Atypically Singapore

Yet there are some things that happens in Singapore and nowhere else in the world. You see, Singapore is an eat-out nation. People tend to finish their work day after 6 and after factoring in the traveling time, reach home around 7, or later. So in a family where both husband and wife work, there just isn't the time to whip up a home-cooked meal. Eating out during the weekdays is fairly common, so anyone in Singapore for the first time always remark that Singapore is a food paradise. Paradise to them, but a necessity for the locals, really.

Thus when it was reported that a new food centre was being built in Bedok (yeah...that Eastern Revamp again) to replace the existing one, it wasn't really new. What was interesting is what existing stall operators were concerned about.Some asked that when (not "if") they moved over to the new food centre, they'd be charged higher rentals,. This is something that happens all the time with spanking new facilities. One operator was quoted as saying "We don't want to raise our food prices because of the rent...this is a place for HDB Heartlanders to have their three meals" (Sunday Times, 16 Jan 2010 page 2). Funny this. You would think that these businesses are acting out of character. As a business, isn't it their concern to bring in a profit? They shouldn't need to care if rentals go up because they can then justifiably charge more to sustain their margins. Let the government worry about the people's complaints. Yet in Singapore, the government always chorus that market prices should dictate and reflect the true cost of doing business. So if rentals go up, so be it, they'd say. There is very little by way of effort to keep the old prices, as far as the government goes. New means progress, Progress comes at a higher price. That's the mantra that always gets chanted. In this instance, you'd wonder who better represents the needs of the residents - the food operators or the government?

The tender system is probably one of the culprits behind the incessant rise of prices. We do not yet know if the NEA or private developer is building this new place. If a private developer comes in, the result is a foregone conclusion. Look at the development of Kopitiam Square in Sengkang. From the tender exercise, the winning bid was easily close to a quarter million dollars more than the second highest bid. As a result, food prices must be charged at a level that can sustain this cost. In other words, higher prices must be charged. We ask who benefits from all these and you are right - the government coffers. Now isn't that a good thing, since this means the government can dish out more goodies come the year end, or during budget time? But that's the point. They get to decide how to spend that money, and in the process either arm-twist or make people beholden to them. Now isn't that dandy? Using your money to fulfill their own purposes?

Before I get gazetted, let me just say that if you do not agree with me, you can always leave a comment - the very policy advocated by the Singapore government - the right of reply.

And no, I do not receive a single cent from my mother for blogging, much less from foreigners.

Youth on the Balance

I was reminded today that if you do not want your personal details to be known, then don't put any of it online, on the internet, to be specific. The internet media has a long long memory. You can delete the pages where you posted these info, you can delete your account, but whatever you do, those pages, if they were once openly available on the internet, will always remain there in some cached pages (such as those that Google maintains) - perhaps till kingdom come or the internet is destroyed, whichever happens first. Even Google's demise, should it happen, would not erase those information. So also if you want to post a comment that can be viewed as a threat, especially one of bodily harm to someone living no more than 41 km away (that's the diagonal size of Singapore island). Then you had better be ready to defend yourself. In particular, I am referring to a Singaporean who did just that on his Facebook page - threaten to kill the Sports Minister of Singapore.

He was arrested and questioned, as anyone who has threatened murder should be, and subsequently released on bail. I agree with many who wrote on the incident, that if he hasn't done anything wrong, he should not be afraid. And he displayed this fearlessness by subsequently claiming, on the internet again, that whatever he said wasn't literal. One can argue till the cows come home if his tirade on his Facebook page is a piece of literary art form or a bald threat by a would-be terrorist. That he goes by a Malay name doesn't help. He should have known better, or is he fronting for someone in the shadows? For all that we say about freedom of speech, if this person boarded a subway train, I will not follow him into that same train. Call me a coward, or accuse me of being paranoid, but you can never know, until it is too late. I am not going to put my life on the line for some vague freedom of speech thing, which some claim they will die defending even if they don't agree with what was said. Hogwash. That is the idealism of youth and the folly of the aged - probably a fallacious belief if ever there was one.

It is so easy to criticize someone or something. Sure mistakes were made in the YOG. Everyone could see it, and not a few poured scorn on the organisers. It was very publicly visible, and embarrassing for a Singapore that prides itself on being efficient, and always planning to the last detail. Perhaps our Kiasu spirit showed up and the MOE soaked up as many tickets as it could so that it could send in the 'army' if and when necessary, to fill the stands.- so some tell me. But what is important is that corrective action was taken, it was effective, just like what our young footballing cubs did to secure the bronze medal after a disastrous outing with the Haiti Football Team.  

So was it worth it? Only time will tell. I asked a youth today if he had volunteered to help out in the YOG. He said 'Yes', and I asked what he got out of it all. He was positive about the experience, especially with the opportunity to mix around and converse with so many different peoples of the world. Somehow I was happy for him but felt a tinge of sadness that I could not go back in time to experience what he has for the past week or so. For our young, who are our future and to learn to co-exist with others - this alone makes it worth it.

Cubs to Kings

Ever since the heady days of Choo Seng Quee and his band of merry footballers, the country hasn’t had much occasion to celebrate its football prowess at this level. Even Fandi Ahmad has turned his back on the country, together with his sons. I don’t blame him. That’s reality. Nothing wrong with a father wanting the very best for his children.

But the show that our young footballing cubs have put up at the Youth Olympic Games (YOG) so far is nothing short of amazing. I didn’t give them half a chance of advancing to the second round, and now they are in the semi-finals.

Good for them, and great for Singapore. This shows that, under the right training and guidance, and with the right stage and heart, Singapore can yet produce quality football on the international stage. And to think, these young ones were virtually unknown a fortnight ago. Maybe it is too early to celebrate. But for them to have advanced to the semi-finals isn't a small feat. And tickets for this match has really been sold out. If we had used the 55,000-capacity National Stadium (which was recently demolished) instead, I believe the tickets would also have sold out.

Go cubs, go! Show the world that Singapore has a young football team that is not only the best in Singapore, JB, Batam, and some are going to say, in the world!

Youth Energy

The world's first Youth Olympic Games (YOG) is well under way in Singapore. No, there aren't any star athlete on display, unlike the Olympic games when many competitors would already have gained fame competing in international meets prior to the Olympic games proper. This is an inherent weakness, if one can call it that, in the Youth Olympic games. Many, if not all of its athletes, are starting out their young lives chasing their dreams. The world's press cannot see themselves selling enough papers and air-time when there are no celebrities on parade. So there is a corresponding lack of buzz and excitement in the YOG
.
It would appear that Singapore's hosting of the inaugural YOG is both a boon and a bane. Its great because Singapore gets to show off its capabilities in organising a world class event. This it has done in the midst of putting on a fantastic National Day Paraded just a week ago. This 'can-do-ness' has become a hallmark of sorts for this tiny island nation. The world now knows that if it wants something done, it can turn to Singapore. Its a bane because it is easy to pick on Singapore for coming short on not presenting 'star athletes', inability to sell all the event tickets, lack of press interest, the hot weather, and what have you, as if Singapore can work miracles.

Sure, I am not personally tuned into the games even though I live in Singapore. Heck, I don't even have a ticket to any of its games. But that doesn't mean I do not feel a sense of pride for what my country is doing for world sports. Sure, there aren't any star athletes, but in time to come, they will hear of them who once competed in the world's first YOG in Singapore. In Singapore, you have no choice when it comes to work and career. We cannot put down our tools for 10 days. Well, maybe some can, but most of us can't. But we can support the effort by NOT pouring cold water on it. Starhub has devoted 4 free channels broadcasting various games throughout the day. I caught a badminton game, and I must say it's absorbing. These athletes may be amateurs, but that is what the Olympics is about in the first place.

Must we have the Press trumpeting an event to make it significant? I don't think so. In fact, I am seeing may young people dressed in the official YOG T-shirts running around the island these days. And no, they are not athletes, they are volunteers. I think in time to come, they will look back and be proud of the fact that they were part of the inaugural YOG.

Oh, to be young again!

A step behind

Anyone who visits China, even as a tourist, cannot deny that knowing the language is important. If nothing you would want to understand what the tour guide is talking about. You say, sure you can understand Chinese but not speak it. I know of some Chinese Singaporeans who cannot speak it, nor understand it. But of course, touring a country without knowledge of the local language is generally ok provided that you have a good guide.

But increasingly, many Singaporeans are heading to China for different purposes. To visit the country for business and for work. Some are there for educational purposes, to jiaoliu, for community service, etc., when a person stays at a stretch of 10 to 20 days. You would want to know how to speak the language, although writing is not quite necessary. But my experience last September was a real clincher for our attitude towards the language. I had met a teacher at a vocational institute in the course of the visit, a young man. He kept conversing in English with me. His English was already good, but every time I spoke in Mandarin Chinese, he would always reply in English. It isn't that this person doesn't know Chinese, just that he wanted very much to practise using English, to help him improve on the language. I, on the other hand, wanted to speak the local lingo in the land of its birth. But eventually, I settled on speaking in English with this chap, seeing how persistent he was in conversing with me in the language.

It is said that some China Chinese have become rich and they are traveling the world as first class travelers (stay in first class hotels, first class shopping, etc.), but many of them are becoming conversant in the international language of trade and commerce - English. I thought, if we don't work hard at their language (which for the Chinese among us, is OUR mother tongue), one day, they will dominate us, even if were are Singaporean Chinese.

A sharing we will go

Well, things develop really fast, or is it that I am slow? Lui Tuck Yew has now announced that the government is jumping into the commercial fray by mandating that any and every content, whether exclusively obtained by any media company, such as Singtel and Starhub, have to be shared. i.e. made available on each other's setup boxes. And this is suppose to kick in from September 2010.

Sadly, this doesn't apply to the monopoly broadcasts that Singtel has earlier secured for the BPL games. Otherwise, there will really be no need for soccer-mad fans to subscribe to mio TV in order to get their BPL broadcasts for the next 3 years.

But this is the right direction. Hopefully, prices will come down as a result of mandating the sharing of 'exclusive' content. Signing up for an extra box wasn't a good idea to start with. The question now is - how much Singtel/Starhub are going to charge their rival's subscribers for the content originating from each other? From a commercial standpoint, it has to break even on their investment, plus some margin on top of that. And probably enough to 'persuade' people to subscribe to mio TV / Starhub Cable.

Well, lets see.

Broadcast Disaster

Singtel recently apologised to about 10,000 of its mio TV subscribers due to a reported software glitch that denied these customers the use of their mio TV signals, i.e. 10,000 went without TV for 2 or more days. As compensation, it threw open its entire stock of channels to mio TV subscribers as a gesture of goodwill and apology. Actually, its dead heat rival, Starhub, regularly throws open their entire stock of channels every once a while to its cable TV subscribers for no other reason than generosity (well, ok, it is still business, not charity).

Singtel recently secured the sole rights in Singapore to carry and broadcast all Barclays Premier League soccer matches, depriving Starhub, which currently holds the license, a significant chunk of its business. Singtel was very happy and its CEO, Mr Allen Liew gloated over it, outright rejecting any sharing of the broadcast signals with Starhub. So in the last couple of months, subscription to Singtel mio TV has increased substantially (so I heard) if only because soccer-mad Singaporeans are willing to be held ransom to watching their favourite sports on TV. Now, with the glitch, Mr Allen Liew must be sweating in his pants that mio TV outage does not happen when it begins broadcasting these games later this year. Can you imagine how angry these soccer-mad mio TV subscribers will be if their mio TV signals malfunctioned, especially in the middle of a match between Manchester United and Chelsea? And that the malfunction lasts 2 or more days?

So on second thoughts, it is probably prudent for Mr Liew to resume talks with Starhub on sharing those signals. At least people who own both mio and Starhub cable won't be so angry. In the meantime, they had better look at upping the reliabilty of their mio system, say to the level of 100%?

The Fifa Tango

Perform Group who? Well, this name may be welcome music to football hungry people in Singapore. Just when Singaporeans face the increasingly likelihood of not being able to watch 'live' telecast of all 64 matches of the Football World Cup in June 2010, along comes this company that says that it can stream all these matches, but via the Internet. It further boasts that the streaming will be of good quality  as it has had experience streaming the Australian Open Tennis competitions and others sports competitions. Well, it wouldn't be free. It is likely going to be pay-per-view deal, with prices like S$11 / S$12 dollars per match being quoted based on its past broadcasts.

If this happens, it'll be great for people who use their computers often, and also for those who can hook up their computers to their LCD TV sets. But the quality will not be as good though, depending on your Internet connection bandwidth, and your PC. Even with the Next Generation Broadband (NGB), which is not available to most Singapore households yet, it cannot match Starhub's dedicated infrastructure. So yes, the option will be there, but the experience may not. Internet speeds are only as fast as the connections across the internet network, which may pass through shared undersea and overland cables and various machines hosting the IPs along the same network.No one can determine the exact path that an internet connection passes through, even if you have a million dollars.

The question that must be asked is; why is Fifa willing to do a deal with this London-based company and allow the Worldcup matches to be accessible to Singapore when they will not back down on the reported S$40m they are demanding from Singtel/Starhub? It is not as if Performance Group's technology is out of this world, cutting edge or anything. Why let a foreign company profit from this business and deprive Singtel/Starhub? If all this is true, then Fifa's discriminatory pricing and predatory practices are not only reprehensible, they are puzzling also. Just because Singtel paid an arm and a leg for the rights to the BPL matches doesn't mean that it can levy the same or more for the Worldcup matches. Whether Singtel makes a profit or loss from this BPL deal isn't even certain and anyway, it is their business, not Fifa's.

What is the relationship between Performance Group and Football Media Services, which is the exclusive sales representative for Fifa in Asia? If Performance Group is given the business, then Football Media becomes a real joke. It levies astronomical sums on Asian businesses but gives the same to a London business entity (read: non-Asian business) for a song? This whole Fifa farce has gone on long enough. I pity that Singtel, Starhub and Mediacorp have been hoodwinked into dancing the ultra-expensive Fifa tango. It is sad that Fifa can act in such unprincipled and monopolistic manner, if my analysis of this whole Performance-Fifa shenanigan is correct.

Singtel/Starhub may have been taken for an expensive ride, but lets not have the same happen to all football loving Singaporeans.

Time to go

I marvel at Mr Loh Lin Kok, erstwhile President of the Singapore Athletics Association (SAA). But I don't envy him. It is amazing that this man is taking such an nonchalant attitude towards it woefully underachieving group of athletes under the SAA umbrella - the biggest and probably the only group that brings together the athletic fraternity in Singapore. That he has been at the helm since 1982 without being challenged is also damning of the more capable athletes who should have stepped up to the plate to dislodge a President that has presided over the steady decline of athletics over the last 28 years. It had to take a crisis, such as their failure in the just concluded SEA games in Laos, for someone to step up to the plate to challenge his almost uninterrupted reign at a key national athletics body. Only 2 golds were won, with one coming from an ageing athlete.

Personally, I thought Mr Loh should have stepped aside voluntarily ages ago, or at least made a real effort to find someone more capable than himself to take over. But his heck-care attitude, and derisive stance, even in the face of auditors findings of serious lapses in the way the Association has been run just demonstrates why athletics has slid so far. He ridicules the Singapore Sports Council (SCC) and anyone else who tries to help, and he always blames the SCC for withholding its funding, but seems to forget that this money comes from the taxpayer. He seem to imply that the SAA is entitled to this money, but I think the SCC has done right in demanding more accountability towards the use of public funds. Looking at Loh's behaviour, I, as a taxpayer, wouldn't even trust one cent of my money to his management of it in the SAA. Who cares if you have put out your own money for entertainment and the like on behalf of the SAA? SAA doesn't belong to you, Mr Loh. It is not your personal fiefdom. If Mr Loh wants to boast about his generosity and self-sacrifice, then let him really be generous - don't put those money he has spent on SAA's books. The man cannot see where he may be wrong. He doesn't know how 'shame' is spelled.

Mr Loh, it is time to call time and fade into the sunset. Otherwise, you will likely get booted out, which is already too kind a gesture for your mismanagement of athletics in Singapore.

P.S. I don't know Mr Loh personally, nor am I an athlete. Whatever views and opinion expressed here has been formed from various local media reports. I am just an interested Singaporean who is concerned about Singapore athletics.

Ballshit

Here we go again. This time, the really big one, the mother of all ball games - the 2010 Fifa World Cup South Africa next year, no less. (Sheesh, that phrase is trademarked). What event can be bigger than that for a world crazy about 11x2 (minus the occasional red carded) people kicking an inflated rubber ball around a rectangular field?

And to fit the size of the event, Fifa, the world football governing body, has seen fit to extract that pound of flesh from the very people that give life to this activity. In Singapore, the main broadcast providers, Singtel and Starhub, have very sensibly colluded to get the best deal they can from the licensing people in Fifa. Yet even this collusion might not guarantee a sensible price at which armchair footballers might be willing to cough up. I hear that Fifa is expecting everyone to serve up an arm and a leg for the rights to broadcast the World Cup matches. Talk about profiteering. The price for watching club football in Britain's EPL is bad enough. They routinely also extract that pound of flesh for broadcast rights, which football crazy fans so willingly offer on the altar of the mother of all balls. I suppose Fifa has wised up to the game and wants in too. The colour of money excites more than balls, stupid! What they will do with that money is beyond me. Maybe fly first class to any and all meetings around the world to start with. They say money corrupts. Are we witnessing the beginning of the fall of soccer once the greed sets into every part (read: people) of the game? Well, ok, they did SAY they will donate the proceeds, but when you cause pain to countless so that you can appear generous to some...I am not so sure where the charitable spirit lies...(Hmmm...I wonder if Fifa's accounts are audited, and if so, by whom?)

Many say soccer is the beautiful game. Well, I agree. Its a beautifully 'green' game, and I don't mean environmentally friendly. I can see where some people can spot the beauty in the game. Soon the officials will be so swamp with the cash that they wouldn't even care what a ball looks like, or care if it is made of bullshit, much less what to do with it (handle it? - yeah this is accepted in FOOTball nowadays - the rote has set in, led by some of the world's best footballers like Diego Maradona and Thierry Henri, who win matches with their hands, whether sanctioned by God or not).

So when this happens, people will be knocked to their senses to see how they have been fooled all these many years into coughing up blood money to people who just kick a ball (and handle it once a while) and people who just organise these kicking ballfests.

Have the rest of us humans become so dumb that we willlingly let others swindle us in broad daylight? Yeah, blame the balls.

Cheap cheap

Everyone, I suppose, in Singapore knows that medicine across the Causeway is cheaper, just like food and petrol. So it is natural that Singaporeans exit Singapore in droves during weekends to stretch their feet and their Singapore Dollar. Over the years, however, Johor has become less of a shopper's paradise for Singaporeans. For some time now, the prices in their shopping malls aren't too different from what you can get back in Singapore.

Petrol is still a bargain, but the Singapore government does its best to 'pursuade' Singaporeans to 'buy Singapore'. The 3 Qtr tank rule is still there. However, of late, the powers that be appears to have changed their minds. For example, Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan has famously said (in February 2009) that Singaporeans can consider putting their elderly parents in Nursing Homes in Johore. Now, Salma Khalik, ST's Health Correspondent (who reported on the Johore Nursing Home story earlier this year for the same paper) is suggesting that Singaporeans stretch their dollar by getting vaccination jabs (against streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria) in Malaysia simply because it costs much less there than in Singapore. Although Mr Khaw's name is missing in this opinion piece, it is pretty much the same point that Mr Khaw was making - there are choices for cheaper medicine, and Singaporean's should avail themselves of it, never mind that you can't avail yourself of more than a quarter tank of cheaper petrol over there. I suppose the petrol is not Mr Khaw's department. The Transport Minister, Mr Raymond Lim doesn't seem to have heard, nor is willing to hear, or if heard, is not willing to have a change of heart about Singaporeans having the choice of spending less on petrol.

By now, everybody knows that medicine in Singapore isn't cheap. That is common knowledge, really. There is a perception that, on the whole, medicine is good in Singapore. That's the premium you have to pay. But now Ms Khalik is suggesting (see Straits Time, 23 October 2009, page A2) that medicine in Malaysia, as far as vaccinations go, is just as good, you wonder why you have to continue to pay a premium in Singapore? It would appear that not only do our businesses price themselves out of the market that lead to the inevitable recessionary cycle, we, the citizens of Singapore, also get priced out of our products like medicine, which isn't exactly optional in our lives. And who are setting the prices in the medical sector in Singapore? Go figure.

I suppose we have to thank Ms Khalik for her money-saving tip, but we would also be grateful if somebody were to talk to Minister Raymond Lim about that petrol thingy.

The Chairwoman

Singaporeans should be shameful for the way it treats its 'foreign talent' in sports. All its major sports - soccer, swimming and until recently, table-tennis, are coached by foreigners. Yet in a year when Singapore has achieved most in the sports arena - Olympic silver medals, 5th place finish in the Beijing Olympics, 1st place in the Paralympics swimming, it couldn't find a coach who had stood out. I don't know what yardstick is being used, but it appears that this yardstick is a tad too long for anyone to measure up to.

It can be argued, very strongly, that the coach of the year (COY) award should have gone to the coaches of sportsman/sportswoman who did Singapore proud in the Olympics, indisputably the most prestigious and the toughest sports arena in the world. Yet all of them have been found wanting. If so, why don't we just sack all of them and find more worthy people to fill their shoes. After all, Singapore taxpayers' money is being used to fund sports in Singapore. Singapore taxpayers have a right to ask why we are using sub-standard coaches to drive excellence in Singapore sports.

But the most shameful thing is that an aggrieved coach, Mr Liu Guodong, is in town to seek an apology from Mdm Lee Bee Wah, President of the STTA, for allegedly slighting him in remarks explaining why he wasn't nominated for the COY award. This in spite of the fact that he coached Singapore's Olympic Table-Tennis team to silver medals - the first in 48 years. Yet, in the first meeting, she reportedly didn't turn up. Some officials appeared instead. I don't know what was said in that meeting, and whether the discussion was useful, but it does look to me as if the STTA is acting like the Communist Part of China -that 'Chairwoman' Lee BW deigns it beneath her to meet with a 'discredited' coach. Liu flew in to Singapore to LBW's doorstep. The least she could have done was to meet him, if only for old times' sake? Well, I shouldn't drag China into this, but Mr Liu is from China , after all. And for the Chinese, 'face' is important, and credibility is important in any leader, as our top political leaders in the PAP have stressed and demonstrated countless times since the country's independence.

So I am not surprised at Mr Liu's incredible quest (I hope it is not an impossible quest) to clear his name. It is now up to Chairwoman Lee to show that she is deserving of everyone's respect and support, from all sportsmen/women and coaches down to the taxpaying public, by facing Mr Liu and explaining herself, and/or otherwise, apologise PERSONALLY.

Personally, I think she and her management team in the STTA should step down for bringing disrepute to the Table-tennis fraternity in Singapore and diminishing the achievements of the silver-medal winning Olympic team by refusing to nominate their coach for the COY award. A wrong step here and she may even cost the PAP a GRC, eventually. For a fresh politician, nothing is worse than becoming unpopular for the wrong reasons.

Thank you for hearing me

I am honoured that a reader has nominated this blog for the Singapore Blog Awards. However, I wish to decline for personal reasons.

I wish those who are nominated similarly the best and may the best weblogs/bloggers win!

epilogos.

quote message:

Dear blogger,

You have been nominated by (name withheld) to join the Singapore Blog Awards, because (name withheld) thinks that your blog is loud and clear.

The Singapore Blog Awards, organised by Singapore's leading bilingual news and entertainment portal, omy.sg, gives recognitions to outstanding blogs in Singapore.

The winners in the 10 main award categories will walk away with a total of more than S$ 20,000 worth of prizes and a trophy designed by famous artist, Tan Swie Hian.

Please accept the nomination by completing the registration form.

We look forward to your participation to make this event a success for the Singapore blogosphere.

The Singapore Blog Awards is sponsored by East Asia Institute of Management (EASB), United International Pictures (UIP), National Heritage Board (NHB), Koka, Asia Web Direct, Play Smart Pte Ltd and HTC.

Supporting media: Avertlets, ping.sg

unquote

Paradox of recession

Nothing is predictable in Singapore nowadays, or at least, some things do not work according to the script.

Consider the opening of the newest shopping mall, Tampines 1, in the middle of one of the deepest recessions in Singapore. Retailers and even the Retailers' Associations have, in the recent past, asked the government for help in cutting costs, such as reducing the GST from 7% to 5%. The government said no. And after witnessing Tampines 1, who can blame them?

Tampines 1 sits on the site where Sogo was. It opened last week, to throngs of people. If there is one thing you can trust Singaporeans to do, it is shopping at the latest malls. I avoided the mall (yea, I am an atypical Singaporean) on its opening day, as well as the weekend, for obvious reasons. I thought today, Monday, would be a good day to visit. I was wrong. The crowd at this Mall on Monday afternoon is nothing like a weekday crowd. Everybody on the island seem to be there, from the children to the teenagers to the adults in businesses and casual wear to the aunties and uncles, all of them were there. I can begin to understand the gridlock that shoppers were faced with last weekend at this mall.

The Japanese retailer chain, Uniqlo, the newest new thing, was shuttered, not because there weren't any customers. Yes, it had drawn down its shutters, but a long queue of would-be customers were lining up just outside, ready to rush in when the shutters come up again. How any retailer would envy at this state of affairs. The mall is much bigger than I'd imagine it to be because I used to visit the old Sogo quite often before it shut. I could imagine the retailers at Tampines Mall and Century Square swatting flies all day long. The crowd was over the other side of the MRT station - in Tampines 1, stupid!

People just came, like bees to flowers, except that visitors came to dump their money into this newest of new places whereas bees would suck dry the nectar from the flowers. Come to think of it, that's what the shoppers were doing - sucking dry the merchandise using their not-so-hard-to-part money. Hey there's a recession going on, if you've forgotten. But then again, it should be like this if one wants to break the spiraling cycle of thrift, which has the effect of choking economic activity thereby worsening the recession.

My one complaint is the food sold at Kapitan, the Kopitiam food court located at the 4th level. Let me rephrase that. My complaint lies with one food stall in Kapitan, the stall that sold char siew rice. When my companion put the plate of char siew rice on the table, the stranger sitting next to me exclaimed at the portion - it was very small indeed. This is the first time that a total stranger has ever made such a remark. Singaporeans tend to be a reserve lot. They'd usually just whisper among their own group of friends. So you can imagine how small the portion really was to elicit such an unbridled comment! But this takes the cake - it costs $3.80! Cough cough cough... And in case you were wondering, there is nothing out of the ordinary about the rice, the char siew, the cumcumber and the sauce. In fact, you could getting better char siew rice at $2 elsewhere.

I thought, if this is how much things will cost, I shuddered to think how high prices will be at the planned wet market in Sengkang Square when it goes into operation. Kopitiam won the bid to build and operate it just 2 weeks ago. And their bid was 2 times the next highest bid. There may be some red faces in Kopitiam right now, but I think they will have the last laugh because they know they can recoup this exorbitant investment quite quickly. That's because people will still flock to this market even if it prices are higher. The reason is very simple - there just isn't anywhere that can compete with the convenient location of this planned wet market. This lack of competition is something that HDB overlooked when it pretended to understand how free markets (there is no effective competition) worked. Of course, there have been complaints and dismay expressed by heartlanders of the prospect of having yet to pay more. The initial euphoria of having a wet market at your doorstep is turning to disillusionment. At the end of the day, the ward's MP and the HDB will be the ones with red faces.

This is living in Singapore today - all full of irony and contradictions.

Para Vic

I am ambivalent about the achievements of Laurentia Tan at the Paralympics - the Olympics for the disabled, which is currently being held in Beijing, at the very same site that the 29th Olympics was held less than a month ago.

Yes, she was wearing the Singapore flag when she took not one, but two bronzes in her equestrian event. Being individual events, it can be argued that her achievements exceeded that of our table-tennis team's silver medal at the Olympics, it being a team effort. A letter writter has event pointed out the the monetary reward of $25,000 is far too small a sum compared to her Olympic counterparts' $250,000.

Yet, that ambivalence lingers, not only in me, but obviously in the rest of Singapore. No campaign bottle was uncocked, there were no victory parties nor parades and the press was subdued in its reporting about this achievement compared to how it reported the victory of our table-tennis team. The reason, perhaps, is that until she won those paralympic bronzes, she was a nobody in Singapore. From what little I gathered from the press, her parents brought her over to Britain when she was just 4 years old, and she has been there ever since. Her father probably did the right thing. It has given her daughter the chance to develop into a confident young women who is contributing productively to society. She is today employed as a Mental Health Worker in Britain, caring for those perhaps more fortunate than her. There must be an inspirational 'Chicken Soup' story here to be told and I am sure it will be told eventually.

For all the help that British society and medicine gave her over the course of her living with her disabilities and overcoming them, I thought that she should have put on the British flag in the Paralympics. For her achievements is a compliment and testimony to the British, more than to anyone on one of its former dominions. And this dominion, Singapore, should be honest and graceful to accept that it played very little part in her rehabilitation and conquest at these Paralympic games.

We would like to toast her victory with 'Majulah Singapore', but in this case, it perhaps should be more like 'God save the Queen!'


morgueFile.com. Author: Nicolas Raymond

Baby load

One of the greatest burdens of having a baby in Singapore is not about money. Rather, the problem is how to ensure that that baby grows up to become a government scholar or at least one who isn't ranked in the last 10 in class. This is the real challenge that parents are forced to face in Singapore society - and it isn't pretty. It doesn't matter if a child is scholarship material or not, parents naturally want their child to do well, no, extremely well, in school. To that end, it is common knowledge that almost every school going kid in Singapore has a private tutor on top of their school teachers, to pile them with additional school work and supplementary exercises. Kiasu parents want to ensure that their child does not fall too far behind the rest of the students in the school, whose parents would most likely also have have engaged a private tutor for the same reasons.

And the problem is a real one. Let's get one thing straight. Not everyone can be first in class. No every can get a scholarship. In fact, those who do so are the exception. The rest of us are the ordinary boys and girls who get by. But the competition to be that exceptional student is such that reality is often suspended over fantasy. And this fantasy is often an expensive affair. One has to shell out more than a $100 per subject per student per month. Multiply that with 3 or more subjects and you're really out of pocket by a couple of hundred $$. Multiply that with 3 or 4 kids and you begin to understand the problem with money. But money, really, is not the only problem. The problem is the mental anguish and superhuman effort parents need to put in to ensure that their child do do well. And time really is not on our side, not when we need to work those hours to earn enough to pay the tutors and the additional enhancement lessons during weekends. I know of a parent who has a somewhat wayward (but academically capable) son. In spite of all his effort and that of his wife, he just couldn't get his son to 'do the right thing' in school. In his word, he was '....getting so tired of supervising and managing his son' that he was about to just give up. This mental challenge and anguish, if multiplied 3 times would kill any parent. Which explains why a couple doesn't desire more than 2 kids, no matter how much the financial incentives dangled in front of them by the government. You either kill your child's interest and young lives with after-school tuition after tuition, or your own sanity trying to manage the child, or, heaven forbid, both.

That is why the government's incentive programmes, which have largely revolved around financial help, haven't really worked. The latest reported replacement birth rate in Singapore is 1.2, hardly enough to replace ourselves in the long run. So long as this pressure cooker environment persists in Singapore, the government can forget about increasing the birth rate. It may as well do what it has silently been doing for some time now in increasing the population - import foreigners and make than locals - eventually. But then, the children of these foreigners will eventually still need to join the junior rat race, so that will then lead us back to square one - rationalizing whether having more than 2 kids in this pressure cooker environment is desirable at all.

Image source: morgueFile.com. Author: manuere

A rowing we won't go

Rank amateurs. Incredible. 5 young man died and it is nobody's fault. In the case of Mat Selamat's escape from detention, 8 people were found to be culpable and disciplinary action instituted, even on a person who had been absolved of blame in the escape. In the case of the death of 5 dragon-boaters, part of the ill-fated dragon-boat race team that took part in the race in Cambodia last year, 'no one was to blame', said the inquiry panel set up to investigate the circumstances and reasons for this tragedy. Granted it is very important that the lessons learnt in this tragedy should go towards preventing similar tragedies from happening in the future, it still begs the question: who is/are to blame? To some of the families who lost a son, there must be a feeling that somebody or some people are shirking their responsibilities.

To its credit, the Board of Inquiry (BOI) does not seem to have hidden anything. It even pointed out that "the team manager and captain...responsible for making crucial decisions on safety instead...(left it) to a vote". Clearly, in matters of safety, a democracy just will not do. Imagine a teacher leading 40 students out on a field trip making decisions by taking a vote - that's what really happened here. It's an abdication of leadership and responsibility. How can nobody be blamed? Granted we do not want to promote a blame culture, but people must be held accountable, beginning from the very top.

What is disingenuous in the finding is the hint that the Cambodian organisers, their paddles and their boats are to blame. If you want to participate in competitions overseas, you cannot insist that the paddles must measure a certain dimension and that all of them should be uniform. In the same way, you cannot insist that the Tonlap River be as calm as the Kallang River, or that the boat must be as wide and flat as those used in Singapore. Every team, including the 8 other teams from Asean, use the same equipment and row in the same river and encounter the same currents. If the Singapore dragon-boat team can only row in calm 'placid' waters, then they should be nowhere near international competitions.

It is symptomatic of Singaporeans, when they travel overseas, that they insist on the kind of efficiency and cleanliness that they are used to and expect in Singapore. No, you have to adapt to different conditions and be prepared for the unexpected, even the worst, when you are in countries that have less developed infrastructure and systems. Ban Singaporeans from joining competitions that do no conform to the guidelines set by the International governing bodies? Well, that proves one thing, doesn't it? That Singaporeans can't hack it. They can't manage, and they don't know how to prepare for the most challenging races. It just goes to perpetuate the perception that Singapore dragon-boaters are soft, easy pushovers - kiddy rowers, actually.

Why don't we just forget the sport and channel our energies elsewhere? That will really help to prevent similar incidents from happening ever again.

Image source: morgueFile.com. Author: Ray Forester

Cash in the card

NETS decision to charge a non-refundable $5 for its cashcard, which is the only card at the moment that can be used to pay for motorist's ERP charges, amongst other fee paying establishments in Singapore, has been decried as monopolistic and unfair by many. This is made worse by the refundable deposit of existing cards, but these cards have a life-span of 5 years. Some day, you have to give up the free cards for a paid one. So sooner or later, you just have to ante up if you want to live in Singapore. Sounds familiar. There is perhaps no better example of an oppressive instrument of trade today - the $5 cashcard.

And in true Singapore fashion, people have asked for justification for such a fee, given that NETS is monopolising this sector currently. Of course monopolists do not have to give a reason. As far as they are concerned, you just take it or leave it. And because public services have locked the consumer into the card, there really is no choice but to pay up, even if the card costs $50 a pop, really. That seems to be what the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) is implying when it has refused to act to stem this monopolistic action by NETS. It says that by the end of the year, LTA will provide alternative cards, which ostensibly, will charge less for its cards. In a truly competitive environment, this will happen, but in Singapore, what state initiated scheme has truly been competitive? Take for example bus and train services. Competitive? Surely not as the two transport providers have been given a neatly carved up portion of the transport landscape to operate in so that there will be minimal duplication - and thus competition. Good from the point of view of using scarce resources, but bad because it does not promote competition that benefits commuters. That's why the Public Transport Council (PTC) exists. And that's why the CCS also exists, to arbitrate and ensure that there is no profiteering. It says that competition will come, and therefore there is nothing for it to do now about the NETS $5 fee for its cashcards.

Well, when competition truly does comes, then the CCS ceases to be relevant. So why isn't it doing anything when it is relevant today? You have to ask the boss of CCS that. In the eyes of the public, it has copped out of its role as a watchdog. There will never ever be competition in the Singapore context where cashcards are concerned, not when the 'alternatives' are engineered by civil servants. You'd probably end up with a situation similar to the transport operators - enough players (2) to claim some sort of competition, but not enough to make CCS an irrelevant body.

I suppose everyone wants to keep his job, even if it is at the expense of another thousand.

Money in your mouth

Soccer fans are getting very raw deals in Singapore, it appears. If they want to catch the English Premier League (EPL) matches and the European Champions League and Uefa Cup matches, they will have to subscribe to both the Starhub Cable Service and Singtel's Mio TV. That's because the broadcast rights to these different soccer league matches are now held by these two broadcasters exclusively. Having to subscribe to both broadcasters has made the cost of watching soccer on TV an expensive affair indeed. I'll be honest, I am no great soccer fan, and this state of affairs doesn't bother me one bit. I get my fix of the EPL/Champions League on the daily papers, which is more than enough for me. So I am not here to voice for a better deal from these broadcasters, or to berate them for charging Singapore soccer fans so much money for their entertainment.

First, it isn't Singtel or Starhub's fault that the charges are so high. I think they are honest when they say that the broadcast rights to these league games are very expensive. And one doesn't have to look far to see why this is so. How much is each soccer player in the EPL paid? It's no secret that each soccer player gets paid something like $50,000 a week and upwards. Some of us don't even get paid that much in a year, let alone a week. So who do you think is paying them these exorbitant sums for kicking a ball around week in and week out? Certainly not Alex Ferguson. Its the FANs, stupid. When these fans support their clubs, they do so in one fundamental way - pay the salaries of the football players. The last I heard, these fans can be very vociferous about their clubs. Some would even put down career and family to fly to Britain to shout their voices hoarse in the thick of the action, never mind that you only get a small part of a bench to rest your bum for all the expenses you need to shell out. So what is $65 a month to watch these same matches in the comfort and company of family and friends, possibly in air-con comfort and a beer or two to go with the occasion? We are fans, aren't we? We support our teams in the league, don't we? You mean supporting by just buying a T-shirt here and jumping around there to celebrate a goal is enough? You want to be a fan and be proud of it? Then pay what your idols demand.

Second, these leagues are outright businesses. People invest millions of dollars in these teams and expect no less a return. Otherwise the Americans, the Russians (Lenin, rest in peace) and Emirateans wouldn't be interested at all in Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal FCs. Why did Thaksin Shinawatra buy Manchester City if he doesn't think that it is a good business investment for his billions?

Third, Singapore's market is relatively small, unlike, say, India or even Malaysia, where the broadcasters can more easily recoup the money they paid for those exclusive rights. Look at the S-League attendances and you will understand what I mean. Who said that the S-League was a success? He must be living in dreamland. When the S-League is treated like a training ground for third-rate teams from China, Korea and Japan, you know where it stands. Even Fandi Ahmad doesn't want to be part of the S-League. Go figure. But I digress.

If you can't stomach all these additional costs, then forget about those overpaid buggers - and I am not referring to the Starhub and Singtel executives. As consumers, you have the choice. If you think the charges are exorbitant, then walk away, otherwise support, and I mean, really $upport your teams.


Image source: morgueFile.com. Author: badrobot

Folly or Glory

5 young Singapore men died in Cambodia this past week in their attempt to bring glory to their country and to themselves. It was war of a another sort - competitive dragon-boat racing, to be exact. Ironically, their boat capsized while trying to dock after their race. Of the 22 men on board, 5 did not resurface from the waters. They were found dead (apparently from drowning) some days later. My sympathies go out to their loved ones. They were such young men with so much promise ahead of them.

But frankly, I was disturbed that the team chose not to wear life vests. Their reason was that it would impede their movements, and thereby slow down their rowing. Well, I have only ever rowed competitively once in a dragon boat race, and as is Singapore's rules, wore a life vest. From that solitary dragon boat competition, I am in no position to judge whether a life vest would or would not impede one's performance. Some experienced boaters are adamant that it would not. My life vest didn't come in useful on that occasion, but it certainly was a load off my mind when and if the boat should capsize.

I was once in a sampan off the coast of Penang which capsized many years ago and a friend of mine in the same boat nearly died because (1) both of us didn't have life vest on and (2) he didn't know how to swim. I hauled him up from the water and got him to hold onto the overturned sampan as I tugged the boat back to shore with the help of another boat.

I think people must get their priorities right. Between Cup glory and life, which should you choose? I thought it would be a no-brainer, but competitive spirit, or folly, would rather risk life over a piece of metalic or plastic object which, when placed in the cabinet, serves only to remind of past glory. But without a life, what glory is there to reminisce? I would rather row my best and be safe. Should glory come to the team, at least I can live to enjoy the fruits of my labour. As it is, the dragon boaters' reach for glory has only brought extreme grief to loved ones. When we are young, we think we can live forever but death can snatch us in the prime of our lives without nary a warning.

Life and glory - choose life - all the time.