public Transport system? Why influx of Foreign workers?
I tell you why.
Cost of living is up because of high rental set by the government to feed their greed.
Store or office rental gone up and the retailer has not choice but to sell their product at a higher price to keep themselves in business.
Prices of flats gone up due to shortages as flood gates for Foreigners was opened for many years.
Again this to feed the government’s greed.
More Foreign workers here to drive the labour cost down and therefore more profit for those at the top of the food chain.
Why we ends up today are due to PAP’s flaw policies over the years and PM tried to appease us by kicking the clowns Ministers in charge out of the cabinet. This also proved the paying top dollars does not mean you will get top quality person.
Jobs
47. Even then, slowing down the inflow of foreign workers means accepting lower economic growth
a. Some companies may be deterred from investing or expanding their operations in Singapore, and choose to close-down, move or invest elsewhere
b. Less vibrancy in our economy and society
c. Less resources to improve the lives of Singa¬poreans
d. Fewer opportunities for our people
Putting Singaporean first in the job market is a very sensitive issue as all Singaporean men need to server NS service. (Unless you are some Dr who even ends up as MP for God’s know what reason left the country and skip NS).
I do not agreed that slowing down inflow of foreign wokers means accepting lower economic growth. This is utterly rubbish.
You look at the quality of foreigner in Singapore. Yes there are a few good one but the rest are just crap.
At the lower end they are cheap labour but have no quality.
At the top end they are expensive but also have no quality.
To me you must attract the CORRECT kind of foreigner to help your country grow not any Tom, Dick and Harry there are reject from their own countries that come here as they know we are sucker for foreigners.
The only way for Singapore to grow and be a good place to live in is a drastic change in government policies. If the PAP can’t do it then somebody have to do it.
I will gladly accept a lower pay, slower economy growth for a country with a slower pace, good health care and a wonderful quality of live that enable me to spent time with families, friends and my hobbies.
Till then I will keep a look out for another country beside Singapore.
He really shows us that PAP has disconnected from the people and ok they are trying to connect back but are too lost or proud to do it properly and therefore came across as insincere.
I read his speech carefully and there are a couple of his points that really bother me.
4. So from personal perspective, many citizens feel pressures in daily lives. They ask themselves:
a. Why has my cost of living gone up?
b. Can I or my children afford to buy homes of our own?
c. What about my healthcare costs when I grow old?
d. In sum: Singa¬pore may be progressing, but can I be part of the success story?
5. Fully understand and empathise with concerns. We are tackling them
a. Building more flats
b. Improving public transport
c. Managing inflow of foreign workers and immigrants
d. Will take a while, but things will get better
e. Please be patient
So why did we end up here? Where cost of living gone up? Why there are flat shortage? Expensive health care and long wait for public Health care? Why we have a screwed up Public Transport system? Why influx of Foreign workers?
I tell you why.
Cost of living is up because of high rental set by the government to feed their greed.
Store or office rental gone up and the retailer has not choice but to sell their product at a higher price to keep themselves in business.
Prices of flats gone up due to shortages as flood gates for Foreigners was opened for many years.
Again this to feed the government’s greed.
More Foreign workers here to drive the labour cost down and therefore more profit for those at the top of the food chain.
Why we ends up today are due to PAP’s flaw policies over the years and PM tried to appease us by kicking the clowns Ministers in charge out of the cabinet. This also proved the paying top dollars does not mean you will get top quality person.
Jobs
47. Even then, slowing down the inflow of foreign workers means accepting lower economic growth
a. Some companies may be deterred from investing or expanding their operations in Singapore, and choose to close-down, move or invest elsewhere
b. Less vibrancy in our economy and society
c. Less resources to improve the lives of Singa¬poreans
d. Fewer opportunities for our people
Putting Singaporean first in the job market is a very sensitive issue as all Singaporean men need to server NS service. (Unless you are some Dr who even ends up as MP for God’s know what reason left the country and skip NS).
I do not agreed that slowing down inflow of foreign wokers means accepting lower economic growth. This is utterly rubbish.
You look at the quality of foreigner in Singapore. Yes there are a few good one but the rest are just crap.
At the lower end they are cheap labour but have no quality.
At the top end they are expensive but also have no quality.
To me you must attract the CORRECT kind of foreigner to help your country grow not any Tom, Dick and Harry there are reject from their own countries that come here as they know we are sucker for foreigners.
The only way for Singapore to grow and be a good place to live in is a drastic change in government policies. If the PAP can’t do it then somebody have to do it.
I will gladly accept a lower pay, slower economy growth for a country with a slower pace, good health care and a wonderful quality of live that enable me to spent time with families, friends and my hobbies.
Till then I will keep a look out for another country beside Singapore.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Will you vote for the Enemy?
PE: 4 get Certificates of Eligibility for presidential polls
11 August 2011
SINGAPORE: The stage is set for a contest not seen in Singapore's history.
Four hopefuls were on Thursday issued eligibility certificates for the Presidential Election on August 27.
The last time there was a contest was in 1993, when the elected presidency was introduced.
The Presidential Elections Committee said it received six applications.
And in assessing the suitability of each hopeful, it was satisfied that Mr Tan Kin Lian, Dr Tony Tan, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr Tan Jee Say are all men of integrity, good character and reputation.
That's one of the criteria for eligibility.
Other criteria include a candidate having served at least three years as a chairman or CEO of a statutory board or company with a paid-up capital of at least S$100 million, or having served in a similar capacity under a special clause.
Dr Tony Tan and Dr Tan Cheng Bock were deemed to have met the first criterion, while Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Tan Jee Say qualified under the special clause.
The committee noted that Mr Tan Kin Lian had been the Chief Executive Officer of NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative Limited for more than three years.
The committee said NTUC Income, although a co-operative, had a paid-up capital of more than S$100 million in the years preceding Mr Tan Kin Lian's departure in 2007.
And this is comparable in size and complexity to a company with a paid-up capital of the same amount.
Mr Tan was the NTUC Income CEO from 1977 to 2007.
As for Mr Tan Jee Say, the committee said that as regional managing director of AIB Govett Asia, he had overall responsibility for the company's operations.
He therefore held a position similar to a CEO.
The committee added that AIB Govett Asia is an organisation of equivalent complexity when compared to companies in Singapore with a paid-up capital of
S$100 million.
The two hopefuls who were deemed not eligible are retiree Ooi Boon Ewe and former JTC Corporation Group Chief Financial Officer Andrew Kuan.
The committee said Mr Ooi had submitted an incomplete application form. He had also acknowledged that he did not meet the eligibility criteria.
As for Mr Kuan's second attempt at running for the presidency, the committee maintained that his seniority and responsibility as Group CFO between 2001 and 2004 are not comparable to what have been set out under the Presidential Elections Act.
The committee's decision is final.
So this is it. Four are qualify to submit their name on nomination day next week to try to become the 3rd elected President of Singapore.
To me the elected President has always be a strategic move by the PAP to back them up on their policy. Although they might have miscalculated on the capability of our dear late President Ong.
So the 2nd “elected” President Nathan is pretty much useless in looking after Singaporean interest in the last 12 years and he did not anything to check on the Singapore government nor our reserve yet he still got a fat pay check.
This year we all know that Tony is the PAP endorsed one and the other 3 each has their own agenda for running but I can be sure they have not got the backing from the Men In Whites.
A four corner fights will definitely benefit Tony, so I am worry about this. .It does not help that the other 3 who are not so active until recently. In fact this might be what the PAP want.
You have to say Tony has been in the lime light since his PAP days and is a seasoned politician. (Although he screwed up on the handshake with the fishmonger). And yes he did get some unfair advantage with the media brainwashing tactics used on us.
So who to vote for?
The famous ex-DPM Tony who got the backing from PAP, The Tan Clan, 7 Unions and maybe the Malay business Association?
Tan Kin Lian, Tan Cheng Bock or Tan Jee Say?
Well I just ask you a simple question.
Say you want to hire 2 security guards to look after your billions of cash in a remote island, will you hire the 2nd guard if you know she is the wife of the first one? Or would you rather hire someone neutral so to ensure your interest and not the interest of the 1st security guards are taken care of?
Ask yourself this before going to the poll my fellow Singapoearn.
Now I will wait and see what Tan Kin Lian, Tan Cheng Bock and Tan Jee Say got to say.
Tony? Nah I heard enough.
11 August 2011
SINGAPORE: The stage is set for a contest not seen in Singapore's history.
Four hopefuls were on Thursday issued eligibility certificates for the Presidential Election on August 27.
The last time there was a contest was in 1993, when the elected presidency was introduced.
The Presidential Elections Committee said it received six applications.
And in assessing the suitability of each hopeful, it was satisfied that Mr Tan Kin Lian, Dr Tony Tan, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr Tan Jee Say are all men of integrity, good character and reputation.
That's one of the criteria for eligibility.
Other criteria include a candidate having served at least three years as a chairman or CEO of a statutory board or company with a paid-up capital of at least S$100 million, or having served in a similar capacity under a special clause.
Dr Tony Tan and Dr Tan Cheng Bock were deemed to have met the first criterion, while Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Tan Jee Say qualified under the special clause.
The committee noted that Mr Tan Kin Lian had been the Chief Executive Officer of NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative Limited for more than three years.
The committee said NTUC Income, although a co-operative, had a paid-up capital of more than S$100 million in the years preceding Mr Tan Kin Lian's departure in 2007.
And this is comparable in size and complexity to a company with a paid-up capital of the same amount.
Mr Tan was the NTUC Income CEO from 1977 to 2007.
As for Mr Tan Jee Say, the committee said that as regional managing director of AIB Govett Asia, he had overall responsibility for the company's operations.
He therefore held a position similar to a CEO.
The committee added that AIB Govett Asia is an organisation of equivalent complexity when compared to companies in Singapore with a paid-up capital of
S$100 million.
The two hopefuls who were deemed not eligible are retiree Ooi Boon Ewe and former JTC Corporation Group Chief Financial Officer Andrew Kuan.
The committee said Mr Ooi had submitted an incomplete application form. He had also acknowledged that he did not meet the eligibility criteria.
As for Mr Kuan's second attempt at running for the presidency, the committee maintained that his seniority and responsibility as Group CFO between 2001 and 2004 are not comparable to what have been set out under the Presidential Elections Act.
The committee's decision is final.
So this is it. Four are qualify to submit their name on nomination day next week to try to become the 3rd elected President of Singapore.
To me the elected President has always be a strategic move by the PAP to back them up on their policy. Although they might have miscalculated on the capability of our dear late President Ong.
So the 2nd “elected” President Nathan is pretty much useless in looking after Singaporean interest in the last 12 years and he did not anything to check on the Singapore government nor our reserve yet he still got a fat pay check.
This year we all know that Tony is the PAP endorsed one and the other 3 each has their own agenda for running but I can be sure they have not got the backing from the Men In Whites.
A four corner fights will definitely benefit Tony, so I am worry about this. .It does not help that the other 3 who are not so active until recently. In fact this might be what the PAP want.
You have to say Tony has been in the lime light since his PAP days and is a seasoned politician. (Although he screwed up on the handshake with the fishmonger). And yes he did get some unfair advantage with the media brainwashing tactics used on us.
So who to vote for?
The famous ex-DPM Tony who got the backing from PAP, The Tan Clan, 7 Unions and maybe the Malay business Association?
Tan Kin Lian, Tan Cheng Bock or Tan Jee Say?
Well I just ask you a simple question.
Say you want to hire 2 security guards to look after your billions of cash in a remote island, will you hire the 2nd guard if you know she is the wife of the first one? Or would you rather hire someone neutral so to ensure your interest and not the interest of the 1st security guards are taken care of?
Ask yourself this before going to the poll my fellow Singapoearn.
Now I will wait and see what Tan Kin Lian, Tan Cheng Bock and Tan Jee Say got to say.
Tony? Nah I heard enough.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Satisfaction for public transport had gone up. Yeah right!
Commuters more satisfied with public transport
Customer Satisfaction Index by SMU's Institute of Service Excellence (ISES) saw an increase of 5.3 points for buses and 3.7 points for the MRT.
Thu, Aug 11, 2011
A study by the Singapore Management University (SMU) has shown that communters here are more satisfied with public transport now, compare to a year ago.
Data from a Customer Satisfaction Index by the university's Institute of Service Excellence (ISES) saw an increase in customer satisfaction with public buses, from 61.1 points to 66.4 points.
Satisfaction with the MRT system also rose by 3.7 points to 67.8 points, reported the Straits Times.
ISES academic director Marcus Lee said the data showed that local residents feel they are getting more value out of their bus rides.
This could be due to the implementation of distance-based fares last year, as well as the addition of bus trips, he added.
This propaganda article is published to support the 1% fare hike in pubic transport.
ISES does not help by not reviewing the sample size nor what people did they sampled from.
As I have mentioned before. I can publish a paper using survey from just 3 people and if 2 out of 3 say the transport system is good the I already score a 60 points.
Moreover I can also more or less tweet the result by selecting the people to do my survey.
For example if I want to find out how good the PAP is and if I want to score a positive points, I will select grassroot leaders and high level civil servant to do my survey.
And if I want a negative result, I will select people from Aljunie and Hougang to do my survey.
So these surveys are useless.
And if you ask me on public transport satisfaction, I will give both the buses and MRT operators 1/100 each.
Customer Satisfaction Index by SMU's Institute of Service Excellence (ISES) saw an increase of 5.3 points for buses and 3.7 points for the MRT.
Thu, Aug 11, 2011
A study by the Singapore Management University (SMU) has shown that communters here are more satisfied with public transport now, compare to a year ago.
Data from a Customer Satisfaction Index by the university's Institute of Service Excellence (ISES) saw an increase in customer satisfaction with public buses, from 61.1 points to 66.4 points.
Satisfaction with the MRT system also rose by 3.7 points to 67.8 points, reported the Straits Times.
ISES academic director Marcus Lee said the data showed that local residents feel they are getting more value out of their bus rides.
This could be due to the implementation of distance-based fares last year, as well as the addition of bus trips, he added.
This propaganda article is published to support the 1% fare hike in pubic transport.
ISES does not help by not reviewing the sample size nor what people did they sampled from.
As I have mentioned before. I can publish a paper using survey from just 3 people and if 2 out of 3 say the transport system is good the I already score a 60 points.
Moreover I can also more or less tweet the result by selecting the people to do my survey.
For example if I want to find out how good the PAP is and if I want to score a positive points, I will select grassroot leaders and high level civil servant to do my survey.
And if I want a negative result, I will select people from Aljunie and Hougang to do my survey.
So these surveys are useless.
And if you ask me on public transport satisfaction, I will give both the buses and MRT operators 1/100 each.
Your sure you want him as President?
President not a separate power centre: Tony Tan
While the elected President can have influence, he "is not — and should not be — a separate power centre," believes presidential hopeful Dr Tony Tan.
What the President can and should do is address the concerns of Singaporeans and take them into account when exercising his or her powers, said Dr Tan.
"These concerns can also be raised formally or informally through appropriate channels. The choice of channels to pursue depends on the individual situation," he said.
Outlining his understanding of the President's role in a statement on Wednesday, he added the President must also have "a heart for all Singaporeans" and know how to reflect their concerns effectively in the context of national and international affairs.
"One can, of course, imagine very different roles for the President that would require a constitutional amendment. But the Presidential Election itself is the wrong forum for this," said Dr Tan.
"Candidates should run for the office that exists, not for the one they wish to have."
His comments come in the midst of an ongoing debate on the role of the highest office in Singapore, most recently stemming from Law Minister K Shanmugam's comments at an Institute of Policy Studies forum.
He said the President "can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet; and he must follow the advice of the Cabinet in the discharge of his duties".
Dr Tan, who attended the IPS forum, said many have pressed him for his thoughts on the issue.
Other Presidential hopefuls have also raised their views. Both Tan Kin Lian and Dr Tan Cheng Bock agreed the President should work within the boundaries of the Constitution.
Tan Kian Lian disagreed, however, that the President could not speak without the Cabinet's approval. He urged the government to "adopt a more open approach towards the issues of the people" and engage the public on their concerns.
Dr Tan Cheng Bock took issue with Minister Shanmugam's comments that the influence a President depends on who the President is. Dr Tan Cheng Bock urged for mutual respect between the government and the President.
Judging from this report, Tony already declare that he will be the president without a mind of his own and will only happily do say what the PAP/Cabinet authorized him to say.
Then may I ask you why we need a $4M guys who do only what the PAP want him to do? We might as well do without the President and saved the $4M and used it to help the poor.
Tony also states that the President must have "a heart for all Singaporeans", yah I wonder when was the last time he took the public transport or eat at a hawker center (Last Sunday newspaper even quote he has his favourite prawn noodle bought for him).
He already shows us what his heart is like with his handshakes with the fishmonger.
So vote wisely my fellow Singaporean. We don’t need a inert $4M man who has no sincerity, do only the what the Men In White does and got away with a white horse son.
While the elected President can have influence, he "is not — and should not be — a separate power centre," believes presidential hopeful Dr Tony Tan.
What the President can and should do is address the concerns of Singaporeans and take them into account when exercising his or her powers, said Dr Tan.
"These concerns can also be raised formally or informally through appropriate channels. The choice of channels to pursue depends on the individual situation," he said.
Outlining his understanding of the President's role in a statement on Wednesday, he added the President must also have "a heart for all Singaporeans" and know how to reflect their concerns effectively in the context of national and international affairs.
"One can, of course, imagine very different roles for the President that would require a constitutional amendment. But the Presidential Election itself is the wrong forum for this," said Dr Tan.
"Candidates should run for the office that exists, not for the one they wish to have."
His comments come in the midst of an ongoing debate on the role of the highest office in Singapore, most recently stemming from Law Minister K Shanmugam's comments at an Institute of Policy Studies forum.
He said the President "can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet; and he must follow the advice of the Cabinet in the discharge of his duties".
Dr Tan, who attended the IPS forum, said many have pressed him for his thoughts on the issue.
Other Presidential hopefuls have also raised their views. Both Tan Kin Lian and Dr Tan Cheng Bock agreed the President should work within the boundaries of the Constitution.
Tan Kian Lian disagreed, however, that the President could not speak without the Cabinet's approval. He urged the government to "adopt a more open approach towards the issues of the people" and engage the public on their concerns.
Dr Tan Cheng Bock took issue with Minister Shanmugam's comments that the influence a President depends on who the President is. Dr Tan Cheng Bock urged for mutual respect between the government and the President.
Judging from this report, Tony already declare that he will be the president without a mind of his own and will only happily do say what the PAP/Cabinet authorized him to say.
Then may I ask you why we need a $4M guys who do only what the PAP want him to do? We might as well do without the President and saved the $4M and used it to help the poor.
Tony also states that the President must have "a heart for all Singaporeans", yah I wonder when was the last time he took the public transport or eat at a hawker center (Last Sunday newspaper even quote he has his favourite prawn noodle bought for him).
He already shows us what his heart is like with his handshakes with the fishmonger.
So vote wisely my fellow Singaporean. We don’t need a inert $4M man who has no sincerity, do only the what the Men In White does and got away with a white horse son.
Monday, August 08, 2011
I have left the country without a passport.
Venue: Pair ris White Sand Kopitiam
Date: 04th Aug 2010
FT from Philippine: I want meal no. 43 take away.
Store assistant from China: 你要什么？
FT from Philippine: 43 take away 打包.
Store assistant from China to me: 他要三十几？
Me to Store assistant from China: 他要四十三打包。
No thanks from anyone. Next time I will tell the Filipino to learn Chinese and the Chinese to Learn English.
Geez… still wonder why I spent 15 year in the army to defend this crap piece of land that is not even inhabited by Singaporean.
Date: 04th Aug 2010
FT from Philippine: I want meal no. 43 take away.
Store assistant from China: 你要什么？
FT from Philippine: 43 take away 打包.
Store assistant from China to me: 他要三十几？
Me to Store assistant from China: 他要四十三打包。
No thanks from anyone. Next time I will tell the Filipino to learn Chinese and the Chinese to Learn English.
Geez… still wonder why I spent 15 year in the army to defend this crap piece of land that is not even inhabited by Singaporean.
Law Minister don't know the Law?
Elections do not change president's powers
By Tessa Wong
LAW Minister K Shanmugam said on Friday that the process of direct elections does not change the scope of the Elected President's powers as set out in the Constitution.
And the Constitution states that the President can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet, he said at a Institute of Policy Studies forum.
"If a head of state challenges the Government, he will be acting unconstitutionally," Mr Shanmugam added.
The 1991 amendment to the Constitution, which made the presidency an elected position, gave the president veto powers in five areas, including the spending of past reserves.
He was speaking at an Institute of Policy Studies forum on the role of the roles, responsibilities and power of the elected president. Ambassador-at-large Professor Tommy Koh and constitutional expert Professor Thio Li-Ann also spoke at the forum, which was held at Orchard Hotel.
Every once in a while one of these over paid brainless goof will say something that is totally STUPID and therefore make themselves the laughing stock for the rest of their life.
What this Idiot basically is telling you that the incumbent do not fear the President as he is their Puppet.
“the President can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet”
To me I think Shanmugam has just shot himself in both his feet.
He is showing how dumb he is and how arrogant the PAP is.
Now one more of these PAP guys go into the History of stupid quotes.
By Tessa Wong
LAW Minister K Shanmugam said on Friday that the process of direct elections does not change the scope of the Elected President's powers as set out in the Constitution.
And the Constitution states that the President can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet, he said at a Institute of Policy Studies forum.
"If a head of state challenges the Government, he will be acting unconstitutionally," Mr Shanmugam added.
The 1991 amendment to the Constitution, which made the presidency an elected position, gave the president veto powers in five areas, including the spending of past reserves.
He was speaking at an Institute of Policy Studies forum on the role of the roles, responsibilities and power of the elected president. Ambassador-at-large Professor Tommy Koh and constitutional expert Professor Thio Li-Ann also spoke at the forum, which was held at Orchard Hotel.
Every once in a while one of these over paid brainless goof will say something that is totally STUPID and therefore make themselves the laughing stock for the rest of their life.
What this Idiot basically is telling you that the incumbent do not fear the President as he is their Puppet.
“the President can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet”
To me I think Shanmugam has just shot himself in both his feet.
He is showing how dumb he is and how arrogant the PAP is.
Now one more of these PAP guys go into the History of stupid quotes.
I scratch you back and you scartch mine OK Tony?
10,000-strong Tan Clan backs Tony Tan for president
By Cai Haoxiang
THE 10,000-strong Federation of Tan Clan Associations has thrown its weight behind former deputy prime minister Tony Tan's bid for the presidency - the first group here to publicly do so.
Secretary-general Tan Lian Ker, 80, explained yesterday that the decision to endorse him over three other aspirants with the Tan surname - Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Tan Jee Say - was due to Dr Tony Tan's association and contributions to the federation.
Dr Tony Tan, 71, has been its honorary adviser since 2006 and his professional assistance and contributions had enhanced the image of the federation and its members, he added.
Speaking to reporters after a dialogue between federation members and Dr Tan, he said it was only proper the federation back Dr Tan over the others, who are not involved in the clan's umbrella body.
Wah lau eh!!!
Look like the Tan Clan is playing safe and put their money on the favourite horse to win so they can get some kick back if he is elected.
It will be useful if the Tan Clan can disclose how and what each of the Tan candidates contributed to the Clan. Giving MONEY? Using their position to help them? Help to distribute food to the poor?
This way the public can judge for themselves what sort of character President Tan is like and also how much can the Tan clan be bought for.
By Cai Haoxiang
THE 10,000-strong Federation of Tan Clan Associations has thrown its weight behind former deputy prime minister Tony Tan's bid for the presidency - the first group here to publicly do so.
Secretary-general Tan Lian Ker, 80, explained yesterday that the decision to endorse him over three other aspirants with the Tan surname - Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Tan Jee Say - was due to Dr Tony Tan's association and contributions to the federation.
Dr Tony Tan, 71, has been its honorary adviser since 2006 and his professional assistance and contributions had enhanced the image of the federation and its members, he added.
Speaking to reporters after a dialogue between federation members and Dr Tan, he said it was only proper the federation back Dr Tan over the others, who are not involved in the clan's umbrella body.
Wah lau eh!!!
Look like the Tan Clan is playing safe and put their money on the favourite horse to win so they can get some kick back if he is elected.
It will be useful if the Tan Clan can disclose how and what each of the Tan candidates contributed to the Clan. Giving MONEY? Using their position to help them? Help to distribute food to the poor?
This way the public can judge for themselves what sort of character President Tan is like and also how much can the Tan clan be bought for.
Friday, August 05, 2011
Brainwashing quietly.
Union leaders should draw own conclusions about candidates: NTUC
Aug 05, 2011
SINGAPORE - The labour movement will break with tradition for the coming Presidential Election.
While it had thrown its support behind a candidate during the previous Presidential Elections, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) will adopt a "consensus-building approach" this time, labour chief Lim Swee Say told reporters yesterday.
Noting that the traditional top-down approach - which had seen the NTUC formally endorse the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong and Mr S R Nathan in their respective Presidential campaigns - "may be less relevant" now, Mr Lim said the labour movement will, instead, facilitate opportunities for union leaders to meet the presidential hopefuls and let them decide who to support.
And by the time Singaporeans head for the polls in three weeks, the NTUC may decide to back a candidate if its unions reach a consensus, or the different unions may end up supporting different candidates, said Mr Lim, who was speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a National Day observance ceremony at the NTUC headquarters.
Mr Lim added: "The reason why we've not come out to give a formal endorsement is because we want the union leaders to see for themselves, to judge for themselves, to come to their own conclusions ... (and) decide what will be good for the labour movement, and good for the workers."
Mr Lim pointed out that while Mr Ong and Mr Nathan were formerly the NTUC's secretary-general and Labour Research Unit director, respectively - thus easily rendering them as its candidates of choice - the current hopefuls did not come from the labour movement.
"If there are unions who feel that Candidate A is better than Candidate B, as a labour movement, we're not going to come down hard on them and say 'no unions are allowed to support different candidates'. It's more a process of consultation and consensus," he said.
On Wednesday, the labour movement held a closed-door dialogue with former Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, one of the presidential aspirants.
Mr Lim said the NTUC may invite other presidential hopefuls if there are requests for a dialogue with them, and its central committee members will also continue to share its assessment of the various candidates with union leaders.
Mr Lim noted that the NTUC is attaching "tremendous importance" to this Presidential Election because "the world of the future is going to be a lot more challenging one" due to stiff external competition and certain domestic issues, such as a widening income gap and an ageing population.
The next Elected President must thus be able to strengthen the Republic's standing internationally as well as unite Singaporeans to "give us the best hope of continuing to succeed in this new world", said Mr Lim.
Firstly it is absolutely stupid to have a PAP guy as the general secretary of the Union.
This also shows the Union is in control by the PAP as the party whip can literally control him like a puppet.
This idiot also never give the reason why he only invited one of the cadidates for air time and not the rest.
Secondary why should any sane adult listen to what the Union says and support the candidate that the union backed?
Everyone should have a mind of their own and listen to what the candidates promised and judge what kind of character he is and finally make his or her own decision to vote for the candidate that is the most sincere and convincing.
We all know who the Union, which is the PAP sub-branch, is backing for this election.
But because the person is having some bad publicity so Lim Swee Say probably got a note from the Secretary General to back up a little and remain neutral on the surface.
And if you read this article carefully, there is a sublime message in there.
Note that only one candidate's name is mentioned and one might even think that he is the only one in the running for this election. Or maybe he will be the only one granted the COE to run.
Aug 05, 2011
SINGAPORE - The labour movement will break with tradition for the coming Presidential Election.
While it had thrown its support behind a candidate during the previous Presidential Elections, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) will adopt a "consensus-building approach" this time, labour chief Lim Swee Say told reporters yesterday.
Noting that the traditional top-down approach - which had seen the NTUC formally endorse the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong and Mr S R Nathan in their respective Presidential campaigns - "may be less relevant" now, Mr Lim said the labour movement will, instead, facilitate opportunities for union leaders to meet the presidential hopefuls and let them decide who to support.
And by the time Singaporeans head for the polls in three weeks, the NTUC may decide to back a candidate if its unions reach a consensus, or the different unions may end up supporting different candidates, said Mr Lim, who was speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a National Day observance ceremony at the NTUC headquarters.
Mr Lim added: "The reason why we've not come out to give a formal endorsement is because we want the union leaders to see for themselves, to judge for themselves, to come to their own conclusions ... (and) decide what will be good for the labour movement, and good for the workers."
Mr Lim pointed out that while Mr Ong and Mr Nathan were formerly the NTUC's secretary-general and Labour Research Unit director, respectively - thus easily rendering them as its candidates of choice - the current hopefuls did not come from the labour movement.
"If there are unions who feel that Candidate A is better than Candidate B, as a labour movement, we're not going to come down hard on them and say 'no unions are allowed to support different candidates'. It's more a process of consultation and consensus," he said.
On Wednesday, the labour movement held a closed-door dialogue with former Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, one of the presidential aspirants.
Mr Lim said the NTUC may invite other presidential hopefuls if there are requests for a dialogue with them, and its central committee members will also continue to share its assessment of the various candidates with union leaders.
Mr Lim noted that the NTUC is attaching "tremendous importance" to this Presidential Election because "the world of the future is going to be a lot more challenging one" due to stiff external competition and certain domestic issues, such as a widening income gap and an ageing population.
The next Elected President must thus be able to strengthen the Republic's standing internationally as well as unite Singaporeans to "give us the best hope of continuing to succeed in this new world", said Mr Lim.
Firstly it is absolutely stupid to have a PAP guy as the general secretary of the Union.
This also shows the Union is in control by the PAP as the party whip can literally control him like a puppet.
This idiot also never give the reason why he only invited one of the cadidates for air time and not the rest.
Secondary why should any sane adult listen to what the Union says and support the candidate that the union backed?
Everyone should have a mind of their own and listen to what the candidates promised and judge what kind of character he is and finally make his or her own decision to vote for the candidate that is the most sincere and convincing.
We all know who the Union, which is the PAP sub-branch, is backing for this election.
But because the person is having some bad publicity so Lim Swee Say probably got a note from the Secretary General to back up a little and remain neutral on the surface.
And if you read this article carefully, there is a sublime message in there.
Note that only one candidate's name is mentioned and one might even think that he is the only one in the running for this election. Or maybe he will be the only one granted the COE to run.
Thursday, August 04, 2011
Movie : Seediq Bale 賽德克‧巴萊
Saw the trailer in Taipei and its on my must watch list this year.
The film is produced by John Woo and directed by Wei Te-Sheng魏德聖 which directed Cape No.7海角七號.
The film is produced by John Woo and directed by Wei Te-Sheng魏德聖 which directed Cape No.7海角七號.
The film has been selected as one of the films in competition at the 68th Venice International Film Festival.
The film is base on the Wushu Incident in 1930 Taiwan where the oppress aborigine upraise against the Japanese.
The cinematography looks good and should expect noting less from Wei Te Sheng.
Offical Website.
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Pre National Day thought.
I enjoy travelling.
I love the taste of the food and drinks, the smell of the air in a foreign land, observing the behaviour of the locals and I do treasure all these experience.
After been an avid traveller for so many years, I could help to compare the countries I have been to with my county by birth Singapore.
Every county has its pros and cons, including Singapore.
I must say the little red passport is indeed one of the best in the world where you are saved on the hassle of visa in most country in the world. (Trust me those that still required Visa are countries I certainly will not like to end up in)
When I was younger I realised Singapore has more pros then cons when compared to the countries I visited.
But I gradually began to see the scale is being tipped.
With decade of economy growth and policy change I realised the Singapore of today is totally different from what it was.
Yes we may be one of the richest, safest, cleanest countries in the world but do we have a high quality of life?
I love the taste of the food and drinks, the smell of the air in a foreign land, observing the behaviour of the locals and I do treasure all these experience.
After been an avid traveller for so many years, I could help to compare the countries I have been to with my county by birth Singapore.
Every county has its pros and cons, including Singapore.
I must say the little red passport is indeed one of the best in the world where you are saved on the hassle of visa in most country in the world. (Trust me those that still required Visa are countries I certainly will not like to end up in)
When I was younger I realised Singapore has more pros then cons when compared to the countries I visited.
But I gradually began to see the scale is being tipped.
With decade of economy growth and policy change I realised the Singapore of today is totally different from what it was.
Yes we may be one of the richest, safest, cleanest countries in the world but do we have a high quality of life?
The PAP tactic - Tell, Confuse, Apologize, Cry.
Singapore in uncharted territory, says Tony Tan
He said Singaporeans must be aware of global economic issues and how they may affect the country. -myp
Wed, Aug 03, 2011
Singaporeans must be aware of global economic issues and how they may affect the country, presidential hopeful Tony Tan said yesterday.
Citing the current United States debt crisis as an example, Dr Tan, 71, asked whether uncertainties on a global level would "overwhelm" Singaporeans.
"We are in uncharted territory here. What does it mean for the jobs? How can (workers) keep themselves relevant?...Will prices continue to rise?" he said.
"I see major difficulties that lie ahead of Singapore."
Making sure that workers "have the skills in order to raise their productivity if costs rise", is crucial, he added.
Dr Tan was speaking to reporters at the NTUC Centre in Marina Boulevard, after an hour-long closed-door dialogue session in which he fielded questions from union leaders.
The dialogue, organised by the Ong Teng Cheong Labour Leadership Institute, aims to engage key personalities on issues affecting the workforce.
The former deputy prime minister - one of five potential candidates vying to contest the upcoming presidential election - described union workers as the "heart" of Singapore's economy.
Explaining his role at the dialogue, Dr Tan said that many of the union leaders are understandably "very worried" about the implications of such a crisis.
"So I wanted to discuss with them all of these issues, give them a better understanding of what is happening, what could happen, and see how we could all work together in order to help them overcome some of these difficulties."
Asked if the labour movement would be endorsing Dr Tan in his presidential bid, Mr John De Payva, president of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), said that it has not formally decided to do so.
"We are mindful of who we think should be president but we have not decided whether to endorse. We may, we may not," he said, adding that a formal decision would come only after discussions with NTUC's Central Committee and its union leaders.
However, Mr De Payva said that Dr Tan "fits the bill" of what NTUC wants in a president: someone with stature, exposure and an understanding of the fundamentals of the role of the president.
Dr Tan - who has had links to the labour movement since 1979, when he became chairman of NTUC's Investment Committee - was invited to the dialogue at the request of union leaders.
A week away and when I come back and still Ex-DPM Tony’s airtime given by his ex-company SPH is unrivalled compare to the other Presidential hopeful.
Employing the same old PAP’s tactic, now he is threatening Singaporean by highlighting the bleak global economy, the probably high unemployment rates etc etc….
Oh spare me Tony, I head the same thing over and over again by the Men In White.
So this is exactly why we need a change of government as they had screwed up over the years and had not been held accountable for and are still drawing their million dollars salaries.
Tony what I want to hear from you is how you will check on the government if you are elected and what plans you have for making life of ordinary Singaporean better.
Oh and please be honest about your son’s deferment. We all knew about white horse privileges in the SAF so don’t lie to us please.
I think he will apologize and cry next.
He said Singaporeans must be aware of global economic issues and how they may affect the country. -myp
Wed, Aug 03, 2011
Singaporeans must be aware of global economic issues and how they may affect the country, presidential hopeful Tony Tan said yesterday.
Citing the current United States debt crisis as an example, Dr Tan, 71, asked whether uncertainties on a global level would "overwhelm" Singaporeans.
"We are in uncharted territory here. What does it mean for the jobs? How can (workers) keep themselves relevant?...Will prices continue to rise?" he said.
"I see major difficulties that lie ahead of Singapore."
Making sure that workers "have the skills in order to raise their productivity if costs rise", is crucial, he added.
Dr Tan was speaking to reporters at the NTUC Centre in Marina Boulevard, after an hour-long closed-door dialogue session in which he fielded questions from union leaders.
The dialogue, organised by the Ong Teng Cheong Labour Leadership Institute, aims to engage key personalities on issues affecting the workforce.
The former deputy prime minister - one of five potential candidates vying to contest the upcoming presidential election - described union workers as the "heart" of Singapore's economy.
Explaining his role at the dialogue, Dr Tan said that many of the union leaders are understandably "very worried" about the implications of such a crisis.
"So I wanted to discuss with them all of these issues, give them a better understanding of what is happening, what could happen, and see how we could all work together in order to help them overcome some of these difficulties."
Asked if the labour movement would be endorsing Dr Tan in his presidential bid, Mr John De Payva, president of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), said that it has not formally decided to do so.
"We are mindful of who we think should be president but we have not decided whether to endorse. We may, we may not," he said, adding that a formal decision would come only after discussions with NTUC's Central Committee and its union leaders.
However, Mr De Payva said that Dr Tan "fits the bill" of what NTUC wants in a president: someone with stature, exposure and an understanding of the fundamentals of the role of the president.
Dr Tan - who has had links to the labour movement since 1979, when he became chairman of NTUC's Investment Committee - was invited to the dialogue at the request of union leaders.
A week away and when I come back and still Ex-DPM Tony’s airtime given by his ex-company SPH is unrivalled compare to the other Presidential hopeful.
Employing the same old PAP’s tactic, now he is threatening Singaporean by highlighting the bleak global economy, the probably high unemployment rates etc etc….
Oh spare me Tony, I head the same thing over and over again by the Men In White.
So this is exactly why we need a change of government as they had screwed up over the years and had not been held accountable for and are still drawing their million dollars salaries.
Tony what I want to hear from you is how you will check on the government if you are elected and what plans you have for making life of ordinary Singaporean better.
Oh and please be honest about your son’s deferment. We all knew about white horse privileges in the SAF so don’t lie to us please.
I think he will apologize and cry next.
Monday, July 25, 2011
We screwed up so give us 3-5 years where we show result just before the election.
Years to correct supply-demand imbalance for HDB flats: Khaw
24 July 2011
SINGAPORE: National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan said it will take 3 to 5 years to "substantively resolve" the problem of high resale flat prices and for prices to stabilise.
He said there is currently an imbalance between supply and demand - and new Build-To-Order (BTO) flats take three years to build.
Mr Khaw said this in response to questions from reporters on the sidelines of a community event on Sunday.
He also expressed confidence that resale flat prices will stabilise but stressed that the problem of high prices cannot be solved overnight. He urged Singaporeans to be patient.
On Friday, figures from the HDB showed prices rising by 3.1 per cent in the second quarter of this year, nearly twice the previous quarter's 1.6 per cent.
"Why do prices go up? It's very simple, because there's an imbalance in supply and demand. Supply means... build more. (But) you won't see the flat until three years later. New housing plans will have effect on the resale market. So the more I push out, I'm sure there's some influence," said Mr Khaw.
On the demand side, Mr Khaw advised young couples who have a place to stay in currently, not to get too excited and jump into the resale market. Instead, they should continue to apply for a BTO flat. He also urged upgraders who already own a flat to hold off on their plans, so as not to crowd the market.
Mr Khaw added that the property cooling measures implemented by the government have reduced unnecessary demand stemming from speculation.
Mr Khaw also explained why the HDB stopped releasing the median Cash-Over-Valuation (COV). The minister said the figure is "misleading" and cannot be used to judge if COV has gone up or come down.
He added that the median figure is dependent on the house type and location of flats that are sold, which can change from month to month.
Instead, the HDB will continue to offer a breakdown of COV according to location and house type, which Mr Khaw said, is the information Singaporeans need when they decide on whether to buy a home.
The golden question is why is there such imbalance now?
The answer is simple, it was done purposely to inflate the price so the government can maximised the profit.
Remember the ex-Minister for National Development who keep telling Singaporean we have enough flats?
Also the influx of Foreigner also adds on to the problem.
Then shouldn’t the million dollar Men In White do a simple math that if you keep increasing the population and not building enough flats you will have a shortage like now?
Well guess they did but were bochap but now they start to chap because they lost a few seats in the last election.
So this is a case of the Men In Whites putting themselves first before you and me as I am pretty sure they know the number of flats there will be in 2010 but as I’ve mentioned they just want to sell it at a higher price.
But they failed to realised that Singaporean will get impatient and shown their un-happiness in votes.
So Minister Khaw is tasked to be Mr Nice guy to clean up after the horse which screwed up but still taking his pension and $16,000 per month of tax payers money.
Good life indeed.
24 July 2011
SINGAPORE: National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan said it will take 3 to 5 years to "substantively resolve" the problem of high resale flat prices and for prices to stabilise.
He said there is currently an imbalance between supply and demand - and new Build-To-Order (BTO) flats take three years to build.
Mr Khaw said this in response to questions from reporters on the sidelines of a community event on Sunday.
He also expressed confidence that resale flat prices will stabilise but stressed that the problem of high prices cannot be solved overnight. He urged Singaporeans to be patient.
On Friday, figures from the HDB showed prices rising by 3.1 per cent in the second quarter of this year, nearly twice the previous quarter's 1.6 per cent.
"Why do prices go up? It's very simple, because there's an imbalance in supply and demand. Supply means... build more. (But) you won't see the flat until three years later. New housing plans will have effect on the resale market. So the more I push out, I'm sure there's some influence," said Mr Khaw.
On the demand side, Mr Khaw advised young couples who have a place to stay in currently, not to get too excited and jump into the resale market. Instead, they should continue to apply for a BTO flat. He also urged upgraders who already own a flat to hold off on their plans, so as not to crowd the market.
Mr Khaw added that the property cooling measures implemented by the government have reduced unnecessary demand stemming from speculation.
Mr Khaw also explained why the HDB stopped releasing the median Cash-Over-Valuation (COV). The minister said the figure is "misleading" and cannot be used to judge if COV has gone up or come down.
He added that the median figure is dependent on the house type and location of flats that are sold, which can change from month to month.
Instead, the HDB will continue to offer a breakdown of COV according to location and house type, which Mr Khaw said, is the information Singaporeans need when they decide on whether to buy a home.
The golden question is why is there such imbalance now?
The answer is simple, it was done purposely to inflate the price so the government can maximised the profit.
Remember the ex-Minister for National Development who keep telling Singaporean we have enough flats?
Also the influx of Foreigner also adds on to the problem.
Then shouldn’t the million dollar Men In White do a simple math that if you keep increasing the population and not building enough flats you will have a shortage like now?
Well guess they did but were bochap but now they start to chap because they lost a few seats in the last election.
So this is a case of the Men In Whites putting themselves first before you and me as I am pretty sure they know the number of flats there will be in 2010 but as I’ve mentioned they just want to sell it at a higher price.
But they failed to realised that Singaporean will get impatient and shown their un-happiness in votes.
So Minister Khaw is tasked to be Mr Nice guy to clean up after the horse which screwed up but still taking his pension and $16,000 per month of tax payers money.
Good life indeed.
Sorry folks price has to go up else who paying my salary?
Government will improve bus, train service: PM Lee
By Zakir Hussain
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong last night pledged that the Government will improve the public transport service year by year, even as debate over a possible fare hike heats up.
The Government will also make sure that any fare hikes are reasonable, justifiable and not excessive, Mr Lee said at a National Day celebration in his Teck Ghee ward.
'From time to time, fare increases cannot be helped,' he said. But there are many schemes to help those in need, he added.
Members of the public are unhappy that transport operators are seeking a fare increase even though problems of over-crowding and long waiting times for buses and trains persist.
Last night, Mr Lee said: 'We will raise service standards and progressively improve them year by year... whether it's waiting times, crowding, frequency of the train services, particularly at peak hours, this is something which we will see to and improve.'
Another source of public unhappiness is that transport operators SMRT and SBS Transit want to raise fares in spite of earning good profits.
This guy never failed to amaze me by keeping scoring own goals.
Like many have expressed. The fare hikes in public transport is not reasonable and not justifiable as over the years the operators profits has been high and the service standard is going down south.
Cut the crap bout schemes helping the poor, the elderly can’t even get discounted fair during peak hour and are limited to a number of trips per day. And yes helping the poor 10% by charging more from the 90% equal more profit for you. Bloody blood suckers!
Also these comments have no value coming from this joker who may have never taken public transport in his life.
What he know about crowded trains, long waiting time and buses that are so packed that you cannot get on?
Of cause he has to side SMRT and SBS Transit. After all they are paying lots of money to the government in taxes and therefore sustained their million dollar salaries.
So the Elites here are screwing the Peasants for their own wealth.
Well guess this guys has 4 more years to screw us thanks to those idiots who voted for him.
By Zakir Hussain
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong last night pledged that the Government will improve the public transport service year by year, even as debate over a possible fare hike heats up.
The Government will also make sure that any fare hikes are reasonable, justifiable and not excessive, Mr Lee said at a National Day celebration in his Teck Ghee ward.
'From time to time, fare increases cannot be helped,' he said. But there are many schemes to help those in need, he added.
Members of the public are unhappy that transport operators are seeking a fare increase even though problems of over-crowding and long waiting times for buses and trains persist.
Last night, Mr Lee said: 'We will raise service standards and progressively improve them year by year... whether it's waiting times, crowding, frequency of the train services, particularly at peak hours, this is something which we will see to and improve.'
Another source of public unhappiness is that transport operators SMRT and SBS Transit want to raise fares in spite of earning good profits.
This guy never failed to amaze me by keeping scoring own goals.
Like many have expressed. The fare hikes in public transport is not reasonable and not justifiable as over the years the operators profits has been high and the service standard is going down south.
Cut the crap bout schemes helping the poor, the elderly can’t even get discounted fair during peak hour and are limited to a number of trips per day. And yes helping the poor 10% by charging more from the 90% equal more profit for you. Bloody blood suckers!
Also these comments have no value coming from this joker who may have never taken public transport in his life.
What he know about crowded trains, long waiting time and buses that are so packed that you cannot get on?
Of cause he has to side SMRT and SBS Transit. After all they are paying lots of money to the government in taxes and therefore sustained their million dollar salaries.
So the Elites here are screwing the Peasants for their own wealth.
Well guess this guys has 4 more years to screw us thanks to those idiots who voted for him.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Underhand tactic by the Men In Whites
WP says 'no' to offices in void decks
It cites cost, uncertainty over what they can be used for among reasons
By Andrea Ong
THE Workers' Party (WP) will not be building offices in Housing Board (HDB) void decks for their Meet-the-People Sessions, turning down an offer from the HDB to rent such office space to them at the same rates it charges community organisations.
The WP cited as reasons for its decision, financial cost and uncertainty over what kind of community activities it would be allowed to hold in these offices, as the HDB requires that its consent be sought first for some activities.
The party also said that 'in view of the constant redrawing of electoral boundaries by the Government, the long-term viability of the construction of offices for WP MPs is open to question'.
The WP's decision yesterday comes two months after the HDB scrapped a 20-year-old policy that differentiated political parties from community organisations, with the latter paying lower rentals than the former.
With most People's Action Party (PAP) MPs holding their Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) in kindergartens run by the PAP Community Foundation (PCF), which is considered a community organisation, opposition parties often alleged that the HDB's policy discriminated against them.
http://wp.sg/2011/07/media-release-on-mps-offices-at-void-decks/
Just like what they did to Mr Chiam, PAP is using their puppet HDB to make life difficult for elected opposition by denying them a dignified location to hold their MP session.
It cites cost, uncertainty over what they can be used for among reasons
By Andrea Ong
THE Workers' Party (WP) will not be building offices in Housing Board (HDB) void decks for their Meet-the-People Sessions, turning down an offer from the HDB to rent such office space to them at the same rates it charges community organisations.
The WP cited as reasons for its decision, financial cost and uncertainty over what kind of community activities it would be allowed to hold in these offices, as the HDB requires that its consent be sought first for some activities.
The party also said that 'in view of the constant redrawing of electoral boundaries by the Government, the long-term viability of the construction of offices for WP MPs is open to question'.
The WP's decision yesterday comes two months after the HDB scrapped a 20-year-old policy that differentiated political parties from community organisations, with the latter paying lower rentals than the former.
With most People's Action Party (PAP) MPs holding their Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) in kindergartens run by the PAP Community Foundation (PCF), which is considered a community organisation, opposition parties often alleged that the HDB's policy discriminated against them.
(See how ST phrase this!)
Three weeks after the recent general election, HDB announced that political parties would now be charged the same rental rates as community organisations, at $1.50 per sq m per month.
(PAP MP got pay?)
http://wp.sg/2011/07/media-release-on-mps-offices-at-void-decks/
Just like what they did to Mr Chiam, PAP is using their puppet HDB to make life difficult for elected opposition by denying them a dignified location to hold their MP session.
As we all know, PAP MP are using their MPS in those PAP kindergarden for free!
So may I ask our dear man in white, do people in Hougang, Potong Pasir and Aljunie pay different tax from people staying in Ang Mo Kio, Tanjong Pagar and Marine Parade? Are grocery and transport cheaper in these opposition wards? (Ok no grocery as they closed the NTUC in Hougang).
Why must opposition ELECTED MPs have to source for location to serve the people paying commercial rental while the incumbent MPs got it free or at a huge discount?
The MPS are for Singaporean no matter where they stay in.
To me, all MP should be given a proper office to hold their MPS no matter which party he/she from.
All these underhand tactic by the PAP not only shows that you are narrow minded but also trying to differentiate those that voted for you and those that did not.
This is no the way to win vote Dear Mr Lee. Please show some class, be more gracious, show some real sincerity and walk the ground more and I am sure you will win Singaporean over.
Till then, I can assure you you will lose some more parliament seats in 2016.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Murdoch love Singapore business model
Murdoch gives Singapore top marks for paying ministers top dollar Rupert Murdoch praised Singapore for paying its ministers top dollar to avoid corruption. -Reuters
Wed, Jul 20, 2011
Reuters
SINGAPORE - Rupert Murdoch praised wealthy Singapore for paying its ministers top dollar to avoid corruption, but a government-appointed committee in the Southeast Asian city-state is reviewing the million-dollar salaries because of public anger.
Murdoch, 80, was attacked by a protester on Tuesday while giving evidence to a British parliamentary committee at which he defended his son and his media company, News Corp , over a phone hacking scandal that has rocked the British establishment.
Murdoch described Singapore as "the cleanest society" in the world as the high salaries paid to its members of parliament precluded corruption, taking a gentle swipe at British MPs recently embroiled in a corruption scandal over expenses.
No politician in Singapore, a former British colony, has been charged with corruption in the last 20 years. But the high ministerial salaries were a hot topic during the May election in which the long-ruling People's Action Party was returned to power with the lowest percentage of the popular vote since independence in 1965.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the world's highest paid political leader with an annual salary of over S$3 million ($2.5 million), has set up a committee to look into resetting ministerial salaries.
Members of parliament, most of whom hold full-time jobs, get an allowance of about S$15,000 ($12,340) a month - or about three times the median household income.
Tan Jee Say, a former top civil servant and fund manager who hopes to contest Singapore's upcoming presidential elections, said public anger stemmed from the perception that ministers were grossly overpaid.
"They told us that they needed the high pay in order to get the most talented and competent people to run the government... We did not get the most talented people," he said.
"The broader issue is that politics is a public service. Other corrupt-free countries such as Denmark and New Zealand do not need to pay their ministers astronomical salaries to keep them clean," he added.
Singapore pegs the salaries of its ministers to two-thirds the amount received by top earners in the private sector, and Prime Minister Lee's salary is more than six times the $400,000 earned by U.S. President Barack Obama.
Many Singaporeans do not oppose paying politicians high salaries. The dispute is over how high.
"I agree with Murdoch. We have strict laws against corruption but the stick cannot work without the carrot," said market researcher Aaron Chew.
"(But) given that ministers get to decide on their salaries, aren't we in essence giving them a blank cheque in the name of preventing corruption?"
Stupid Murdoch is actually saying money can buy everything.
Paying top dollars for Top management in a profit making company is reasonable as they are tasked to generate profit and will be sacked if the company lost money.
Singapore logic of paying millions to the Ministers is crap, firstly they don’t deserve it with their screwed up performance (High cost of living, Shortage of Housing, screwed up transport services, Mas Selamat saga, Orchard road flood, over influx of foreigner etc.) And in-fact no one even take responsibility.
Those Ministers involved are still in the parliament.
Ok PM did apologised when he realised his party is losing vote during the election period.
A county is not a company. You have to attract the right kind of people into public services and if you use money then you are attracting the wrong kind of people and that is why Singapore is such sad place to live in.
On the surface we are wealthy and but in fact we are just slave with low quality of life.
The solution to stop corruption is simple, introduce the punishment of death penalty or to those who are against it, stripping one of citizenship and sent for exile is the alternative.
Wed, Jul 20, 2011
Reuters
SINGAPORE - Rupert Murdoch praised wealthy Singapore for paying its ministers top dollar to avoid corruption, but a government-appointed committee in the Southeast Asian city-state is reviewing the million-dollar salaries because of public anger.
Murdoch, 80, was attacked by a protester on Tuesday while giving evidence to a British parliamentary committee at which he defended his son and his media company, News Corp , over a phone hacking scandal that has rocked the British establishment.
Murdoch described Singapore as "the cleanest society" in the world as the high salaries paid to its members of parliament precluded corruption, taking a gentle swipe at British MPs recently embroiled in a corruption scandal over expenses.
No politician in Singapore, a former British colony, has been charged with corruption in the last 20 years. But the high ministerial salaries were a hot topic during the May election in which the long-ruling People's Action Party was returned to power with the lowest percentage of the popular vote since independence in 1965.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the world's highest paid political leader with an annual salary of over S$3 million ($2.5 million), has set up a committee to look into resetting ministerial salaries.
Members of parliament, most of whom hold full-time jobs, get an allowance of about S$15,000 ($12,340) a month - or about three times the median household income.
Tan Jee Say, a former top civil servant and fund manager who hopes to contest Singapore's upcoming presidential elections, said public anger stemmed from the perception that ministers were grossly overpaid.
"They told us that they needed the high pay in order to get the most talented and competent people to run the government... We did not get the most talented people," he said.
"The broader issue is that politics is a public service. Other corrupt-free countries such as Denmark and New Zealand do not need to pay their ministers astronomical salaries to keep them clean," he added.
Singapore pegs the salaries of its ministers to two-thirds the amount received by top earners in the private sector, and Prime Minister Lee's salary is more than six times the $400,000 earned by U.S. President Barack Obama.
Many Singaporeans do not oppose paying politicians high salaries. The dispute is over how high.
"I agree with Murdoch. We have strict laws against corruption but the stick cannot work without the carrot," said market researcher Aaron Chew.
"(But) given that ministers get to decide on their salaries, aren't we in essence giving them a blank cheque in the name of preventing corruption?"
Stupid Murdoch is actually saying money can buy everything.
Paying top dollars for Top management in a profit making company is reasonable as they are tasked to generate profit and will be sacked if the company lost money.
Singapore logic of paying millions to the Ministers is crap, firstly they don’t deserve it with their screwed up performance (High cost of living, Shortage of Housing, screwed up transport services, Mas Selamat saga, Orchard road flood, over influx of foreigner etc.) And in-fact no one even take responsibility.
Those Ministers involved are still in the parliament.
Ok PM did apologised when he realised his party is losing vote during the election period.
A county is not a company. You have to attract the right kind of people into public services and if you use money then you are attracting the wrong kind of people and that is why Singapore is such sad place to live in.
On the surface we are wealthy and but in fact we are just slave with low quality of life.
The solution to stop corruption is simple, introduce the punishment of death penalty or to those who are against it, stripping one of citizenship and sent for exile is the alternative.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Singaporean First? Yes! First to Pay And Pay.
Singaporeans come first in higher education
Former deputy prime minister Tony Tan favours a "Singaporeans first" approach to higher education here.
Wed, Jul 20, 2011
Former deputy prime minister Tony Tan favours a "Singaporeans first" approach to higher education here.
The presidential hopeful, who gave a public lecture at the Singapore Management University yesterday, said: "Whatever initiatives we launch, we must always put the interests of Singaporeans and Singapore first.
"Our primary responsibility is to Singaporeans - to give Singaporeans and their families every opportunity to be first."
This is why Singapore citizens have priority in getting enrolled at primary and secondary schools, which lay the critical foundation for success in higher education, he added. There are also many subsidies and scholarships available to Singaporeans to study locally or abroad, he pointed out.
Dr Tan, 71, who was minister for education in the 1980s, explained that "Singaporeans first" differs from "Singaporeans only".
He said that Singapore should not shut its doors to international talent, as that would "restrict our ability to engage in the kind of collaborative research that has put Singapore universities in the very top ranks of universities in the world".
Finding the right balance would not be easy but we must try, said Dr Tan, who had earlier qualified that he was speaking in the capacity of a "private citizen".
Higher-education policies guided in this direction sits well with Singaporeans, such as lawyer Lim Kia Tong.
Mr Lim, 58, whose son will sit his A-level examinations this year, told my paper: "If Singaporeans can't get into local universities, (their parents would be compelled) to spend substantial sums of money to send them overseas, and even though we are citizens, we would feel second-rate."
Two 19-year-old former classmates from Anderson Junior College told my paper that they were disappointed when they were rejected by three local universities this year despite obtaining grades which they felt were deserving of admission.
The luckier of the pair, Ms Chan J. Y, will pursue a course at culinary school Le Cordon Bleu's Sydney campus next year, paid for by her parents. Her classmate, Ms Sonam Damani, whose parents are unable to send her abroad, plans to apply again next year while studying at a private university such as UniSIM.
Dr Tan was also quizzed by reporters on the controversial graduate mothers' scheme, which he scrapped in 1985 during his tenure as education minister.
The scheme gave priority to children of graduate mothers for school registration.
Netizens have recently criticised Dr Tan - who supported the scheme initially - for discontinuing the scheme only after public displeasure was expressed at the 1984 polls.
He said: "When I became education minister, it was one of the first issues which I took up. I felt that it was not fulfilling its purpose. It was unfairly disadvantaging certain segments of our (society).
"I don't think it was going to achieve the purpose for which it was intended."
As suspected Tony is getting hell lots of media coverage compares to the rest of the president hopeful.
Tony is a nice guy and he is one of my favourite PAP guys like George (maybe I am bias as we have the same alma mater) but in my opinion he joined the wrong party and even though he had quit to me he still breath, sleep and sound like the PAP.
First I don’t know why was he invited to this event the only reason is to give him a chance to speak in public.
Then his stand for higher education is just echoing what the men in white’s stand which we all know. There is absolutely unnecessary for Tony to reiterate it.
This government policy is just to pacify Singaporean, just like the housing issue. The real reason for letting in the foreigners was and will always be the dollar sign. Oh and they are not too happy that parents are sending their kids oversea and this is view as lost revenue by the Men In White.
The problem with this country is that we are swarmed with foreigners. They are here to compete with us for food, job, housing and education and they don’t serve National Service. (Hell some MP also did not serve! WTF!)
Cut the crap about Singaporean being first, to the PAP we are just a digit, a profit making object and we and all the foreigners are here to pay their million dollars salaries.
Former deputy prime minister Tony Tan favours a "Singaporeans first" approach to higher education here.
Wed, Jul 20, 2011
Former deputy prime minister Tony Tan favours a "Singaporeans first" approach to higher education here.
The presidential hopeful, who gave a public lecture at the Singapore Management University yesterday, said: "Whatever initiatives we launch, we must always put the interests of Singaporeans and Singapore first.
"Our primary responsibility is to Singaporeans - to give Singaporeans and their families every opportunity to be first."
This is why Singapore citizens have priority in getting enrolled at primary and secondary schools, which lay the critical foundation for success in higher education, he added. There are also many subsidies and scholarships available to Singaporeans to study locally or abroad, he pointed out.
Dr Tan, 71, who was minister for education in the 1980s, explained that "Singaporeans first" differs from "Singaporeans only".
He said that Singapore should not shut its doors to international talent, as that would "restrict our ability to engage in the kind of collaborative research that has put Singapore universities in the very top ranks of universities in the world".
Finding the right balance would not be easy but we must try, said Dr Tan, who had earlier qualified that he was speaking in the capacity of a "private citizen".
Higher-education policies guided in this direction sits well with Singaporeans, such as lawyer Lim Kia Tong.
Mr Lim, 58, whose son will sit his A-level examinations this year, told my paper: "If Singaporeans can't get into local universities, (their parents would be compelled) to spend substantial sums of money to send them overseas, and even though we are citizens, we would feel second-rate."
Two 19-year-old former classmates from Anderson Junior College told my paper that they were disappointed when they were rejected by three local universities this year despite obtaining grades which they felt were deserving of admission.
The luckier of the pair, Ms Chan J. Y, will pursue a course at culinary school Le Cordon Bleu's Sydney campus next year, paid for by her parents. Her classmate, Ms Sonam Damani, whose parents are unable to send her abroad, plans to apply again next year while studying at a private university such as UniSIM.
Dr Tan was also quizzed by reporters on the controversial graduate mothers' scheme, which he scrapped in 1985 during his tenure as education minister.
The scheme gave priority to children of graduate mothers for school registration.
Netizens have recently criticised Dr Tan - who supported the scheme initially - for discontinuing the scheme only after public displeasure was expressed at the 1984 polls.
He said: "When I became education minister, it was one of the first issues which I took up. I felt that it was not fulfilling its purpose. It was unfairly disadvantaging certain segments of our (society).
"I don't think it was going to achieve the purpose for which it was intended."
As suspected Tony is getting hell lots of media coverage compares to the rest of the president hopeful.
Tony is a nice guy and he is one of my favourite PAP guys like George (maybe I am bias as we have the same alma mater) but in my opinion he joined the wrong party and even though he had quit to me he still breath, sleep and sound like the PAP.
First I don’t know why was he invited to this event the only reason is to give him a chance to speak in public.
Then his stand for higher education is just echoing what the men in white’s stand which we all know. There is absolutely unnecessary for Tony to reiterate it.
This government policy is just to pacify Singaporean, just like the housing issue. The real reason for letting in the foreigners was and will always be the dollar sign. Oh and they are not too happy that parents are sending their kids oversea and this is view as lost revenue by the Men In White.
The problem with this country is that we are swarmed with foreigners. They are here to compete with us for food, job, housing and education and they don’t serve National Service. (Hell some MP also did not serve! WTF!)
Cut the crap about Singaporean being first, to the PAP we are just a digit, a profit making object and we and all the foreigners are here to pay their million dollars salaries.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Best quote (joke) of the year
Yahoo! Singapore is running a project, Singapore9, for you to vote and recognise 9 Singaporean who really made a different for the past year.
I choked on my breakfast when I saw the no.1 Guy on the list and strangely his picture is bigger then rest.
He quote really top my list of JOKE OF THE YEAR.
Mmm… maybe he did really makes a different.
Guess the grassrooters are starting to click on our dear friend button.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Lui Tuck Yew talk for the sake of talking
New transport minister Lui Tuck Yew is digging his own grave towards the next general election.
He is talking rubbish and seem like Raymond Lim is going to have a majong kaki real soon.
Ordinary people like me can't even make sense out of what the hell is this million dollar scholar minister trying to say.
'Serious downsides' to WP suggestion
Transport Minister says taxpayers, even those who do not take public transport, may end up paying more
Jul 14, 2011
Singapore - The Workers' Party's (WP) suggestion to nationalise public transport "might seem like a very attractive idea" but it has "serious downsides" in reality, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said yesterday.
Chief among these "downsides" is that "commuters and taxpayers - yes, even those who don't take public transport - are likely to end up paying more, and possibly, for a poorer level of service over time", Mr Lui added.
This is only HIS opinion and yet again we see the PAP using scare tactics tell you that YOU WILL PAY MORE even before studying how to implement this proposal.
Mr Lui's remarks on his Facebook page came a day after the WP reiterated its call for a National Transport Corporation.
The Transport Minister pointed out that, an entity that depends on Government funding and which operates on a cost-recovery basis, "would have little incentive to keep costs down".
Why can’t it be done? Just put the right person as the CEO and I am sure he can run the company well as a cost-recovery basis. Note the two companies currently are earning $161M and $54M profit and this a very big buffer.
Said Mr Lui: "Cost increases will be passed on to commuters. Over time, this will lead to higher costs for the same level of service, which means commuters pay higher - and not lower - fares. Not only would people have to pay more, nationalising the operators could result in a stagnation of service quality or efficiency over time."
Who is asking you to run the pubic transport company at a lost? You just have to operate it with minimum profit. In fact we have nothing to lose as now we are paying higher fare and no service.
Stagnation of service quality? Like PAP you meant? Bullshit lah! If quality drop just sacked the joker running the company and replaced with someone who can do it. I am sure you have lots of talented scholar in the civil service.
On Monday, SBS Transit and SMRT applied for the maximum increase of 2.8-per-cent for bus and rail fares. Responding to media queries, the WP reiterated on Tuesday its proposed transport body would not be driven by profit but would operate on a cost-recovery basis.
Mr Lui noted yesterday that "the profit incentive" of commercial enterprises "spurs efficiency and productivity improvements".
Huh? Now this Lui is really talking rubbish. Efficiency and productivity are method to increase profit, he don’t even mention service quality which I find is the most important factor in a service orientated company. Please don’t treat the public transport provided like a factory and commuter are just products.
Yes currently there are efficiency and productivity from the operator view point. By filling the bus and train to maximum capacity! This definitely improve the companies productivities.
While some have argued that the public transport operators should not be making high profits, Mr Lui said Singaporeans should also "recognise that as public-listed companies, it is not unreasonable for the (operators) to earn fair returns from the sizeable capital investments required to sustain their operations and to invest in future public transport needs".
So that is why we need to delist these companies and nationalised it! Are you listening to WP proposal at all Ah Lui? Or are you arguing for the sake or arguing?
A Ministry of Transport (MOT) spokesperson added yesterday that experience elsewhere has shown that privately operated public transport systems bring about greater efficiency. The spokesperson said: "This is why many cities around the world, like Melbourne, Tokyo, Stockholm and Seoul, either have or are moving towards commercial enterprises providing public transport services."
I don’t know about the rest but I can vouch that the Train service in Seoul is both CHEAP and efficient so how come ours are expensive, overcrowded and inefficient even thought it is a privatised company?
Mr Lui reiterated that commuters' interests are "safeguarded": A "robust framework" is in place to regulate bus and rail service levels through service quality and operating performance standards so that public transport operators do not pursue profit at the expense of commuters. Also, the Public Transport Council (PTC) regulates fares based on a fare adjustment formula that takes into account macro-economic factors, namely the Consumer Price Index and average national wage increases.
If the 10% of the (Like the minister who never take pubic transport) salaries skyrocked, this will bring the national average wage up and if we use this to justify public transport fare increase then it is both stupid and dumb. I suggest you take the average salary of the bottom 50% of the national as a benchmark to decide whether to increase the fare my folk.
"The fare adjustment formula protects commuters by capping fare increases - (public transport operators) are not free to simply pass on their cost increases to commuters," Mr Lui added.
Yes there is capping at each increase only. There is no cap on how often they can apply to increase.
While SBS Transit and SMRT have asked for the maximum fare increase this year, Mr Lui noted there have been some years when the PTC approved fare increases that have been less than what the public transport operators proposed. "We should let the PTC deliberate on this properly and make its decision," he added.
Please remind us when was the last time fare was reviewed and reduced? And of cause PTC have to wayang a bit to proved their existence.
On Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport chairperson Cedric Foo's call to relook the fare adjustment formula, the MOT spokesperson noted the fare formula "is not meant to be static".
In 2008, for example, the revised formula factored in higher productivity gains. This revised formula is valid until next year. "The PTC will review the fare adjustment formula for subsequent years bearing in mind the interests of commuters as well as the long-term viability of the public transport operators," the MOT spokesperson added.
With the Government investing another S$60 billion in new rail lines by the end of the decade, Mr Lui reiterated the Government's commitment to invest heavily in the public transport infrastructure. "Government funding of public transport infrastructure is a key reason why public transport fares continue to be affordable," he added.
He is talking rubbish and seem like Raymond Lim is going to have a majong kaki real soon.
Ordinary people like me can't even make sense out of what the hell is this million dollar scholar minister trying to say.
'Serious downsides' to WP suggestion
Transport Minister says taxpayers, even those who do not take public transport, may end up paying more
Jul 14, 2011
Singapore - The Workers' Party's (WP) suggestion to nationalise public transport "might seem like a very attractive idea" but it has "serious downsides" in reality, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said yesterday.
Chief among these "downsides" is that "commuters and taxpayers - yes, even those who don't take public transport - are likely to end up paying more, and possibly, for a poorer level of service over time", Mr Lui added.
This is only HIS opinion and yet again we see the PAP using scare tactics tell you that YOU WILL PAY MORE even before studying how to implement this proposal.
Mr Lui's remarks on his Facebook page came a day after the WP reiterated its call for a National Transport Corporation.
The Transport Minister pointed out that, an entity that depends on Government funding and which operates on a cost-recovery basis, "would have little incentive to keep costs down".
Why can’t it be done? Just put the right person as the CEO and I am sure he can run the company well as a cost-recovery basis. Note the two companies currently are earning $161M and $54M profit and this a very big buffer.
Said Mr Lui: "Cost increases will be passed on to commuters. Over time, this will lead to higher costs for the same level of service, which means commuters pay higher - and not lower - fares. Not only would people have to pay more, nationalising the operators could result in a stagnation of service quality or efficiency over time."
Who is asking you to run the pubic transport company at a lost? You just have to operate it with minimum profit. In fact we have nothing to lose as now we are paying higher fare and no service.
Stagnation of service quality? Like PAP you meant? Bullshit lah! If quality drop just sacked the joker running the company and replaced with someone who can do it. I am sure you have lots of talented scholar in the civil service.
On Monday, SBS Transit and SMRT applied for the maximum increase of 2.8-per-cent for bus and rail fares. Responding to media queries, the WP reiterated on Tuesday its proposed transport body would not be driven by profit but would operate on a cost-recovery basis.
Mr Lui noted yesterday that "the profit incentive" of commercial enterprises "spurs efficiency and productivity improvements".
Huh? Now this Lui is really talking rubbish. Efficiency and productivity are method to increase profit, he don’t even mention service quality which I find is the most important factor in a service orientated company. Please don’t treat the public transport provided like a factory and commuter are just products.
Yes currently there are efficiency and productivity from the operator view point. By filling the bus and train to maximum capacity! This definitely improve the companies productivities.
While some have argued that the public transport operators should not be making high profits, Mr Lui said Singaporeans should also "recognise that as public-listed companies, it is not unreasonable for the (operators) to earn fair returns from the sizeable capital investments required to sustain their operations and to invest in future public transport needs".
So that is why we need to delist these companies and nationalised it! Are you listening to WP proposal at all Ah Lui? Or are you arguing for the sake or arguing?
A Ministry of Transport (MOT) spokesperson added yesterday that experience elsewhere has shown that privately operated public transport systems bring about greater efficiency. The spokesperson said: "This is why many cities around the world, like Melbourne, Tokyo, Stockholm and Seoul, either have or are moving towards commercial enterprises providing public transport services."
I don’t know about the rest but I can vouch that the Train service in Seoul is both CHEAP and efficient so how come ours are expensive, overcrowded and inefficient even thought it is a privatised company?
Mr Lui reiterated that commuters' interests are "safeguarded": A "robust framework" is in place to regulate bus and rail service levels through service quality and operating performance standards so that public transport operators do not pursue profit at the expense of commuters. Also, the Public Transport Council (PTC) regulates fares based on a fare adjustment formula that takes into account macro-economic factors, namely the Consumer Price Index and average national wage increases.
If the 10% of the (Like the minister who never take pubic transport) salaries skyrocked, this will bring the national average wage up and if we use this to justify public transport fare increase then it is both stupid and dumb. I suggest you take the average salary of the bottom 50% of the national as a benchmark to decide whether to increase the fare my folk.
"The fare adjustment formula protects commuters by capping fare increases - (public transport operators) are not free to simply pass on their cost increases to commuters," Mr Lui added.
Yes there is capping at each increase only. There is no cap on how often they can apply to increase.
While SBS Transit and SMRT have asked for the maximum fare increase this year, Mr Lui noted there have been some years when the PTC approved fare increases that have been less than what the public transport operators proposed. "We should let the PTC deliberate on this properly and make its decision," he added.
Please remind us when was the last time fare was reviewed and reduced? And of cause PTC have to wayang a bit to proved their existence.
On Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport chairperson Cedric Foo's call to relook the fare adjustment formula, the MOT spokesperson noted the fare formula "is not meant to be static".
In 2008, for example, the revised formula factored in higher productivity gains. This revised formula is valid until next year. "The PTC will review the fare adjustment formula for subsequent years bearing in mind the interests of commuters as well as the long-term viability of the public transport operators," the MOT spokesperson added.
With the Government investing another S$60 billion in new rail lines by the end of the decade, Mr Lui reiterated the Government's commitment to invest heavily in the public transport infrastructure. "Government funding of public transport infrastructure is a key reason why public transport fares continue to be affordable," he added.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Retired but still hanging around for the goodies Part II
2 ex-PMs continue to have staff support
It will enable them to carry out official work when called upon: PMO
THE Prime Minister has decided that the Government will continue to provide staff support to Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong.
Both men, who stepped down from the Cabinet in May, continue to make significant contributions to Singapore, especially internationally, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) said in a statement on Tuesday.
The PMO also said that the staff support will enable Mr Lee and Mr Goh to carry out official work when called upon by the Government, as well as their duties as senior advisers to the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).
The elder Mr Lee, 87, was in Government for 52 years, including 31 years as Singapore's first prime minister. In May, Mr Lee also relinquished his post as GIC chairman. He is now its senior adviser.
Mr Goh, 70, served in Government for 35 years and was prime minister for 14 of those years. Previously MAS chairman, he is now the central bank's senior adviser. He also has an honorary title - Emeritus Senior Minister.
Both men had chosen to step down from Government in May to give Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his new team a fresh, clean slate to carry the country forward in a more difficult and complex situation, they had explained in a statement then. Both remain Members of Parliament.
From Channel New Asia, each of the ex-PM will have one special assistant and one press secretary part-time, plus one secretary and two clerical officers full-time.
I hope the PMO will disclose how much are their salaries are in total. Well we don’t need to know exactly how much the 2 special assistant salary as salary are still a sensitive in Asian society but at least they should let the tax payer know how much are we paying to support these two ex-PM.
In fact, this two ex-PM are actually retired and are talking a role as part time advisor to the Singapore government so I think it is fair that they should be given part time assistant and come one, it is more then enough for both of them to share one full time assistant since now they are part timer too.
Don’t forget these two also travel frequently on First Class with tax-payer money to do what I also don’t know.
In fact the government should also give us a break down what and how did the two ex-PMs have contributed after they step down from the cabinet.
Moreover these two has accumulated enough wealth over the years to last 3 or more life times so can’t they afford to hired their own assistant?
Too stingy perhaps?
It will enable them to carry out official work when called upon: PMO
THE Prime Minister has decided that the Government will continue to provide staff support to Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong.
Both men, who stepped down from the Cabinet in May, continue to make significant contributions to Singapore, especially internationally, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) said in a statement on Tuesday.
The PMO also said that the staff support will enable Mr Lee and Mr Goh to carry out official work when called upon by the Government, as well as their duties as senior advisers to the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).
The elder Mr Lee, 87, was in Government for 52 years, including 31 years as Singapore's first prime minister. In May, Mr Lee also relinquished his post as GIC chairman. He is now its senior adviser.
Mr Goh, 70, served in Government for 35 years and was prime minister for 14 of those years. Previously MAS chairman, he is now the central bank's senior adviser. He also has an honorary title - Emeritus Senior Minister.
Both men had chosen to step down from Government in May to give Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his new team a fresh, clean slate to carry the country forward in a more difficult and complex situation, they had explained in a statement then. Both remain Members of Parliament.
From Channel New Asia, each of the ex-PM will have one special assistant and one press secretary part-time, plus one secretary and two clerical officers full-time.
I hope the PMO will disclose how much are their salaries are in total. Well we don’t need to know exactly how much the 2 special assistant salary as salary are still a sensitive in Asian society but at least they should let the tax payer know how much are we paying to support these two ex-PM.
In fact, this two ex-PM are actually retired and are talking a role as part time advisor to the Singapore government so I think it is fair that they should be given part time assistant and come one, it is more then enough for both of them to share one full time assistant since now they are part timer too.
Don’t forget these two also travel frequently on First Class with tax-payer money to do what I also don’t know.
In fact the government should also give us a break down what and how did the two ex-PMs have contributed after they step down from the cabinet.
Moreover these two has accumulated enough wealth over the years to last 3 or more life times so can’t they afford to hired their own assistant?
Too stingy perhaps?
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
The poor get poorer thank you SMRT and SBS
These people decide on your public transport fee.
Transport operators seek fare increases
GPC chairman to ask Transport Ministry to review fare adjustment formula
SINGAPORE - Public transport operators SBS Transit and SMRT have applied for the maximum fare increase of 2.8 per cent for rail and bus fares, citing "uncontrollable" and "significant" cost pressures but a more fundamental review may be on the cards.
Beyond this year's exercise, Member of Parliament Cedric Foo, who took over as chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport, has signalled his intention to engage the Transport Ministry to review the fare adjustment formula.
With public transport playing a bigger role in Singapore's land transport system, Mr Foo toldMediaCorp a review of the formula would be timely as it was drawn up in 2005. The fare adjustment formula was last reviewed in 2008.
The Public Transport Council (PTC) - which is responsible for regulating fares - said yesterday it would study and deliberate on both operators' applications and would inform the public of the outcome as soon as a decision is reached.
Commuters can expect some time to adjust to any fare changes, as it was said this year - once by the PTC in February and again by Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew in June - that any consideration of fare increases should be done in relation with the opening of the Circle Line's final two stages in October.
SMRT executive vice-president for trains Khoo Hean Siang said yesterday that non-fare businesses from commercial activities - such as retail rentals and advertising - have contributed to productivity gains but they could not mitigate the "uncontrollable cost pressures due to fuel prices and manpower costs".
SMRT's energy cost increased 17.5 per cent for the year to March 31, due mainly to higher electricity and diesel prices as well as the expansion of rail network with the opening of the first two phases of the Circle Line.
The SMRT said a higher employer's CPF contribution rate contributed to higher manpower costs.
"In addition, more staff had to be hired due to the opening of Circle Line Phase 1 and 2, and to operate additional train and bus trips from various service enhancements efforts implemented to meet the rising commuting demand," the SMRT added.
Besides rising fuel and energy costs, SBS Transit said it "continues to face significant cost pressures despite increased efforts to lower costs and increase productivity".
In particular, SBS Transit cited its investments in new buses which began in 2006, with some 600 buses - bought at a cost of S$268 million - scheduled for delivery over this year and next year.
"In all, our 2,050 new buses are costing us some S$854 million," SBS Transit added. The company said more details of the application, which is subject to the approval of the PTC, will be announced at a later date.
The PTC's fare revision formula takes into account inflation, average wages and productivity of the operators to arrive at a cap to fare adjustments.
Mr Foo felt any review would need to look at two objectives - balancing an affordable public transport system with operators earning enough to invest in improving service.
"I would like to look at it holistically," he added. "We need to ask ourselves what has worked, what has not worked, how we may re-look at this formula and make it more relevant to its objectives."
Last year, overall fares were up 0.5 per cent. In 2009, the transport operators decided to reduce fares by 4.6 per cent because of the severe economic downturn, even though the formula allowed for a 5 per cent rise.
In 2008, fares rose 0.7 per cent. And in 2007, the council approved a 1.8-per-cent rise in bus fares but kept train fares unchanged.
SMRT's net profit dropped 1.1 per cent to S$161.1 million for the year to March 31 as staff, energy and operating costs rose.
Meanwhile, SBS Transit's net profit for the full year ending December 31 last year was S$54.3 million, down a marginal 0.6 per cent from the year before.
This is what you get when there is complete monopoly of the market. It’s the same for politic.
With “rising cost” as a reason both SMRT and Transit Link wanted to raise fare. Note last year both companies have a profit of $161.1miilons and $54.3million respectively.
So I guess the real reason for fare increment is to protect or increase this profit.
I have no confident in the Public Transport Council as well. The council are all made up of Elites, we have several professors and directors. How many of these people take public transport daily? So any fool will predict there will be an increase in fare and after this more increase in private bus fare too and then taxi maybe.
So folks welcome back to reality, Election is over and cost of living is going up and wages are coming down. To those who voted for PAP in the last election you have no right to complaint as for me I can still say #@!%$!$#@!%$!@$#.
Monday, July 11, 2011
The PAP endorsed one
Dr Tony Tan attends Peranakan 'wedding banquet'
DRESSED in a traditional Peranakan costume and sparkling jewels representing wealth and family status, the bride walks slowly swaying side to side to the music, accompanied by an elder woman who guides her on the strict wedding rituals.
The groom wears a Manchurian-style robe and holds a scholar's fan in one hand, fanning constantly as he walks down the aisle beside his bride, in front of more than 500 guests.
This is not an actual wedding but a celebration of the Peranakan Association's 111th anniversary.
Speaking at the event, guest of honour former Deputy Prime Minister Dr Tony Tan said that the Peranakan culture is distinctive because of its ability to embrace other cultures and also its taste, beliefs, rituals and language that are a blend of Chinese, Malay and colonial British cultures.
I am curious on what capacity Tony is attending this function.
Technically he is jobless and his title is Ex-DPM, not even Emeritus. So how did he ends up as a VIP of the Peranakan’s clan.
Since Tony left the cabinet and became the GIC CEO he has been rather low profile and suddenly when he announced he is running for this year President Election we have this kind of report surfacing.
Indeed the spin doctor have started working.
DRESSED in a traditional Peranakan costume and sparkling jewels representing wealth and family status, the bride walks slowly swaying side to side to the music, accompanied by an elder woman who guides her on the strict wedding rituals.
The groom wears a Manchurian-style robe and holds a scholar's fan in one hand, fanning constantly as he walks down the aisle beside his bride, in front of more than 500 guests.
This is not an actual wedding but a celebration of the Peranakan Association's 111th anniversary.
Speaking at the event, guest of honour former Deputy Prime Minister Dr Tony Tan said that the Peranakan culture is distinctive because of its ability to embrace other cultures and also its taste, beliefs, rituals and language that are a blend of Chinese, Malay and colonial British cultures.
I am curious on what capacity Tony is attending this function.
Technically he is jobless and his title is Ex-DPM, not even Emeritus. So how did he ends up as a VIP of the Peranakan’s clan.
Since Tony left the cabinet and became the GIC CEO he has been rather low profile and suddenly when he announced he is running for this year President Election we have this kind of report surfacing.
Indeed the spin doctor have started working.
Retired but still hanging around for the goodies.
Abdullah Tarmugi to lead delegation on visit to New Zealand
10 July 2011
SINGAPORE: Mr Abdullah Tarmugi, the Speaker of the last Parliament, will lead a four-member delegation on a visit to New Zealand from July 10 to 15, at the invitation of Dr Lockwood Smith, Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives.
Mr Abdullah will be accompanied by Members of Parliament Ms Ellen Lee, Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Vikram Nair. The delegation will visit Auckland and Wellington.
The Office of the Clerk of Parliament said the Singapore delegation will meet the representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ministry of Defence and New Zealand Trade and Enterprise to discuss bilateral matters.
It will also attend a parliament sitting at the New Zealand House of the Representatives and observe parliamentary proceedings.
The Singapore delegation will also be meeting overseas Singaporeans in New Zealand.
Correct me if I am wrong but I though this guy has retired? He even got a thank you note from PM.
So why is a “Speakers of the last Parliament” (Which did not participate in the last election) leading a team of MPs? Doesn’t sound right to me. Maybe the New Zealander Smith invited the speaker of parliament but since we still have no idea who will that be they just got the previous guy there.
It is OK if he is still the speakers but hey isn’t he suppose to be gone and enjoying his pension.
So now tax payers still have to feed this retired guy?
Come to think about it how come they still have not appointed the new speaker since Zainal has already lost.
10 July 2011
SINGAPORE: Mr Abdullah Tarmugi, the Speaker of the last Parliament, will lead a four-member delegation on a visit to New Zealand from July 10 to 15, at the invitation of Dr Lockwood Smith, Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives.
Mr Abdullah will be accompanied by Members of Parliament Ms Ellen Lee, Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Vikram Nair. The delegation will visit Auckland and Wellington.
The Office of the Clerk of Parliament said the Singapore delegation will meet the representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ministry of Defence and New Zealand Trade and Enterprise to discuss bilateral matters.
It will also attend a parliament sitting at the New Zealand House of the Representatives and observe parliamentary proceedings.
The Singapore delegation will also be meeting overseas Singaporeans in New Zealand.
Correct me if I am wrong but I though this guy has retired? He even got a thank you note from PM.
So why is a “Speakers of the last Parliament” (Which did not participate in the last election) leading a team of MPs? Doesn’t sound right to me. Maybe the New Zealander Smith invited the speaker of parliament but since we still have no idea who will that be they just got the previous guy there.
It is OK if he is still the speakers but hey isn’t he suppose to be gone and enjoying his pension.
So now tax payers still have to feed this retired guy?
Come to think about it how come they still have not appointed the new speaker since Zainal has already lost.
Thursday, July 07, 2011
More info of the Police screw up.
More info on the case can be found here.
I also read from the newspaper that the victim has no case against the government. Three words came to my mind. WTF?!
I extra some key point from the report.
The judge was Justice Woo Bih Li.
SSI Zainal also breached rules governing the conduct of police officers when he recorded the first statement on a slip of paper and transferred it to his field diary much later in the day - a move Justice Rajah said was 'clearly unacceptable'…..
Justice Rajah said the prosecution had not been able to give any plausible reason for why SSI Zainal, a seasoned investigator with 28 years of experience, failed to comply with the rules. He said Mr Ismil was in a vulnerable state when his first statement was taken as he was under the influence of drugs. He was 'prone to be vulnerable to suggestions and manipulations when... under stress or threat'…..
What exactly happened when the statement was taken? Any other witness beside SSI Zainal?
Why his conviction was overturned
•Mr Ismil's first two police statements confessing to attacking Madam Tham should have been found inadmissible.
After they were recorded in a police car and the police station, they were not read back to Mr Ismil. He was also not given the chance to make corrections, and neither statement was signed by him. This is a breach of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Very scary. This imply anyone can confess a crime for you.
Mr Ismil's first statement was not recorded in the investigator's pocket book or field diary but on a slip of paper, and the entry was transferred to his field diary much later in the day. His second statement was also not immediately recorded in the pocket book or field diary.
Police not following procedure.
Mr Ismil, a drug abuser, was under the influence of drugs when he was first questioned. The trial judge preferred the evidence of the prosecution psychiatrist and found that his withdrawal symptoms had lessened by the time he was questioned.
I thought a judge should be unbias and take need to take all evidence into account why hey preferred the prosection psychiatrist report? IF in doubt should a 3rd party psychiatrist be consulted?
But the appeal court said the trial judge was wrong to determine that Mr Ismil 'miraculously recovered' just before giving his statement.
Defence psychiatrists said that Mr Ismil, who has an IQ of only 73, was vulnerable to suggestion and manipulation, so it was likely the confession was false. But the prosecution psychiatrist disagreed.
The appeal court said the trial judge erred in preferring the evidence of the psychiatrist, who did the interview without a Malay interpreter. The appeal court noted that there was no objective evidence linking Mr Ismil to the crime.
If you asked me the police and the Judge really screwed up man.
6 years gone... thank you very much.
Man accused of murder freed after 6 years in jail
By Selina Lum
IN A dramatic twist yesterday, an odd-job labourer was released from prison after he was cleared of murdering an elderly housewife six years ago.
Mr Ismil Kadar - who spent six years in prison including two years on death row - was acquitted by the Court of Appeal, which issued a strongly worded judgment highlighting 'serious lapses' by police and prosecutors.
Describing the case as 'extraordinary', Justice V. K. Rajah said the 42-year-old's confessions were obtained 'in troubling circumstances' which appeared to be deliberate breaches in procedures rather than mere carelessness.
He added that investigators had been 'less than thorough' and said there was a 'startling lack of any objective evidence' that tied Mr Ismil to the crime.
Mr Ismil - who has an IQ of only 73 - had been in jail since May 2005, when he 'confessed' to murdering Madam Tham Weng Kuen, 69, in her Boon Lay flat. The IQ level of a normal person is between 90 and 110.
The housewife was stabbed and slashed 110 times in the brutal attack while her husband, who was bedridden from a stroke, was in the bedroom. He heard what was happening but could not do anything about it. Madam Tham's body was discovered a few hours later when their only child - a daughter - checked on them.
The screw up by police and the prosecutors wasted 6 years of a man life and nearly cause the death of an innocent man.
Note that Mr Ismail Kadar was force to confess 'in troubling circumstances' probably being abused physically and psychologically.
This could very well happen to you and me.
I believe the police and the state own Mr Ismail Kadar an apology and are going to offer him some compensation.
More importantly it should also investigate and make public what when wrong and how to prevent in the future. And also please find out is there any similar cases now.
Question I can come up with:
Why did the police force a confession out of Mr Kadar who is low in IQ? What method did they used that can cause a man who confessed in a crime that has the death penalty?
Was there a KPI to be met then? Were they trying to take the easy way out by closing the case when they can’t find the real culprit?
Who was responsible for this lapse and is anyone being held responsible for it?
What is being done to prevent it from happening again?
Was Wong Kang Seng the Home affair Minister then? (OK a cheap shot)
It is sad that this sort of thing is happening in Singapore where the police and State prosecutor pride themselves for fair and efficient.
I personally had heard other stories similar to this case regarding the Men In Blue so I am really sceptical about the efficiency of the Police.
By Selina Lum
IN A dramatic twist yesterday, an odd-job labourer was released from prison after he was cleared of murdering an elderly housewife six years ago.
Mr Ismil Kadar - who spent six years in prison including two years on death row - was acquitted by the Court of Appeal, which issued a strongly worded judgment highlighting 'serious lapses' by police and prosecutors.
Describing the case as 'extraordinary', Justice V. K. Rajah said the 42-year-old's confessions were obtained 'in troubling circumstances' which appeared to be deliberate breaches in procedures rather than mere carelessness.
He added that investigators had been 'less than thorough' and said there was a 'startling lack of any objective evidence' that tied Mr Ismil to the crime.
Mr Ismil - who has an IQ of only 73 - had been in jail since May 2005, when he 'confessed' to murdering Madam Tham Weng Kuen, 69, in her Boon Lay flat. The IQ level of a normal person is between 90 and 110.
The housewife was stabbed and slashed 110 times in the brutal attack while her husband, who was bedridden from a stroke, was in the bedroom. He heard what was happening but could not do anything about it. Madam Tham's body was discovered a few hours later when their only child - a daughter - checked on them.
Firtly Kudo to the lawyer Mr R. Thrumurgan.
The screw up by police and the prosecutors wasted 6 years of a man life and nearly cause the death of an innocent man.
Note that Mr Ismail Kadar was force to confess 'in troubling circumstances' probably being abused physically and psychologically.
This could very well happen to you and me.
I believe the police and the state own Mr Ismail Kadar an apology and are going to offer him some compensation.
More importantly it should also investigate and make public what when wrong and how to prevent in the future. And also please find out is there any similar cases now.
Question I can come up with:
Why did the police force a confession out of Mr Kadar who is low in IQ? What method did they used that can cause a man who confessed in a crime that has the death penalty?
Was there a KPI to be met then? Were they trying to take the easy way out by closing the case when they can’t find the real culprit?
Who was responsible for this lapse and is anyone being held responsible for it?
What is being done to prevent it from happening again?
Was Wong Kang Seng the Home affair Minister then? (OK a cheap shot)
It is sad that this sort of thing is happening in Singapore where the police and State prosecutor pride themselves for fair and efficient.
I personally had heard other stories similar to this case regarding the Men In Blue so I am really sceptical about the efficiency of the Police.
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
Not very clever statement from the $3million man. (Note with Potential pay cut)
PM Lee: Water priced such that S'poreans value it
By Joy Fang
WATER is a valuable and limited resource, and Singapore needs to price its water at a level that would make people understand its worth, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday.
"You have to get the price right so that people understand that this is a scarce resource and will value it," he said, adding that producers of water should also be able to get economic return on their investment.
"If you make it free, nobody will bother to turn off the tap... They can leave it on since somebody else is paying."
Today, water tariffs are about three times those charged before 1997.
When water tariffs were raised yearly from 1997 to 2000, the Government was worried that people would not accept it, Mr Lee said.
"But one reason people accepted it was because, at that time, regularly, there were reminders from various quarters in neighbouring countries that if we were not compliant, they will threaten to cut our water off," he said.
Still, low-income families will not be left behind, he said.
There are schemes, such as the U-Save subsidies, to make water affordable for them.
This is not a very clever plan coming from the Prime Minister.
Price water expensive just to make Singaporean understand its worth? Bullshit lah! Education is more important then anything.
Pricing high is only for the Gahment to profit more that’s it.
I paid so much for the Cabinets and I still don’t think its worth it.
Well done Mr Prime Minister, you just shown us your true worth.
By Joy Fang
WATER is a valuable and limited resource, and Singapore needs to price its water at a level that would make people understand its worth, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday.
"You have to get the price right so that people understand that this is a scarce resource and will value it," he said, adding that producers of water should also be able to get economic return on their investment.
"If you make it free, nobody will bother to turn off the tap... They can leave it on since somebody else is paying."
Today, water tariffs are about three times those charged before 1997.
When water tariffs were raised yearly from 1997 to 2000, the Government was worried that people would not accept it, Mr Lee said.
"But one reason people accepted it was because, at that time, regularly, there were reminders from various quarters in neighbouring countries that if we were not compliant, they will threaten to cut our water off," he said.
Still, low-income families will not be left behind, he said.
There are schemes, such as the U-Save subsidies, to make water affordable for them.
This is not a very clever plan coming from the Prime Minister.
Price water expensive just to make Singaporean understand its worth? Bullshit lah! Education is more important then anything.
Pricing high is only for the Gahment to profit more that’s it.
I paid so much for the Cabinets and I still don’t think its worth it.
Well done Mr Prime Minister, you just shown us your true worth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)