One or two?

The PM announced last evening that men will also be entitled to paternity leave, similar to women's maternity leave, to look after their just borned child. Everyone in the University Cultural Centre auditorium that I could see through the TV broadcast clapped in approval, particularly the women amongst them. The rationale? PM related an example of a women who voiced her fears that she would be forgotten by her employer if she took as long as 6 months maternity leave. So fathers should step in to shoulder this burden by being allowed to take similar leave to share the burden of nursing the baby. All of which is dandy, until you think about it further.

Would men not also be forgotten at the workplace when they take paternity leave? The couple can now share equally the 4 months of maternity leave that women are entitled to, that is 2 months each. And even supposing it is 1 month out of the 4 for the men, it is probably 1 month too long for the men to be absent from the office. In this dog-eat-dog world, if you are not around, you need not be around, period. So sharing this load might lead to both of the couple, the mother and the father, to become expendable employees. Which is better - to have one expendable person or two?

So those cheering and clapping last evening should stop and think again what paternity leave really entails. The "absence" problem is already raised above. The second question that needs asking is: are all fathers capable of looking after and handling an infant? We know what maternal instincts are. Is there such a thing as a men's version of it, i.e. a paternal instinct? Sadly, experience tells us that the answer is not clear. What is the proportion of clumsy and incompetent men when it comes to nursing an infant? I don't know, and I suspect, the people who clamoured for and the government which said yes to paternity leave last evening don't know either. Yes, I know of men who love children (and I mean that in a "straight" way). My mother often mentions that my uncle loves children. I love children too. In fact I played a big part in taking care of my infant son, without the benefit of paternity leave. My wife will attest to this. But this is anecdotal. There probably are more men who are clueless and view infant care as a woman-only job. Worst, men tend to be more impatient, with the frightening consequence that the child may suffer rather than be cared for.

PM said in jest that men, if they are given paternity leave, should use it for that very purpose. Everyone may have laughed at that remark, but it is a disturbing reaction, to say the least. There is really really a high chance that paternity leave may be abused. After all, no one can police this. The wife can't and won't say a thing. The husband who abuses it will certainly keep quiet about using his paternity leave to do other things. You expect the maid to complain to the authorities?

There are probably other reasons that make paternity leave a bad idea. The issue, really, is not about the leave - maternity or paternity, much as many mothers wish to believe that it is. This will not go anywhere near helping to resolve the problem of low fertility among Singaporeans.

I believe that I will be proven correct one year from the implementation of this policy.

Death and Taxes

Should we treat paying taxes not so much an obligation, indeed no a duty, but an act of charity. This is what a letter writer to Today suggested come days ago. Yet ironically, in that same paper, on the facing page, a letter writer wrote about how certain public servants are wasting tax-payers' money by engaging private law firms in their law suits.

At one level, I agree with the letter writer. As many would by now have found out, the personal tax bill for many this year is far far more than last year's. Last year was election year, so it would not take a Phd to figure out why. Yep, my tax bill has nearly doubled, not that my pay has increased by that quantum, mind you. And the last time I filed my tax returns online, I could not claim for some donations I made in the year of assessment simply because the organisation was not listed as one of the approved institution of public character (IPC). There wasn't anywhere on the screen form you could write it in. You could only select from a preset list. This in spite the fact that I have been donating to the same institution for 2 years prior to the last YA and the deduction had been allowed. I would like to think that I am honest, but I am penalised? Well, the Singapore IRAS is very efficient and, in a sense, ruthless, in extracting that pound of flesh, and then some, from its taxpayers. So when I thought about what the writer suggested, I wondered if I should write to IRAS to re-assess my income tax.

In a sense, the writer is correct. Taxes are a means to redistribute income and enable a government to govern for the common good. Even billionaire investor Warren Buffet famously said that the rich in America are not paying enough taxes, and that they should. Paying taxes to care for society is an ideal, an assumption that, as events in the last few months in Singapore have demonstrated, is far from the ideal. What with S$2,200 bicycles to patrol public parks, S$650 designer chairs for government officers' butts. Is it any wonder the ambivalence towards contributing to the public purse for the common good.

In any case, those who have the means - profitable businesses and wealthy individuals, routinely engage tax accountants to minimise their tax obligations. So why should the man in the street do any less in minimizing his own tax bill?

Death and taxes will remain dreaded facts of life. They are to be avoided at all cost, or for as long as possible.

Un-maidenly

Ever had somebody bark "Excuse me" to you? Yes, bark. It is annoying to say the least. This phrase is no longer that polite, and indeed apologetic, request to heed a need. The way it is used by some people nowadays sounds like "Hey low life, you are getting in my way. Move aside or else...". It grates on the ear. "Excuse me" is no longer said in a gentle, apologetic manner, but it is a bark, a command, a directive with a barely concealed impatience and disdain for the rest of mankind. And the main perpetrators of this bark?

I am sorry to say this. They are mostly young female, some are even teenagers. I am not trying to discriminate. Older people perhaps understand and use the phrase more appropriately. The guys are not ready to bark. They don't need to. Oh, how unmaidenly many of the young 'fairer' sex among us have turned, prematurely, into witches. Maybe it has got to do with the movies, or that misplaced thing called 'girl power'. I don't know. I don't have a daughter, so I can't related the phenomenon. Brash, young, the 'me' generation that demands immediate attention and yet not give any attention.

Sometimes, I just feel like turning around and given the barker a slap on the face.Only, I'll be hauled to court for molest. Don't mess with young girls, particularly if they are under-aged. Society seems to protect them more, even though they probably deserve less.

Tuition nation

"The fool and his money are soon parted". I learnt this a long time ago. First as an idiom in primary school. Then in a venture that I was just too careless over. Just careless, not foolish, mind you.

But there are some people who are foolish, like those that paid thousands of dollars to an unaccredited tutor that purportedly could teach their children to be gifted. Obviously these overly ambitious parents are prepared to swallow the bait, hook, line and sinker. I suppose "gifted" to them meant that it was ok to pay through their noses to give their child a chance to join the gifted education programme invented by the Ministry of Education. After all, 'gifts' are bought and given away, right?

I don't want to comment about the tutor who swindled so many people. Suffice to say that he is dastardly and probably a scum of society. There have been others in the past who acted in similar fashion, perhaps even worse. And there will be others who will come along to swindle others in like manner, so long as you have people who are ready and willing to be tricked.

What is remarkable is that people think that a person can be trained to be gifted. Someone said to me that either you have it or you don't. Hello, its in the genes, and you can't train genes to perform somersaults, can you?. I tend to agree. That's what you start off with. Good genes. But to fully harness the capabilities that those genes bring, you have to work hard, really hard. Like putting in the hours to read, to train your mind, to practise, to become familiar and good at what you want to do, like playing the piano, or creating the next  new thing. Wasn't it Thomas A. Edison who said that you need 1% inspiration and 99% hard work to achieve your goals? Well, he should know. He was probably the greatest inventor in modern times.

In a way, the Singapore education system has encouraged people to 'buy' knowledge and capability. Singapore is not known to be the tuition nation for nothing. And the sad situation is that the school system appears to be working hand-in-glove with the tuition industry. I have heard from parents and students that teachers in the formal school system assume that every child has a tutor. So they off-load, or outsource, some of their teaching to the tutors, never mind that some children come from families that are too poor to even afford a meal from the school canteen. Tell me I am wrong, but somehow I am not hopeful of being proven wrong. Perhaps these teachers are taking too literally the mantra, "teach less, learn more" - an invention of the Ministry of Education. Do we even know what this means before we take it literally? For one, excellence and promotions are still very much dependent on a rigorous examination system where the muggers tend to do well. I am not saying that that is the best and only way to do well in school. There have been exceptions, but the rule is more relevant to the rest of us.

So long as we have such a system of rote learning, there will always be pretenders who will help fools part with their money.

Numbers game

The numbers do not lie. On a per capita basis, Yahoo Sports reported that Jamaica, with a population of 2.7 million, won nine gold medals in the recently concluded London Olympic games. This casts doubt on people who say that Singapore's population is too small to produce world beaters in sports. For the record, Singapore won three bronze medals, and all by people who were not born in Singapore. They are what Singaporeans' euphemistically call "Foreign Talent". Singapore's population as of 2011 is 5,183,700 of which  Singapore residents number 3,789,300. That's roughly 1 million more than Jamaica's population, or 2.5 million more if you include the non residents.

Granted, we are not comparing apple with apple. There are differing social, cultural and economic environments that mask these numbers, and sociologists and politicians will have their stories to tell to rationalise and explain the discrepancies in these numbers.

However, going by these numbers alone, Singapore hasn't done all that well. Tao Li didn't even get into the finals. She was 6th in the Beijing Games.Joseph Schooling, the great hope of the Republic, blamed his disastrous performance on the cap and goggle, nuf said. The Singapore women table tennis team was demoted from Silver at the Beijing Olympics to Bronze at this London Games. Feng redeemed the team with her commendable individual Bronze effort. And the rest of team Singapore? What, there are others?

Perhaps we should study countries like Jamaica or even Grenada to discover how else, other than immigration, which is a contentious issue in Singapore right now. Singapore can do better on the world sporting stage. I think, after the post-mortem (I assume there will be one conducted), it won't be for the lack of ideas and initiatives that the Singapore government and the sporting community have approached the issue. But many would say that monetary reward is not the only, nor the best way, nor is it the right way in the long term to produce local sporting talent. Don't get me wrong. Money can and does play a part, but obviously there is something missing that the Jamaicans appear to have. Usain Bolt is not their one-shot wonder. Their 1-2-3 victory in the 200m race proves it.

Singapore has the next 4 years to prepare for gold in the Rio Olympics. Hopefully, we will have answers way before then so that we can works towards greater success in those Olympics.

Daoxiao lunch

Singapore has become a cosmopolitan place, and a bit confusingly amusing. I was having lunch on National Day at a Chinese restaurant serving dao-xiao mian (literally shaved noodles). I was attended to by a waiter who took our order in English. Nothing odd about that. Then came a couple - two women, who took seats next to ours. It wasn't as if I wanted to eavesdrop. It wasn't a large restaurant, so we literally sat side by side with them. When they started to converse, I could tell immediately that they were China Chinese.

When the waiter came by, they were discussing their choices in Chinese. Then having decided, one of them placed their order with the waiting waiter - in English! It wasn't a case that they wanted to show off their linguistic skills. The waiter was a Filipino. I suppose he could only speak English, and perhaps his native Tagalog. So here I was, in a Chinese restaurant, seated beside a couple of China Chinese who were placing their order in English.

If this weren't Singapore, it would be odd.

Regardless of language

As Singaporeans recite the National Pledge today in celebration of its 47th National Day, I am reminded of the phrase in the pledge "regardless of language...". Much has been made of our Table Tennis trio of Feng Tianwei, Li Jiawei and Wang Yuegu being foreign imports and therefore not representative of the country's sporting abilities. One the the factors often cited about this ambivalence toward the trio is their inability to speak English, or even try to to learn to speak English. Is the ability to speak English a distinguishing attribute of a Singaporean? If you asked my father, he might spit at you. But no, he was just too gentle and even tempered a person to ever do that. But there would probably be many other Chinese who would - spit at you, or at least on the ground in front of you, i.e.

English was the language of the colonialists. It had no place in a local's linguistic heritage as opposed to the foreign devils. My father brought up all his children in Singapore, put them through the Singapore education system. He sent them to English language schools because he was a pragmatic person. You couldn't possibly advance in your lives if you didn't know how to speak English, he reasoned. Yet all his life, he never spoke nor learnt to speak English. He was born in China, spent his youth in Hong Kong, then came to Singapore shortly thereafter. He spoke Cantonese, could understand Mandarin but not speak it. He also spoke and understood a smattering of Malay. His penmanship (in Chinese AND English - he signed his English name beautifully) was of the first order. If we define being a Singaporean as one who can speak English or makes an attempt to do so, then my father was not a Singaporean. Perhaps he tried to learn it, I am not sure. He conversed with his children, and everyone else, in Cantonese and no other language.

Yet it would be absurd to say that he was not a Singaporean. He appreciated the government under Lee Kuan Yew and never waivered in giving them his support at every GE. I am not embarrassed to say this. Lee Kuan Yew was good for Singapore. It gave him a peaceful and safe environment in which he could practise his religion, make friends across races, earn a living and bring up his children. He started off living in an attap house, and gradually owned a HDB flat. And so it was for that generation of 'imports' - people who migrated to these shores for one reason or another, sunk roots and never thought of anywhere else as home.

We are their descendants and woe to us if we call our fathers, or their fathers, foreigners because they never learnt to speak English.

Happy Birthday, Singapore!

That maiden medal

Ms Feng Tian Wei has won a bronze medal in Table Tennis at this year's London Olympics, and many Singaporeans are proud and happy about it. After all, the last time a Singaporean won a medal at these games was in 1960, by Mr Tan Howe Liang, in weight-lifting. I say "many" because there appears to be many others who have poured cold water over it because Feng is not a 'true-blue' Singaporean. And the quarter million dollar reward for achieving this feat appears to be one of the reasons. True, Feng, and compatriots, Yuegu and Jiawei, were imported from China, ostensibly for the very purpose of ending the Olympic, and in fact, any International sporting medal  drought. There were no other stated purpose. At least the importees were open and honest about this. A Singaporean is a Singaporean sol long as he/she has sworn allegiance to the country, right? If this weren't so, you'd have to ask who made the decision to grant this much prized citizenship status away. Someone said that TW and her compatriots have not made any effort to assimilate within the local environment - they speak Chinese all the time, whereas the world over has encountered that brand of English known as Singlish as a distinguishing identity of a native of the island of Singapore. The trio face an uphill battle for recognition, not so much on the ball court, but in the court of public opinion.

My advice, if it is worth anything at all, is to have each of them marry a Singapore guy and bear a couple of "authentic" Singapore children (must be born in KK Hospital). It doesn't matter if their offspring do not become TT champions. They probably will not when they are plugged into the Singapore system of educating its young ones. Yes, Jiawei is already married to a China Chinese, and borned a son in Beijing. So no chance that the child will become a Singaporean though maybe a great TT player after her mother. Lest history repeats itself, Singapore would not have been very wise in its investment of time and money. A good sporting history counts for little if it does not pay the baby bonus for Singapore. I know, I know, let's not demean female foreign talents as sows, but you just can't help it when you think of the millions of taxpayers' money expended on this venture.

Nevertheless, credit where credit is due. We must congragulate these women for their effort and victory on the world largest sporting stage.Let's not collectively "chase" them away. We will be shooting ourselves in the foot.

That 2200 bicycle

Much has been reported, written, talked about around the table, discussed and dissected by all and sundry about the now notorious case of the Singapore NParks  buying Brompton bicycles for its officers to patrol the network of parks around the island.

NParks has undoubtedly done a good job putting in place, connecting and nurturing the green lungs of Singapore. It is now possible to cycle around the island through this network of parks, away from the busy roads and Singapore drivers' bullying ways towards cyclists. However there might be instances when you need to lug your bicycle over an overhead bridge here and there. Its not perfect, and that's why NParks needed foldable bicycles for its officers, so we are told. That way, they can ride and carry their bikes as the situation demands, and even take the bus with these foldable bicycles. Certain bus types operated by SBSTransit are bicycle and wheelchair friendly. I suppose covering those kilometers of Singapore's parks isn't an easy task. So our officers deserve every tool that will make their job easier and probably more productive.

But Singaporeans are up in arms over the NParks spending S$2,200 on some Brompton bicycles. Some cycling enthusiast have weighed in with their bicycle purchases of a wide variety of models, foldable and otherwise. None that we have heard from have spent more than a S$1,000 on a bicycle. Most that have spent that amount of money bought 2 or more bicycles. For the rest of us, S$200 is about what all that is needed for a good and sturdy bicycle. And if you are a casual cyclist, you can get one for S$80 or less from Carrefour. So when did NParks decide they needed a super premium bike to do their jobs? Its like the police buying Porshe's and Ferraris for their patrol cars. Well, the police have, quite sensibly, so far, bought the more economical Japanese and European models. At least nobody has gone to town accusing the policemen of  luxuriating in super cars during their patrolling duties, chasing down speed demons who ignore traffic lights. They could easily have given this excuse for expensive tastes, just as NParks has done.

It is incredible that NParks insists that Bromptons are the only foldable bicycles out there that fit their purposes. Knowledgeable cyclists will tell you, and I agree wholeheartedly with them, that these bicycles are  easily S$2,000 more than the alternatives that would help the NPark officers do their jobs. And the Bromptons aren't light, if a video of an NParks officer lugging the bicycle up an overhead bridge, which was broadcast on the CNA news, showed.

This episode of extreme waste of tax payers' money has now been conveniently swept under the proverbial carpet by NParks writing a letter that expressed some remorse, that they could have done a better job in the procurement process, promising that they will do a more thorough job the next time. That goes without saying, but the deed is already done. Tax payers like myself, who wouldn't even consider buying a $200 bicycle, just spent $2,200 on one. I am seriously considering asking the IRAS to re-assess my income tax for reliefs that I apparently could not claim in the last tax filing.

Thank you, Mr Khaw, for helping me re-evaluate my tax obligations to the government.

God in the City

There has been a spate of court cases on corruption June. Don't know if this is because of the sweltering temperature. This was preceded by sex cases in May. I wonder what July will bring. One cannot but be impressed by the work rate of the Attorney General's Chambers. Going by these cases (and more to come?), they can look forward to big performance bonuses at the end of the year, particularly if the cases lead to convictions and fines. I am not suggesting for a moment that the AGC has monetary motives in mind when they haul people to court. I am glad that they are doing what they are paid to do - uphold the law of the land and make the point that Singapore is not a place for any sort of hanky-panky.

First they took sex offenders to court. Then they took civil offenders to court. They also took commercial offenders to court. And the latest, they took God to court. Errmmm, let me correct that. They hauled purported servants of God to court in the dying days of June 2012. The city has been set abuzz, and the blogosphere has gone into overdrive to self-righteously condemn one and all, never mind that the courts have not passed judgement at all in most of the cases. But you can't stop people from talking. Yesterday, I was having dinner in a neighbourhood food court. I overhead 1 women passing comment to her 2 companions about Pastor Kong Hee of City Harvest Church living it up in a house in Sentosa Cove. Yep, only the ultra-rich can afford a house in Sentosa Cove. Yeah, the pastor says that the house doesn't belong to him, nada nada nada. Who would believe a person accused of swimming in S$50 million over the last 2 years if not longer? But then these are only allegations. The court process has only just begun, and it is there that the contest of truths will be waged. While the weather has become cooler with the passing of June into July, don't expect the temperature to fall over these cases.

But some things seem to have died down, or at least become less noisy. Discussion of foreign labour, housing and transportation seem to have taken a back seat. Government overseeing these ministries must be relieved. Even the release of the COI report on the SMRT train breakdowns seem to be a non-event. But I suppose we will hear more of this the coming week when Parliament sits to consider this and other issues.

Sex in the City

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.