2012 is shaping to be sex in the city of Singapore. First, there are the 44 odd men who were hauled to Court for having sex with an underage girl. Then there are revelations coming out of the Courts about how a former senior civil servant had his tryst with three middle-age woman (apparently still very desirable still), two of whom are married, so it was reported.
And what a difference there are in these two cases. No, I don't mean the sex, although that is itself a salacious part of these two sagas. The difference is that the Courts protected the identity of the underage prostitute and let the press free rein over the identity and indeed the acts of the three women involved in the corruption scandal. In a way, I feel sorry for these women. I don't know how or where they can hang their heads now that these lurid details have been reported, and may I add, with glee, by the repressed press who were told to shut up or "shut down" in the previous case. Yes, the press even tried to get in touch with these women, all to no avail, for obvious reasons. By all accounts, these are intelligent woman who have probably excelled academically and then scaled the corporate ladder to reach the pinnacle of their careers. Were they desperate for that contract from the SCDF, or were they, at least for two of the married ones, desperate "housewives". Why they would sell their bodies to get the contracts for their companies? After all, they don't own the companies, do they? Were their respective companies in such dire straits that they had to sell their bodies to redeem them? Or was the SCDF guy such as casanova that these three woman, unbeknownst to each other, just found him too attractive to resist, never mind their husbands and children?
I can understand corruption, but I just can't understand sex. You can sell sex, or you can give it away with abandon. What must be going through the minds of these women when they did either. One young and three mature women. But one impression that must strike anyone is that the former chief of the SCDF sure had a good time, and probably the women, all of them bar none, did too.
But as they say, good things never last. Unfortunately, for these three career women, the bad days have been a disaster to their careers, their families and themselves. In retrospect, the sex was just too expensive. The lesson, or takeaway, from all this is that if you want to do it, do it while you are young, probably before you are of age, as the prostitute has well demonstrated.
Friday, June 08, 2012
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Crossing the bridge
When the by-election was first announced a couple of weeks ago, my colleague confidently declared that the Hougang ward will revert to the PAP. I thought it was not likely as that will require a 15% swing, given that the last incumbent, Mr Yaw Shin Leong, secured about 65% margin of victory in the 2011 GE. Given that nothing very drastic has changed since then, except for the sacking of a sitting MP by the Workers Party, there was no real reason for the swing. Of course political commentators and letters to the press suggested that Hougang residents are finally ready to throw in the mantel of "sacrificial lamb" in favour of inflating their property prices through the behest of a PAP MP. But it appears that this is the minority view. The people of Hougang appears to continue to like the WP and returned the Hougang seat to them.
It was comical indeed, last night, when I was catching the press conference by the losing team. In the first one, Mr Desmond Choo was totally hidden behind the cameras and I could hardly hear what he said. And I was not the only one. A reporter at the scene made the same point and had Mr Choo repeat what he said, but his face was still hidden. Much later, CNA interviewed him again, without any other reporters in sight. DPM Teo was again standing next to Mr Choo, now in full view, saying the same thing for the 3rd time. The whole thing struck me as rather amateurish. Certainly the whole thing was not as carefully stage-managed as one would expect of the PAP machinery, but I suppose they weren't in the mood anyway.
My sympathies go out to Mr Choo. I don't know him personally, but from news reports leading up to polling day, I could see that he was working hard, and appeared to have the residents' interests at heart. I don't doubt his sincerity. He appears a good man. Young, handsome, energetic. What's not to like about him? His only problem is that he is with the wrong party, on the wrong side of the fence, so to speak. So what if his influence got Hougang a free legal clinic and whatnots. The benefit of these appeared unproven to 62% of Hougang voters. I think the WP also noticed Mr Choo's sincerity. At least MP Png Eng Huat (aka Huat Ah) appears to be able to get along with him, hinting at a cuppa or more with him in the future. Maybe Huat Ah can, in time, persuade Mr Choo that his political future in Hougang is with the WP, i.e. if he still wants to stay around in Hougang. Otherwise, he will have to wait out Mr Png's health before finally getting elected, like Mr Sitoh Yih Pin of Potong Pasir. But this is WP, so you can bet that there will be another good WP candidate then. Why shouldn't that candidate go by the name of Desmond Choo? He should just join the WP, shadow Huat Ah for the next 4 years, get the residents to know him as the Low Thia Khiang anointed successor to the Hougang seat, and stand as a WP candidate for Hougang. I am sure the reluctant Huat Ah will be more than willing to step aside. The fastest way into Parliament, I'd say, though at the "wrong" side of the bench.
Its his choice but it will give the PAP a fit.
It was comical indeed, last night, when I was catching the press conference by the losing team. In the first one, Mr Desmond Choo was totally hidden behind the cameras and I could hardly hear what he said. And I was not the only one. A reporter at the scene made the same point and had Mr Choo repeat what he said, but his face was still hidden. Much later, CNA interviewed him again, without any other reporters in sight. DPM Teo was again standing next to Mr Choo, now in full view, saying the same thing for the 3rd time. The whole thing struck me as rather amateurish. Certainly the whole thing was not as carefully stage-managed as one would expect of the PAP machinery, but I suppose they weren't in the mood anyway.
My sympathies go out to Mr Choo. I don't know him personally, but from news reports leading up to polling day, I could see that he was working hard, and appeared to have the residents' interests at heart. I don't doubt his sincerity. He appears a good man. Young, handsome, energetic. What's not to like about him? His only problem is that he is with the wrong party, on the wrong side of the fence, so to speak. So what if his influence got Hougang a free legal clinic and whatnots. The benefit of these appeared unproven to 62% of Hougang voters. I think the WP also noticed Mr Choo's sincerity. At least MP Png Eng Huat (aka Huat Ah) appears to be able to get along with him, hinting at a cuppa or more with him in the future. Maybe Huat Ah can, in time, persuade Mr Choo that his political future in Hougang is with the WP, i.e. if he still wants to stay around in Hougang. Otherwise, he will have to wait out Mr Png's health before finally getting elected, like Mr Sitoh Yih Pin of Potong Pasir. But this is WP, so you can bet that there will be another good WP candidate then. Why shouldn't that candidate go by the name of Desmond Choo? He should just join the WP, shadow Huat Ah for the next 4 years, get the residents to know him as the Low Thia Khiang anointed successor to the Hougang seat, and stand as a WP candidate for Hougang. I am sure the reluctant Huat Ah will be more than willing to step aside. The fastest way into Parliament, I'd say, though at the "wrong" side of the bench.
Its his choice but it will give the PAP a fit.
Sunday, May 06, 2012
Caught
I was amused the other day to read how Mr Gerard Ee was 'caught' visiting, well lets say certain sites, on the internet. I have no idea what these sites were, but from what was reported, it wouldn't be what your mom would approve of. But don't we all click on one link or another and we end up where we do not intend to go to. Happened to me also (blush blush). I read Yahoo News quite often. The news stories are all above board decent, but there are certain stories that contain one or more scantily clad bodies. Its not porn, really. Never seen a person in a bikini lying on the beach or beside a pool before? But you know, you can't control what people think, or how they think. That's where the danger lies. Not knowing enough. They say a little knowledge can be dangerous. And it doesn't help with the ongoing trial of those 40 or so people for engaging in underage sex.
And the culprit may be a link that appears on the page you are viewing. If the Facebook link Social is ON, then that page will be shared with whoever you allow to read your Facebook - the public or your friends. What is so insidious about it is that you only learn about inadvertently sharing the page when you visit your Facebook account later. Hold on, where did that come from? Sure you could have turned it off, but you realise this AFTER the "damage" is done.
So next time, if you do not want the world to see what you are reading or where you are visiting, turn Social OFF:
This can save you some embarrassing moments, though of course, there was nothing wrong with it in the first place, except in the minds of some people who jump to conclusions and ascribe too much.
Facebook still has a long way to go to ensuring its members' privacy. You thought you had locked down your account, but it only takes a new feature, or app to expose you, no thanks to FB. In the past, this is the very reason that many have refused to join FB. I just have to say that if you want to continue using FB, you have to be very careful, and that includes our PM, Mr Lee Hsien Loong, who just opened his FB to the world.
And the culprit may be a link that appears on the page you are viewing. If the Facebook link Social is ON, then that page will be shared with whoever you allow to read your Facebook - the public or your friends. What is so insidious about it is that you only learn about inadvertently sharing the page when you visit your Facebook account later. Hold on, where did that come from? Sure you could have turned it off, but you realise this AFTER the "damage" is done.
So next time, if you do not want the world to see what you are reading or where you are visiting, turn Social OFF:
This can save you some embarrassing moments, though of course, there was nothing wrong with it in the first place, except in the minds of some people who jump to conclusions and ascribe too much.
Facebook still has a long way to go to ensuring its members' privacy. You thought you had locked down your account, but it only takes a new feature, or app to expose you, no thanks to FB. In the past, this is the very reason that many have refused to join FB. I just have to say that if you want to continue using FB, you have to be very careful, and that includes our PM, Mr Lee Hsien Loong, who just opened his FB to the world.
Monday, April 23, 2012
The Island that was
It is a sad day for Singapore.
The celebrated "Singapore works" moniker is in danger of extinction. The erstwhile 'it just works' island is now an unreliable place to be, transport wise. How did we ever descend into this?
Commuters are so spooked that they pray and cross their fingers they will get to the office on time every morning. And students taking exams are now caught up in this worrisome phenomenon - of trains breaking down for hours. Come to think of it - Singapore students of one type or another are taking exams and tests throughout most of the year, except perhaps in June and December. I am beyond that, but I have children who may face this previously unthinkable prospect. If you are late, it is because you are late. Don't blame the bus or the train. You should have set off earlier to allow for heavy traffic. That's what we get told anyway.
Now, we can definitely say it was the train that was late. What can you do when you are stuck in a subterranean tunnel somewhere on the island for an extended period of time? There is really nowhere to go, nothing to do except wait for help. And given the mess that is likely taking place above ground, you can hunker down and wait, and wait and ....until the oxygen runs out or someone smashes the door with a fire extinguisher.
But we have become complacent, even arrogant in our perceived resiliency. We have gotten drunk on the praise that the international community has lavished on us for years that we have begun to believe in our own invincibility. Well, schools are going to have to craft out a new set of rules that govern these exceptions that are likely to occur to students taking exams. Our exam standards and processes will now get to a higher level. Yeah, you bet.
As the Committee of Inquiry (COI) on transport proceeds, we are hearing of lapses that reddens the face, and not least those earning millions whose job was to put in place people and processes precisely to prevent, and manage disasters. But no, the here and now matters more. The stockholders' interest is primary. If you can't cut cost and grow profit, you're just not good enough a CEO. You need to get one person to do two persons' job. That's promoting productivity. Isn't that what the government is advocating, nay, droning on and on these days?
The customer who? Oh those rats in the tunnels and holes. Well, consider themselves lucky that we charge them so little to zip from one hole in the ground to another, those vermins. For us, that Porshe is just fine.
City Hall, we have a problem here.
The celebrated "Singapore works" moniker is in danger of extinction. The erstwhile 'it just works' island is now an unreliable place to be, transport wise. How did we ever descend into this?
Commuters are so spooked that they pray and cross their fingers they will get to the office on time every morning. And students taking exams are now caught up in this worrisome phenomenon - of trains breaking down for hours. Come to think of it - Singapore students of one type or another are taking exams and tests throughout most of the year, except perhaps in June and December. I am beyond that, but I have children who may face this previously unthinkable prospect. If you are late, it is because you are late. Don't blame the bus or the train. You should have set off earlier to allow for heavy traffic. That's what we get told anyway.
Now, we can definitely say it was the train that was late. What can you do when you are stuck in a subterranean tunnel somewhere on the island for an extended period of time? There is really nowhere to go, nothing to do except wait for help. And given the mess that is likely taking place above ground, you can hunker down and wait, and wait and ....until the oxygen runs out or someone smashes the door with a fire extinguisher.
But we have become complacent, even arrogant in our perceived resiliency. We have gotten drunk on the praise that the international community has lavished on us for years that we have begun to believe in our own invincibility. Well, schools are going to have to craft out a new set of rules that govern these exceptions that are likely to occur to students taking exams. Our exam standards and processes will now get to a higher level. Yeah, you bet.
As the Committee of Inquiry (COI) on transport proceeds, we are hearing of lapses that reddens the face, and not least those earning millions whose job was to put in place people and processes precisely to prevent, and manage disasters. But no, the here and now matters more. The stockholders' interest is primary. If you can't cut cost and grow profit, you're just not good enough a CEO. You need to get one person to do two persons' job. That's promoting productivity. Isn't that what the government is advocating, nay, droning on and on these days?
The customer who? Oh those rats in the tunnels and holes. Well, consider themselves lucky that we charge them so little to zip from one hole in the ground to another, those vermins. For us, that Porshe is just fine.
City Hall, we have a problem here.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Hold the money
Listen up, the identity of the whore who set up 44 men, and counting in sleepless Singapore is...
Cannot tell or I will be fined S$5,000. Serious.
I'd rather save it and pay the teenage whore that money...
Hey, last I heard, she is older than 18 now. That means a visit to her bordello wouldn't get you hauled up to Court. Now you don't need to squat in jail after squatting on... Its open season if her identity is revealed.
When you think of tainting (ahem) the witness, you'd understand why the Prosecutors and the Judge find it a horrifying prospect to reveal her identity in public at this time. Thus the gag order even for the public, I suppose. Bad news travel fast. Bad and dirty news even faster.
There are many in Singapore who are still sleepless.
Cannot tell or I will be fined S$5,000. Serious.
I'd rather save it and pay the teenage whore that money...
Hey, last I heard, she is older than 18 now. That means a visit to her bordello wouldn't get you hauled up to Court. Now you don't need to squat in jail after squatting on... Its open season if her identity is revealed.
When you think of tainting (ahem) the witness, you'd understand why the Prosecutors and the Judge find it a horrifying prospect to reveal her identity in public at this time. Thus the gag order even for the public, I suppose. Bad news travel fast. Bad and dirty news even faster.
There are many in Singapore who are still sleepless.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Face it, PM
It's nothing new, really. Since Mr George Yeo went a blogging some YEARS ago, the trend for other government-types to go online was inevitable. For those who have read George Yeo's blog, it was, well, rather officious. It adopted the civil service style of writing - para 1, para 2, para 3...But it caught netizens' attention, nevertheless. The blogging Minister.
Now no less than Mr Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore, has taken to fronting his own FB page. That's great, though he is late to the game. Nevertheless, within a day (or less), his FB page has garnered more than 20,000 likes, though I don't know what there is about it to like at this point in time. Even the Wall Street Journal has seen fit to publish the event. I suppose power attracts, or you just want to be seen hobnobbing with the rich, the powerful, the famous/infamous and the politicians. PM Lee fits all of these descriptors so it is no wonder the overwhelming strength of the magnet of the man. As an aside, George Yeo's Facebook likes lead PM Lee's by a wide berth. But this is to be expected. George has had a head start.
Frankly, I couldn't care less about whether he's had his dinner, but apparently many in Singapore have no other past time than to kay-poh and boast to one and all about when he/she learnt that LHL has had his dinner. Now don't get me wrong. I am not belittling anyone, not least the PM. He has done himself a favour by engaging his stakeholders on the universe's most significant media. Not through a group of admins who purport to speak on his behalf.
But, and this seems never too far away - the perceived threat of action against detractors and abusers of LHL's FB page. No, the law of the internet does not apply. Singapore's Laws do. Just read the House Rules on his FB page, reproduced below for your convenience.
I don't think those were LHL's words. Perhaps his lawyer's, or some smarts in the PMO. But you will agree with me that those words sound ominous.
Yes, Prime Minister! No dirty or abusive words. Otherwise...
OK, we get it.
Somehow these words just take away some of the personal feel of the page. I doubt any netizen puts up those kind of rules. It is live and let live on the internet. You want to join in, then you have to be prepared for the occasional abuse. I have been abused before, and called all manner of the most un-nice things when I took a position that basically agreed with the government's stand. You don't really have to send your lawyers after them. There is a certain intelligence of the crowd, or rather decency of the crowd. On balance, we look after each other. We will wack down anyone who is abusive, unfair, unreasonable and downright abnoxious, no expensive lawyers needed. You just have to trust the crowd, Prime Minister. Look at George. No threats. No House Rules. And he is doing just fine.
Welcome to the Wild Wild Web.
Now no less than Mr Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore, has taken to fronting his own FB page. That's great, though he is late to the game. Nevertheless, within a day (or less), his FB page has garnered more than 20,000 likes, though I don't know what there is about it to like at this point in time. Even the Wall Street Journal has seen fit to publish the event. I suppose power attracts, or you just want to be seen hobnobbing with the rich, the powerful, the famous/infamous and the politicians. PM Lee fits all of these descriptors so it is no wonder the overwhelming strength of the magnet of the man. As an aside, George Yeo's Facebook likes lead PM Lee's by a wide berth. But this is to be expected. George has had a head start.
Frankly, I couldn't care less about whether he's had his dinner, but apparently many in Singapore have no other past time than to kay-poh and boast to one and all about when he/she learnt that LHL has had his dinner. Now don't get me wrong. I am not belittling anyone, not least the PM. He has done himself a favour by engaging his stakeholders on the universe's most significant media. Not through a group of admins who purport to speak on his behalf.
But, and this seems never too far away - the perceived threat of action against detractors and abusers of LHL's FB page. No, the law of the internet does not apply. Singapore's Laws do. Just read the House Rules on his FB page, reproduced below for your convenience.
I don't think those were LHL's words. Perhaps his lawyer's, or some smarts in the PMO. But you will agree with me that those words sound ominous.
Yes, Prime Minister! No dirty or abusive words. Otherwise...
OK, we get it.
Somehow these words just take away some of the personal feel of the page. I doubt any netizen puts up those kind of rules. It is live and let live on the internet. You want to join in, then you have to be prepared for the occasional abuse. I have been abused before, and called all manner of the most un-nice things when I took a position that basically agreed with the government's stand. You don't really have to send your lawyers after them. There is a certain intelligence of the crowd, or rather decency of the crowd. On balance, we look after each other. We will wack down anyone who is abusive, unfair, unreasonable and downright abnoxious, no expensive lawyers needed. You just have to trust the crowd, Prime Minister. Look at George. No threats. No House Rules. And he is doing just fine.
Welcome to the Wild Wild Web.
Labels:
community
,
Governance
,
government
,
Internet
,
politics
,
The Web
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Sleepless in Singapore
What do 44 men have to do with an under-aged (i.e. less than 18 years old) girl? Well, they bought themselves sex with this girl. This in itself is unremarkable. It happens everywhere, every time. legally or illegally, consensual or otherwise. After all, they say that it is world's oldest profession, and by that, the world's oldest business. So what if 44 men had paid for sex? It happened. It will continue to happen. Of course, as they say, if you want to engage in such activities, just remember not to get caught. These 44 were caught. There were reportedly as many as 60 involved in the investigations. Well, those got away. But 44 is perhaps enough to divert the attention of Singaporeans away from the woes of high property prices, stratosgpherically high cost of Certificate of Entitlement (COEs) and unrelenting breakdowns in the rail system. We do need some diversion from bad news. While reading of 44 people being charged in court for illicit sex can be a yawn for some, it may be sweet relief for others, not least the people in charge of housing and transport in Singapore. Here's a breather for them.
But seriously, one wonders if men in Singapore are so sex deprived. I can understand this of workers who toil and sweat by day in a foreign land (or for that matter, even the locals), and live rather sedate and lonely lives in their dorms at night. Its one of those natural urges that cries out for satisfaction and fulfillment one way or another. But a school principle, a naval officer, a senior lawyer, a senior civil servant, a senior banker and a businessman among them? Can't get no satisfaction at home? What are the women doing, or more particularly, not doing to keep their men from straying? When money becomes a commodity for these high income earners, there is nothing else, I suppose that satisfies a man's ego. Or is it just ego, for after all, it's underage girls you know. But I suppose some may suppose that such girls carry less risk of transmission of sex diseases. They are young after all? But we now know, and the 44 also should know, that the girl wasn't a virginal damsel. They were probably passing any and every dirt among themselves, no thanks to the messenger of a damsel.
Having said all these, the question still arises - the case against the 43 hasn't been proved yet, save one - the remorseful (I suppose) principal who continues to spout Confucianism and moral verses to assuage his soul, by self confession. But as their lawyer, Mr Subhas Anandan asked, who is the girl? How old is she actually? This girl that the 43 men allegedly paid a couple of hundred dollars for an hour or so of bliss? Common justice demands that her identity be revealed, for she was as much, if not more, culpable in the whole affair. Why protect the messenger at the expense of the messengees? But I suppose the prosecutors have their reasons. Whatever these may be, the girl must be produced at some point in time, and I expect no less than rotten carrots and eggs to fly her way.
Truly, where sex is involved, few are spared. But more so, we just aren't interested in propagating ourselves the right way any more.
But seriously, one wonders if men in Singapore are so sex deprived. I can understand this of workers who toil and sweat by day in a foreign land (or for that matter, even the locals), and live rather sedate and lonely lives in their dorms at night. Its one of those natural urges that cries out for satisfaction and fulfillment one way or another. But a school principle, a naval officer, a senior lawyer, a senior civil servant, a senior banker and a businessman among them? Can't get no satisfaction at home? What are the women doing, or more particularly, not doing to keep their men from straying? When money becomes a commodity for these high income earners, there is nothing else, I suppose that satisfies a man's ego. Or is it just ego, for after all, it's underage girls you know. But I suppose some may suppose that such girls carry less risk of transmission of sex diseases. They are young after all? But we now know, and the 44 also should know, that the girl wasn't a virginal damsel. They were probably passing any and every dirt among themselves, no thanks to the messenger of a damsel.
Having said all these, the question still arises - the case against the 43 hasn't been proved yet, save one - the remorseful (I suppose) principal who continues to spout Confucianism and moral verses to assuage his soul, by self confession. But as their lawyer, Mr Subhas Anandan asked, who is the girl? How old is she actually? This girl that the 43 men allegedly paid a couple of hundred dollars for an hour or so of bliss? Common justice demands that her identity be revealed, for she was as much, if not more, culpable in the whole affair. Why protect the messenger at the expense of the messengees? But I suppose the prosecutors have their reasons. Whatever these may be, the girl must be produced at some point in time, and I expect no less than rotten carrots and eggs to fly her way.
Truly, where sex is involved, few are spared. But more so, we just aren't interested in propagating ourselves the right way any more.
Wednesday, April 04, 2012
That Brown Mount
Bukit Brown - a cause célèbre among civil society and special interest groups nowadays. All these over a cemetery that nobody cared about, much less heard of, before the Singapore government announced its intent on building an expressway through this piece of land. True to character, the government is planning ahead and it deemed the exhumation of graves, some dating back a hundred years, small sacrifice for the here and now, and probably for the future too. After all, they have done it before. The Bidadari Cemetery along Upper Aljunied Road was removed to make way for the then new Woodleigh MRT station. Much of the land above ground has yet to be redeveloped, which has proved to be a boon to the living. It has become a favourite jogging place for the health conscious exercise enthusiasts. What's not to like about clean clear spaces in an otherwise congested city?
The government is doing this, amidst strong dissenting voices from mainly environmental and civil society groups, for the motorists, which is becoming associated with the rich and the pretenders in this country. With a new small car costing no less than S$80,000, it's become a luxury (again) to own a car. That is the rub. Why must our heritage be destroyed just so the rich blokes (yeah, that's what you are when you own a car on this island) can zip around unimpeded, that they can go from point A to point B in a quarter of the time that we poorer public commuters have to spend doing the same? But of course it is impossible to restrict car ownership any further in an increasingly unequal society that is Singapore today. You'd be asking for a revolt at some point in time, likely through the ballot box. Unlike Hong Kongers, Singaporeans who gather without a permit, except in designated places, face arrest. So nowadays, they congregate online to make their voices heard. Unfortunately, these voices are a mixed bag. Some are rational, considered, some vociferous, others are rude and abusive, yet others hawk semi-truths and parrot others without verifying the veracity of what they are repeating. This isn't doing their cause any good because the powers that be will treat them as such - noise of the rabble-rousers.
Of course, there are those who are sincere and wish to engage the government. I think the authorities have accommodated these views with a re-design of the new expressway, but not a cancellation of their original intent to build that road. You can't please everyone. Some are still smarting from feeling that they have been run over by a government bulldozer, unhappy that they didn't get what they want. Uncharacteristically, the government has reflected on the episode and admitted that it could have done better to manage expectations. I began with disapproving the building of the expressway. After all the debates, I still think that it shouldn't be built, not for the sake of preserving our history and heritage, but because the plan smacks of elitism. Why spend millions of dollars building something that I am not ever likely to use since I don't drive? The taxi you say? That's also becoming a luxury. If anything, nowadays I pop down a hole at one part of the island and emerge from another hole somewhere else, much like a gopher, then take a short bus ride or walk the rest of the way to my destination. Why do we need new expressway bridges anyway? But I can also see that more land will be freed up for the living. I only hope that these added land will not be for the benefit of the rich only. Sadly I am not optimistic about this.
The government is doing this, amidst strong dissenting voices from mainly environmental and civil society groups, for the motorists, which is becoming associated with the rich and the pretenders in this country. With a new small car costing no less than S$80,000, it's become a luxury (again) to own a car. That is the rub. Why must our heritage be destroyed just so the rich blokes (yeah, that's what you are when you own a car on this island) can zip around unimpeded, that they can go from point A to point B in a quarter of the time that we poorer public commuters have to spend doing the same? But of course it is impossible to restrict car ownership any further in an increasingly unequal society that is Singapore today. You'd be asking for a revolt at some point in time, likely through the ballot box. Unlike Hong Kongers, Singaporeans who gather without a permit, except in designated places, face arrest. So nowadays, they congregate online to make their voices heard. Unfortunately, these voices are a mixed bag. Some are rational, considered, some vociferous, others are rude and abusive, yet others hawk semi-truths and parrot others without verifying the veracity of what they are repeating. This isn't doing their cause any good because the powers that be will treat them as such - noise of the rabble-rousers.
Of course, there are those who are sincere and wish to engage the government. I think the authorities have accommodated these views with a re-design of the new expressway, but not a cancellation of their original intent to build that road. You can't please everyone. Some are still smarting from feeling that they have been run over by a government bulldozer, unhappy that they didn't get what they want. Uncharacteristically, the government has reflected on the episode and admitted that it could have done better to manage expectations. I began with disapproving the building of the expressway. After all the debates, I still think that it shouldn't be built, not for the sake of preserving our history and heritage, but because the plan smacks of elitism. Why spend millions of dollars building something that I am not ever likely to use since I don't drive? The taxi you say? That's also becoming a luxury. If anything, nowadays I pop down a hole at one part of the island and emerge from another hole somewhere else, much like a gopher, then take a short bus ride or walk the rest of the way to my destination. Why do we need new expressway bridges anyway? But I can also see that more land will be freed up for the living. I only hope that these added land will not be for the benefit of the rich only. Sadly I am not optimistic about this.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Burning money
Bishan Town is in the news again. No, it's not just about its newest landscaping, though that is noteworthy. But more than anything else, Bishan is known for its expensive public housing. Many years ago, in the 1990s, during the height of the housing bubble, someone paid a million dollars for a public housing apartment there-an astonishing sum in those days! Today, one of its new private condominium, the Sky Habitat @ Bishan, is reportedly asking for S$1,700-S$1,800 psf for its apartments. For a 1,200 square foot apartment (about the size of a 5-room public housing apartment), the price will come up to S$2.04m - an insane price. For comparison, a 5-roomer public housing apartment could be got for $500k plus or minus $100k As our politicians have explained, that is not including the generous subsidies that they routinely dole out for 'needy' people. One wonders if it is the property developer who is insane, or the prospective buyer is, or both of them are, based on the willing-buyer/willing seller principle? What's so insane, you ask?
Well, first, it isn't a landed property. If it were, in land-scarce Singapore, that will make sense in the long run. Second it doesn't sit on free-hold land. Its only a 99-year leasehold property. Third, it isn't in a prime district like Bukit Timah. It is located in a suburdan part of Singapore, somewhere in the middle of the island and is surrounded by plenty of public housing apartments. It doesn't boast of fantastic scenery (yeah, don't believe the advertisements which invariably paint a scenic picture of the locality). In fact, within living memory, this place used to be a cemetery, not that I have anything against that. I used to, as a boy, visit some relatives who lived in the kampongs in Bishan (Peck San Theng, I remember my father calling the place where the relative stayed) then during the Lunar New Year. And I do remember the small bridge made of wooden planks over the stream that I had to go over to get to my relative's house.
Over the years, it has developed into a much sought after place to live in, but it isn't exclusive in any way. There are those who say it is served by the MRT station. That's true of and increasingly true of every town in Singapore. I know of other places where it is even more well-served by the MRT. Others say that the island's premier Raffles Institution (RI) being nearby is a big plus. Yeah, it probably is, but how many years do you expect your child to stay in RI for this to be remain a 'plus'? Of course, there is more than an even hope that others may be looking to move in, so you may have a sale-able apartment location. But at this price, I wonder what margins you will gain, anyway? Yet others point to the brand name designer behind the condo. Well, I don't know who he is, I am not in this line, but the visual are quite attractive, which is true of other developments elsewhere on the island.
So really, I see no reason beyond insanity to buy this place at this kind of prices. The only reason one would do so is if you have money to burn, and these are not those that you bring to the cemetery.
Well, first, it isn't a landed property. If it were, in land-scarce Singapore, that will make sense in the long run. Second it doesn't sit on free-hold land. Its only a 99-year leasehold property. Third, it isn't in a prime district like Bukit Timah. It is located in a suburdan part of Singapore, somewhere in the middle of the island and is surrounded by plenty of public housing apartments. It doesn't boast of fantastic scenery (yeah, don't believe the advertisements which invariably paint a scenic picture of the locality). In fact, within living memory, this place used to be a cemetery, not that I have anything against that. I used to, as a boy, visit some relatives who lived in the kampongs in Bishan (Peck San Theng, I remember my father calling the place where the relative stayed) then during the Lunar New Year. And I do remember the small bridge made of wooden planks over the stream that I had to go over to get to my relative's house.
Over the years, it has developed into a much sought after place to live in, but it isn't exclusive in any way. There are those who say it is served by the MRT station. That's true of and increasingly true of every town in Singapore. I know of other places where it is even more well-served by the MRT. Others say that the island's premier Raffles Institution (RI) being nearby is a big plus. Yeah, it probably is, but how many years do you expect your child to stay in RI for this to be remain a 'plus'? Of course, there is more than an even hope that others may be looking to move in, so you may have a sale-able apartment location. But at this price, I wonder what margins you will gain, anyway? Yet others point to the brand name designer behind the condo. Well, I don't know who he is, I am not in this line, but the visual are quite attractive, which is true of other developments elsewhere on the island.
So really, I see no reason beyond insanity to buy this place at this kind of prices. The only reason one would do so is if you have money to burn, and these are not those that you bring to the cemetery.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
The right stuff
I had a very bad experience when I visited Beijing some years ago. You see, my friend used a public toilet. We were in a place where tourists go to. I just can't recall which one that was. Anyway, she exited the toilet looking choked and on the verge of spilling her guts outs. What was the reason for this? The toilet. It was damned damned damned (pardon the word and the emphasis) smelly. It looked ok from the outside though. I may not have used the toilet myself, but I believed her 100% when I saw the 'pain' she was in.
So toilets, dirty, messy and stinking ones, are not the preserve of Singapore. Yes, we do have them, and in a First World country that we have become, now for more than 10 years, we are damned ashamed of it. Truth be told, there are probably well kept toilets for every dirty stinky ones. In fact there are probably more than a 1:1 ratio. I would hazard that for every stinking ones, there are probably 2 well maintained ones. If you lived in Singapore, like me, you might not agree. Perhaps I don't visit public toilets all that often nowadays, at least not those in our hawker centres. I'd use the ones in the shopping malls, which if you consider the prices that shops there charge for their merchandise, you sort of expect better treatment in their loos.
Now Singapore is considering building more hawkers centres that will not be parceled out to commercial operators such as Kopitiam and Koufu to operate. Hooray! Lower prices of food, but I hope that the toilets would be 21st century quality also. Or are our designers of our new generation hawkers centres going to retain this aspect of our dirty toilets, for nostalgia's sake? Nooo, social enterprises will be running these places, surely they are more socially conscious and will have a heart not to cause a person to retch upon existing that most essential of places?
But who know? There's nothing like nostalgia.
So toilets, dirty, messy and stinking ones, are not the preserve of Singapore. Yes, we do have them, and in a First World country that we have become, now for more than 10 years, we are damned ashamed of it. Truth be told, there are probably well kept toilets for every dirty stinky ones. In fact there are probably more than a 1:1 ratio. I would hazard that for every stinking ones, there are probably 2 well maintained ones. If you lived in Singapore, like me, you might not agree. Perhaps I don't visit public toilets all that often nowadays, at least not those in our hawker centres. I'd use the ones in the shopping malls, which if you consider the prices that shops there charge for their merchandise, you sort of expect better treatment in their loos.
Now Singapore is considering building more hawkers centres that will not be parceled out to commercial operators such as Kopitiam and Koufu to operate. Hooray! Lower prices of food, but I hope that the toilets would be 21st century quality also. Or are our designers of our new generation hawkers centres going to retain this aspect of our dirty toilets, for nostalgia's sake? Nooo, social enterprises will be running these places, surely they are more socially conscious and will have a heart not to cause a person to retch upon existing that most essential of places?
But who know? There's nothing like nostalgia.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
The Bitter and the Sweet
Well, finally the boss has spoken. The earlier foray into this subject by his henchman hadn't gone down well with many people, not least with this blogger. But I am disappointed. Somehow, PM Lee Hsien Loong's pronouncement on the subject of calling for/not calling for the widely anticipated Hougang by-election came across as less than Prime Ministerial. If he were in the hustings, it would have been expected. But in a Parliament where he is the Prime Minister and his party, the PAP, commands an unassailable majority, it grated on the ears when he all but blamed the WP for the loss of its MP in Hougang, that the people of Hougang are now without an MP because of the WP's thoughtless action in sacking Mr Yaw. Which is true, but it is not as if the WP wantonly and recklessly sacked its Yaw Shing Leong thereby causing the Hougang seat to be vacated and the residents of Hougang unrepresented. I believe them when they said it was a difficult and a non-unanimous decision to sack Mr Yaw. (Hmmm...why is it easier to believe the WP than the PAP nowdays?).
Even then, the PM is still happy to continue playing the cat-and-mouse game, saying in a rejoinder to Opposition Leader, Mr Low Thia Khiang, that he will inform the House the period in which the by-election will be called "as soon as I have finished considering all the factors". This is as blank a cheque as any I have seen. As some sensible people from the public have commented, what crisis is the nation facing now that it has to put the issue of a by-election on the back-burner? It may be true that Cabinet has more information than any person in Singapore and they are cognizant of the dire situation facing Singapore economically. They may be hunched over thinking through the strategy, options and responses so much so that 24,560 Hougang residents aren't all that important. Of course they are not important. It's the WP's sh*t-h*le and they are not in a hurry to step into it. One might even think that the PAP government has all but given up on winning Hougang back to its fold. Its a lost cause, so why give the WP the satisfaction of a victory so soon? Let them sweat and double up serving both Aljunied GRC and Hougang SMC. That'll deplete their energies and resources, surely?
I think that's the strategy. The PAP knows it is a lost cause, so it is better to exact as much damage on the WP resource-wise. But of course, it will suffer collateral damage, they are not stupid. More Hougang residents will be turned off by a PAPty that doesn't care. The real unknown is how much collateral damage it will sustain from the rest of Singapore, which is watching the drama as it unfolds very publicly?
I, for one, am put off and disappointed with the PAP over this incident, never mind that it put out significant sweeteners in Budget 2012. By the way, I don't live in Hougang.
Even then, the PM is still happy to continue playing the cat-and-mouse game, saying in a rejoinder to Opposition Leader, Mr Low Thia Khiang, that he will inform the House the period in which the by-election will be called "as soon as I have finished considering all the factors". This is as blank a cheque as any I have seen. As some sensible people from the public have commented, what crisis is the nation facing now that it has to put the issue of a by-election on the back-burner? It may be true that Cabinet has more information than any person in Singapore and they are cognizant of the dire situation facing Singapore economically. They may be hunched over thinking through the strategy, options and responses so much so that 24,560 Hougang residents aren't all that important. Of course they are not important. It's the WP's sh*t-h*le and they are not in a hurry to step into it. One might even think that the PAP government has all but given up on winning Hougang back to its fold. Its a lost cause, so why give the WP the satisfaction of a victory so soon? Let them sweat and double up serving both Aljunied GRC and Hougang SMC. That'll deplete their energies and resources, surely?
I think that's the strategy. The PAP knows it is a lost cause, so it is better to exact as much damage on the WP resource-wise. But of course, it will suffer collateral damage, they are not stupid. More Hougang residents will be turned off by a PAPty that doesn't care. The real unknown is how much collateral damage it will sustain from the rest of Singapore, which is watching the drama as it unfolds very publicly?
I, for one, am put off and disappointed with the PAP over this incident, never mind that it put out significant sweeteners in Budget 2012. By the way, I don't live in Hougang.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Balancing the People
Senior Counsel and the honorary MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC (etc. etc.) Mr Hri Kumar Nair has been crossing swords with Asst Prof Eugene Tan of SMU over the issue of the need to hold a by-election at the Hougang single member constituency (SMC). Prof Tan argued that the government is obliged to hold one. Mr Hri Kumar said no. That's what Mr Kumar's legalese amounted to anyway. You know what? I may be able to follow the argument, but I am no more enlightened by it all, especially Mr Kumar's arguments, which seem to fit chambers, but are lost with us common folks.
But one thing I can discern, and that is the PAP, which Mr Hri Kumar so likes to point out that he is beholden to for his present position in Parliament, has still not learned from last year's elections. Well, let's set aside all the intellectual crossing of swords and ask ourselves: if I were a resident, if Mr Kumar is a resident, of Hougang, would he much prefer to have an MP represent him? Honestly? A 'yes' or a 'no' will do. I would say 'yes'. If nothing, having an MP working for you is an entitlement as a citizen. I don't pay more nor less for an MP's allowance, so why deprive me? But above all considerations of money, can I trust the PAP government to look after me? Not if it pussyfoots on holding a by-election, as it appears to be doing now.
So my question is, does the PAP government even have a heart for the people? Right now, the answer, going by Mr Hri Kumar's eloquence on the national stage and in the newspapers, is NO. Its the law, you see. Its about "may" and "should" or "could" or whatever, that is important. He admires and trusts the law, whether it is British Law or Singapore Law, to cover the PAP's collective behind. And all said in learned sentences that probably three-quarters of Singaporeans don't understand. I daresay that if Mr Kumar comes out to contest in an SMC tomorrow (why not Hougang"), he will have his figurative tail between his legs when the votes are tallied. Maybe that's the REAL reason for prevaricating? (see I also know some cheem words, don't play play).
So we have another PAP man who rides a high horse and seems to be having a good time talking it up. The people, nahhh...neigh..., they are not important. Where are the people in Mr Kumar's learned opinions? Sadly, they don't exist. The PAP might as well drop the first 'P' in its name.
If the PAP is listening, the problem with you is your arrogance. Period.
P.S. I fear that I will be accused of putting words into someone's mouth. I apologise if I have offended anyone, or deigned (there's another cheem word) to criticize duly elected and learned members of national institutions.
But one thing I can discern, and that is the PAP, which Mr Hri Kumar so likes to point out that he is beholden to for his present position in Parliament, has still not learned from last year's elections. Well, let's set aside all the intellectual crossing of swords and ask ourselves: if I were a resident, if Mr Kumar is a resident, of Hougang, would he much prefer to have an MP represent him? Honestly? A 'yes' or a 'no' will do. I would say 'yes'. If nothing, having an MP working for you is an entitlement as a citizen. I don't pay more nor less for an MP's allowance, so why deprive me? But above all considerations of money, can I trust the PAP government to look after me? Not if it pussyfoots on holding a by-election, as it appears to be doing now.
So my question is, does the PAP government even have a heart for the people? Right now, the answer, going by Mr Hri Kumar's eloquence on the national stage and in the newspapers, is NO. Its the law, you see. Its about "may" and "should" or "could" or whatever, that is important. He admires and trusts the law, whether it is British Law or Singapore Law, to cover the PAP's collective behind. And all said in learned sentences that probably three-quarters of Singaporeans don't understand. I daresay that if Mr Kumar comes out to contest in an SMC tomorrow (why not Hougang"), he will have his figurative tail between his legs when the votes are tallied. Maybe that's the REAL reason for prevaricating? (see I also know some cheem words, don't play play).
So we have another PAP man who rides a high horse and seems to be having a good time talking it up. The people, nahhh...neigh..., they are not important. Where are the people in Mr Kumar's learned opinions? Sadly, they don't exist. The PAP might as well drop the first 'P' in its name.
If the PAP is listening, the problem with you is your arrogance. Period.
P.S. I fear that I will be accused of putting words into someone's mouth. I apologise if I have offended anyone, or deigned (there's another cheem word) to criticize duly elected and learned members of national institutions.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Moral Glass Houses
What's that they say? Those that live in glass houses should learn not to throw stones. National Development Minister, Mr Khaw "$8" Boon Wan reportedly "reminded voters to consider a person's character when they go to the polls, adding that there is no difference between a person's personal and professional life once he or she enters politics..."
Well, nobody is perfect, and nobody can know a person perfectly. Often not even the person whom he/she shares a bed with every night knows each other perfectly, no matter what Valentiners would have you believe. Dare Mr Khaw claim that he and/or the PAP knows all its elected MPs all that well? Mr Khaw's remarks called to mind the tragic case of Mr Teh Cheang Wan, coincidentally also the National Development Minister in MM Lee's cabinet in the early 1980s. Teh had been highly rated by MM then, and he was fast-tracked into the Cabinet. Unfortunately, he managed to fool MM and his government. He was on the take, and when confronted with this, he committed suicide. Perhaps Mr Khaw was too young to remember this (nah...can't be, he's easily older than me), or, more likely, he has a case of selective amnesia.
The Yaw affair is a sad one. But I think the WP did right to claim the moral high ground even though it knew that the people in the PAP, and maybe others, will ridicule them and say all manner of ill about them as if these same stone-throwers are angels sent from God.
Mr Khaw also reportedly said that it (the sacking of Mr Yaw) "was a sad development to learn that an MP’s character was deemed insufficient by his own party". Yes, it is indeed tragic, but the PAP would have done no less to its own, and did no less in the past. So Mr Khaw should get off his high horse. It can happen to you or me. People whom we may have trusted for a long time may turn out very different and disappoint us thoroughly.
Get this right: There is nothing wrong about being the "cheatee". It is the cheater who is wrong.
Well, nobody is perfect, and nobody can know a person perfectly. Often not even the person whom he/she shares a bed with every night knows each other perfectly, no matter what Valentiners would have you believe. Dare Mr Khaw claim that he and/or the PAP knows all its elected MPs all that well? Mr Khaw's remarks called to mind the tragic case of Mr Teh Cheang Wan, coincidentally also the National Development Minister in MM Lee's cabinet in the early 1980s. Teh had been highly rated by MM then, and he was fast-tracked into the Cabinet. Unfortunately, he managed to fool MM and his government. He was on the take, and when confronted with this, he committed suicide. Perhaps Mr Khaw was too young to remember this (nah...can't be, he's easily older than me), or, more likely, he has a case of selective amnesia.
The Yaw affair is a sad one. But I think the WP did right to claim the moral high ground even though it knew that the people in the PAP, and maybe others, will ridicule them and say all manner of ill about them as if these same stone-throwers are angels sent from God.
Mr Khaw also reportedly said that it (the sacking of Mr Yaw) "was a sad development to learn that an MP’s character was deemed insufficient by his own party". Yes, it is indeed tragic, but the PAP would have done no less to its own, and did no less in the past. So Mr Khaw should get off his high horse. It can happen to you or me. People whom we may have trusted for a long time may turn out very different and disappoint us thoroughly.
Get this right: There is nothing wrong about being the "cheatee". It is the cheater who is wrong.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Merry-go-round
Well, its really a merry Christmas for taxi drivers in Singapore this festive season. And certainly a prosperous new year. I hate to take a Comfort cab nowadays, especially after 6pm EVERY day. From then till midnight, for all seven days of the week, the cabby will collect 1.25 times what the meter would read previously. That's pretty steep. So last Sunday evening after dinner at a restaurant, I opted to take the subway train home. As I was walking to the subway, I was looking out for a non-Comfort cab because their fares have (still) not increased. But alas, I reached the train station first. Well look at it from the bright side - walking helped to burn off some of the carbs that I had downed not too long ago, and I saved quite a bit of money as a cab would have had to criss-cross the island from the southern tip to the north-eastern tip where I stay. I wasn't sure if I would not vomit the food when I looked at the final fare on the meter.
Predictably, now that the largest taxi company on the island has increased its fares, all the rest will follow suite. Actually not WILL, they HAVE followed. And the quantum of increases is the same - that's Singapore's version of competition for you. Its rather twisted, really. More like collusion, and all with the blessings of the government, it appears. Its not the first time. The bus and train companies have practiced this twisted form of competition for some time now, with the blessings of the authorities which are helmed by leaders who are "educated" in prestigious Universities the world over at taxpayer's expense, no less. This is really a merry go-around that will sadden Santa Claus this merry season. Its not a season of giving, it is a season of taking.
And the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS), the PUBLIC Transport Council (PTC) and the Government are not raising a ruckus. The CCS says to the effect that if you are not happy, sue them. Nope, they are not going to front this. The PTC is rather silent as if they are party to this. And the Government insists that they just want to stay on the sidelines as this is a commercial issue. Unfortunately, Singaporeans are not in the habit of initiating class actions suites. We are a long-suffering lot. Perhaps timid. Mostly apathetic. But they pour out their frustrations on social media so that the World knows that Singapore really is not heaven on earth.
To be fair the authorities trotted out some numbers, and with the cooperation of the broadcast media, demonstrated how much cheaper it still is to take a cab compared to cabs in Hong Kong and London. Give me a break. They should know better. An apple is very different from an orange, no? But maybe to them, apples and oranges are fruits, so the comparison is valid. Sheesh, you can't win. Or should I say the cabbies win. The cab operators win. The taxman (government) wins. And we the long-suffering consumers are the losers.
I really must get used to taking the bus and the train, not that those are without their own set of problems. Well, I'll TRY to be merry and look forward to the new year, though this December has brought more than its fair share of bad news, much of which are really avoidable.
Predictably, now that the largest taxi company on the island has increased its fares, all the rest will follow suite. Actually not WILL, they HAVE followed. And the quantum of increases is the same - that's Singapore's version of competition for you. Its rather twisted, really. More like collusion, and all with the blessings of the government, it appears. Its not the first time. The bus and train companies have practiced this twisted form of competition for some time now, with the blessings of the authorities which are helmed by leaders who are "educated" in prestigious Universities the world over at taxpayer's expense, no less. This is really a merry go-around that will sadden Santa Claus this merry season. Its not a season of giving, it is a season of taking.
And the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS), the PUBLIC Transport Council (PTC) and the Government are not raising a ruckus. The CCS says to the effect that if you are not happy, sue them. Nope, they are not going to front this. The PTC is rather silent as if they are party to this. And the Government insists that they just want to stay on the sidelines as this is a commercial issue. Unfortunately, Singaporeans are not in the habit of initiating class actions suites. We are a long-suffering lot. Perhaps timid. Mostly apathetic. But they pour out their frustrations on social media so that the World knows that Singapore really is not heaven on earth.
To be fair the authorities trotted out some numbers, and with the cooperation of the broadcast media, demonstrated how much cheaper it still is to take a cab compared to cabs in Hong Kong and London. Give me a break. They should know better. An apple is very different from an orange, no? But maybe to them, apples and oranges are fruits, so the comparison is valid. Sheesh, you can't win. Or should I say the cabbies win. The cab operators win. The taxman (government) wins. And we the long-suffering consumers are the losers.
I really must get used to taking the bus and the train, not that those are without their own set of problems. Well, I'll TRY to be merry and look forward to the new year, though this December has brought more than its fair share of bad news, much of which are really avoidable.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
The take-charge minister
This must be a first. The North-South and East-West lines of the MRT system has been halted totally, from 5.30 to 10 today, Sunday morning, 18th December 2011! It can only take the might of a government minister, Mr Lui Tuck Yew, the Transport Minister no less, to order this stoppage. Without a doubt this is to avoid a likely 4th break-down of the MRT system operated by the SMRT, if events of the past 3 days are any guide.
Yes, I haven't heard of the SMRT system stopping operations for such a stretch of time. Fortunately, this is Sunday, a non-working day. However, people in the retail and services trade will still have to make their way to the shops to ensure that they open for business at 11am. Well, these people will have to take the bus, if they know or remember which buses to take, that is. And you can't call in "sick" because this is the last weekend before Christmas, and businesses need all "hands on deck". Employees can't take the first train out at 10 because it takes time to travel, and they literally will not be able to open the store on time.
That said, I must credit Mr Lui for taking over this problem so swiftly. You need ministerial muscle for this - to call time on one of the most important infrastructure on the island - to do what needs to be done, something that SMRT, to its discredit and shame, seem not to have nor been able to do. He has reportedly visited some train stations, checked the signs, the staff, the processes, etc. - something that really is not his job. Any lesser person wouldn't have done this. Just delegate someone to do the legwork. Monitor from the comfort of an operations control centre. Remember, the elections have been over more than half a year, when he was often seen on the trains. But now we know that it was not electioneering gimick. This guy is serious. Remember, he cut short his meeting in Cambodia to give this problem his personal attention. After all, the problem affects thousands of people everyday, and the businesses that rely on people moving around uninhibited. Mr Lui has got his priorities right, which is more than what I can say for the management of the SMRT. This enforced stoppage must really be a slap in the corporate face of the SMRT and especially its manageement, led incompetently by Ms. Saw Phaik Hwa.
Let's hope that with this due diligence check, we won't have another massive breakdown of the train system any time soon. People are entitled to a merry Christmas and a happy new year.
Yes, I haven't heard of the SMRT system stopping operations for such a stretch of time. Fortunately, this is Sunday, a non-working day. However, people in the retail and services trade will still have to make their way to the shops to ensure that they open for business at 11am. Well, these people will have to take the bus, if they know or remember which buses to take, that is. And you can't call in "sick" because this is the last weekend before Christmas, and businesses need all "hands on deck". Employees can't take the first train out at 10 because it takes time to travel, and they literally will not be able to open the store on time.
That said, I must credit Mr Lui for taking over this problem so swiftly. You need ministerial muscle for this - to call time on one of the most important infrastructure on the island - to do what needs to be done, something that SMRT, to its discredit and shame, seem not to have nor been able to do. He has reportedly visited some train stations, checked the signs, the staff, the processes, etc. - something that really is not his job. Any lesser person wouldn't have done this. Just delegate someone to do the legwork. Monitor from the comfort of an operations control centre. Remember, the elections have been over more than half a year, when he was often seen on the trains. But now we know that it was not electioneering gimick. This guy is serious. Remember, he cut short his meeting in Cambodia to give this problem his personal attention. After all, the problem affects thousands of people everyday, and the businesses that rely on people moving around uninhibited. Mr Lui has got his priorities right, which is more than what I can say for the management of the SMRT. This enforced stoppage must really be a slap in the corporate face of the SMRT and especially its manageement, led incompetently by Ms. Saw Phaik Hwa.
Let's hope that with this due diligence check, we won't have another massive breakdown of the train system any time soon. People are entitled to a merry Christmas and a happy new year.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
