Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
POA Showcase
Let the showcase begin....
APEC meeting first event to be gazetted under new Public Order Act
03 November 2009 1805 hrs (SST)
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1015617/1/.html
SINGAPORE : The APEC meeting in Singapore is the first major event to be gazetted as a "Special Event" under the amended Public Order Act introduced earlier this year.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told local and international media that he does not expect disruptions from civil society groups. He said that unlike the IMF World Bank meeting, APEC does not engage such groups.
Still, security is a concern.
Mr Lee said the new Public Order Act was passed in time for APEC so that Singapore will have "adequate powers to ensure law, order and security".
Police have the power to stop and search, request reasons for entry and deny entry to the gazetted areas.
"We can gazette certain areas and within that area, we can instruct people to move along and not dawdle and attempt to do something which is disruptive. And if they don't, we can take action against them," said Mr Lee.
"When we had a meeting in Sydney two years ago, (the Australians) spent $300 million building a fence surrounding the whole of the centre of Sydney and declared a public holiday, so all Sydney-ans could leave the town and leave us in solitary splendour. We're not going to do quite that but we hope to have a smooth and peaceful meeting," he added.
Three years ago, when Singapore hosted the International Monetary Fund-World Bank meeting, the authorities objected to 28 foreigners - all of whom had a history of taking part in violent protests or disruptive activities at previous meetings - from being allowed into the country.
During that period, civil society organisations were allowed to protest in a space provided within the Suntec Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre. - CNA /ls
Copyright © 2008 MediaCorp Pte Ltd
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A recall of the key features of the Public Order Act
http://www.mha.gov.sg/news_details.aspx?nid=MTM5OQ%3D%3D-3BtUG%2B2xe3A%3D
Consolidated Permit Regime
5 Currently, cause-related activities are regulated together with recreational, social and commercial activities under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PEMA) and Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act (MOA). Under the POA, the relevant portions of these two regulatory regimes will be consolidated for cause-related assemblies and processions. Specifically, this will mean that cause-related activities will be regulated by permit regardless of the number of persons involved or the format they are conducted in. This rationalises the current approach of regulating groups of five or more under the MOA and groups of four or less under the PEMA, (where there is public entertainment).
6 Under the POA, there will be different penalties to distinguish between first-time and repeat or recalcitrant offenders. The jail term for first time offender in the present penalty schedule has been removed. Penalties for repeat offenders on the other hand have been enhanced.
Enhancing Security during Major Events
7 Major international events are trophy targets for terrorists. As Singapore increasingly plays host to major international events and continues to promote the business of Singapore as an international meeting and convention hub, our priority must be to ensure the safety and security of the delegates and our people during such events.
8 To do so, our security forces cannot afford to be distracted from their security deployment or allow the level of security measures in place on site to be diminished by the disruption of political activists, militants or mischief-makers seeking to exploit the media and political attention attending the event. The POA comprises provisions to enhance security during such major events. Under the POA, Minister will be able to declare via gazette a certain event as a special event which will then allow Police to exercise powers to preserve public order and safety of the individuals involved in the event. Within the special event area where typically the security-threat level is higher if not highest, Police can exercise enhanced powers such as prohibition of items, stop and search, arrests, security screening, request reasons for entry from suspicious persons, and denial of entry. Persons who refuse to comply with Police orders or interfere with the conduct of the event will be committing an offence. This is the result of careful study of Australia’s APEC 2007 laws and the Australia Capital Territory’s Major Events laws.
Move-On Powers
9 The POA will broaden the repertoire of Police powers in dealing with public order incidents. Currently, in the face of an illegal assembly or march, Police will have to either prosecute after the offending action is over or arrest to prevent an escalation of the incident. A move-on order, gives the Police an additional intervening instrument to engage the offender and give him a chance to stop his unlawful activity without involving arrest. It allows Police to de-escalate an activity which can potentially cause significant law and order threats by ordering the person to leave. If the person complies, there will be no arrest and the threat will be removed.
10 To enhance internal accountabilities, the move-on orders will be issued by a police officer of or above the rank of sergeant on the explicit authorization of a senior Police officer. It will be in the form of a written notice that will state the area, and the time period (up to 24 hours) within which the subject is prohibited from re-entering. Unlike the Australian model, we have scoped the application of our move-on orders narrower so that our move-on powers can be used only in cases where the Police assess that the person’s behaviour fits within certain specified criteria as appended below:
a) interferes with trade or business at the place by obstructing, hindering or impeding someone entering, at or leaving the place;
b) is or has been disorderly, indecent, offensive, or threatening to someone entering, at or leaving the place;
c) is or has been disrupting the peaceable and orderly conduct of any event, entertainment or gathering at the place; or
d) shows that he is just about to commit an offence or has just committed or is committing an offence.
Order on Filming
11 There are specific practical situations where the recording of an on-going incident can potentially jeopardise the success of security operations or the safety of the officers. For instance, in a counter-terrorism operation, real time coverage of the storming operation can expose the special forces and the hostages to great risks as it can undermine the element of surprise critical to such missions. There are also other instances whereby the identities of an officer carrying out such sensitive covert operations can be compromised by the dissemination of video-recording of the operation.
12 The POA empowers law enforcement officers to prohibit persons from filming, communicating and exhibiting films of law enforcement activities which if exhibited will either endanger the safety of officers or prejudice the effective conduct of an operation. It will be an offence if a person willfully disobeys the prohibition order given to him. [3]
APEC meeting first event to be gazetted under new Public Order Act
03 November 2009 1805 hrs (SST)
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1015617/1/.html
SINGAPORE : The APEC meeting in Singapore is the first major event to be gazetted as a "Special Event" under the amended Public Order Act introduced earlier this year.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told local and international media that he does not expect disruptions from civil society groups. He said that unlike the IMF World Bank meeting, APEC does not engage such groups.
Still, security is a concern.
Mr Lee said the new Public Order Act was passed in time for APEC so that Singapore will have "adequate powers to ensure law, order and security".
Police have the power to stop and search, request reasons for entry and deny entry to the gazetted areas.
"We can gazette certain areas and within that area, we can instruct people to move along and not dawdle and attempt to do something which is disruptive. And if they don't, we can take action against them," said Mr Lee.
"When we had a meeting in Sydney two years ago, (the Australians) spent $300 million building a fence surrounding the whole of the centre of Sydney and declared a public holiday, so all Sydney-ans could leave the town and leave us in solitary splendour. We're not going to do quite that but we hope to have a smooth and peaceful meeting," he added.
Three years ago, when Singapore hosted the International Monetary Fund-World Bank meeting, the authorities objected to 28 foreigners - all of whom had a history of taking part in violent protests or disruptive activities at previous meetings - from being allowed into the country.
During that period, civil society organisations were allowed to protest in a space provided within the Suntec Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre. - CNA /ls
Copyright © 2008 MediaCorp Pte Ltd
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A recall of the key features of the Public Order Act
http://www.mha.gov.sg/news_details.aspx?nid=MTM5OQ%3D%3D-3BtUG%2B2xe3A%3D
Consolidated Permit Regime
5 Currently, cause-related activities are regulated together with recreational, social and commercial activities under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PEMA) and Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act (MOA). Under the POA, the relevant portions of these two regulatory regimes will be consolidated for cause-related assemblies and processions. Specifically, this will mean that cause-related activities will be regulated by permit regardless of the number of persons involved or the format they are conducted in. This rationalises the current approach of regulating groups of five or more under the MOA and groups of four or less under the PEMA, (where there is public entertainment).
6 Under the POA, there will be different penalties to distinguish between first-time and repeat or recalcitrant offenders. The jail term for first time offender in the present penalty schedule has been removed. Penalties for repeat offenders on the other hand have been enhanced.
Enhancing Security during Major Events
7 Major international events are trophy targets for terrorists. As Singapore increasingly plays host to major international events and continues to promote the business of Singapore as an international meeting and convention hub, our priority must be to ensure the safety and security of the delegates and our people during such events.
8 To do so, our security forces cannot afford to be distracted from their security deployment or allow the level of security measures in place on site to be diminished by the disruption of political activists, militants or mischief-makers seeking to exploit the media and political attention attending the event. The POA comprises provisions to enhance security during such major events. Under the POA, Minister will be able to declare via gazette a certain event as a special event which will then allow Police to exercise powers to preserve public order and safety of the individuals involved in the event. Within the special event area where typically the security-threat level is higher if not highest, Police can exercise enhanced powers such as prohibition of items, stop and search, arrests, security screening, request reasons for entry from suspicious persons, and denial of entry. Persons who refuse to comply with Police orders or interfere with the conduct of the event will be committing an offence. This is the result of careful study of Australia’s APEC 2007 laws and the Australia Capital Territory’s Major Events laws.
Move-On Powers
9 The POA will broaden the repertoire of Police powers in dealing with public order incidents. Currently, in the face of an illegal assembly or march, Police will have to either prosecute after the offending action is over or arrest to prevent an escalation of the incident. A move-on order, gives the Police an additional intervening instrument to engage the offender and give him a chance to stop his unlawful activity without involving arrest. It allows Police to de-escalate an activity which can potentially cause significant law and order threats by ordering the person to leave. If the person complies, there will be no arrest and the threat will be removed.
10 To enhance internal accountabilities, the move-on orders will be issued by a police officer of or above the rank of sergeant on the explicit authorization of a senior Police officer. It will be in the form of a written notice that will state the area, and the time period (up to 24 hours) within which the subject is prohibited from re-entering. Unlike the Australian model, we have scoped the application of our move-on orders narrower so that our move-on powers can be used only in cases where the Police assess that the person’s behaviour fits within certain specified criteria as appended below:
a) interferes with trade or business at the place by obstructing, hindering or impeding someone entering, at or leaving the place;
b) is or has been disorderly, indecent, offensive, or threatening to someone entering, at or leaving the place;
c) is or has been disrupting the peaceable and orderly conduct of any event, entertainment or gathering at the place; or
d) shows that he is just about to commit an offence or has just committed or is committing an offence.
Order on Filming
11 There are specific practical situations where the recording of an on-going incident can potentially jeopardise the success of security operations or the safety of the officers. For instance, in a counter-terrorism operation, real time coverage of the storming operation can expose the special forces and the hostages to great risks as it can undermine the element of surprise critical to such missions. There are also other instances whereby the identities of an officer carrying out such sensitive covert operations can be compromised by the dissemination of video-recording of the operation.
12 The POA empowers law enforcement officers to prohibit persons from filming, communicating and exhibiting films of law enforcement activities which if exhibited will either endanger the safety of officers or prejudice the effective conduct of an operation. It will be an offence if a person willfully disobeys the prohibition order given to him. [3]
Monday, November 2, 2009
PAP Convention: Quote of the Quotes
Keeping this article for posterity sake. Some of the key quotes:
DPM Teo Chee Hean: "We must be open to ideas and open to people. So long as they subscribe to our party ideals, our values "
PM Lee: "This leadership for Singapore can only come from the PAP" ..... "we must produce such a line up by the next General Elections - 2011 or 2012.""
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some promising PAP candidates identified for next election: PM Lee
01 November 2009 1200 hrs (SST)
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1015089/1/.html
\SINGAPORE : Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said the People's Action Party (PAP) has identified some candidates, including potential office-holders, for the next General Election due by February 2012.
They are mainly in their thirties and forties. Mr Lee, who is also the PAP's Secretary-General, was the main speaker at the party's convention on Sunday.
He highlighted why Singapore's next General Election will be crucial, as it must produce leaders who can take over his generation of Cabinet colleagues.
Mr Lee said: "We have made progress, we have got people who will be part of this team, but we do not have a complete team and we must produce such a line up by the next General Elections - 2011 or 2012."
By then, Mr Lee believes Singapore will have a new slate of leaders who can instil confidence among investors and Singaporeans and lead the country for the next 20 years . Mr Lee said:
"We have kept clean, resolutely against corruption, in the Party in the society, in the government, at the grassroots. "If there is a case we will investigate; if a wrong has been done, we will act on it...If you do not keep the party clean, you are finished."
The PAP brought in 24 new Members of Parliament during the last General Election. On the new candidates, Mr Lee said they grew up in the years of prosperity and did not experience turbulence and hardship.
But he believes they are just as committed as the earlier generations of MPs. Mr Lee said: "This leadership for Singapore can only come from the PAP, and if the PAP lets Singapore down, we are all in big trouble, not only PAP but (also) Singapore.
Therefore, the PAP must never let Singapore down; (we must) make sure when we press the button, things work." He added that the new MPs have done well and have established themselves with voters.
Mr Lee also told his audience of party activists that the new office-holders have made significant contributions as well, and have gained confidence in presenting and defending policies in Parliament and on the ground. Prime Minister Lee also reminded the party convention that
Singapore will be amending the Constitution, which will result in more Non-Constituency MPs, smaller Group Representation Constituencies and more Single Member Constituencies. That means there would be more contests in the next General Election.
So Mr Lee's message to the party activists is: never assume that your division will get a walkover. Party activists asked questions about the selection process of candidates after Mr Lee's speech.
Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who is also Second Assistant Secretary-General of the PAP, said: "If you look at our party, we have got a successful blend between people who have come up from the ground and people who have come in from outside the party, and come in as MPs in the last elections; we have several who have come from the ground.
"Lim Biow Chuan and Sam Tan were branch secretaries, so we have people who have come from the ground and who are able to hold their own in Parliament and represent the people. "But we also need to make sure that we bring in talented people from outside.
We must be open to ideas and open to people. So long as they subscribe to our party ideals, our values and want to do well for Singapore and Singaporeans, we should be prepared to accept them." The PAP leaders stressed that the party's success formula is to ensure that it gets its politics right so that it can attract good people to enter politics. - CNA/so/ms
Copyright © 2008 MediaCorp Pte Ltd
DPM Teo Chee Hean: "We must be open to ideas and open to people. So long as they subscribe to our party ideals, our values "
PM Lee: "This leadership for Singapore can only come from the PAP" ..... "we must produce such a line up by the next General Elections - 2011 or 2012.""
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some promising PAP candidates identified for next election: PM Lee
01 November 2009 1200 hrs (SST)
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1015089/1/.html
\SINGAPORE : Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said the People's Action Party (PAP) has identified some candidates, including potential office-holders, for the next General Election due by February 2012.
They are mainly in their thirties and forties. Mr Lee, who is also the PAP's Secretary-General, was the main speaker at the party's convention on Sunday.
He highlighted why Singapore's next General Election will be crucial, as it must produce leaders who can take over his generation of Cabinet colleagues.
Mr Lee said: "We have made progress, we have got people who will be part of this team, but we do not have a complete team and we must produce such a line up by the next General Elections - 2011 or 2012."
By then, Mr Lee believes Singapore will have a new slate of leaders who can instil confidence among investors and Singaporeans and lead the country for the next 20 years . Mr Lee said:
"We have kept clean, resolutely against corruption, in the Party in the society, in the government, at the grassroots. "If there is a case we will investigate; if a wrong has been done, we will act on it...If you do not keep the party clean, you are finished."
The PAP brought in 24 new Members of Parliament during the last General Election. On the new candidates, Mr Lee said they grew up in the years of prosperity and did not experience turbulence and hardship.
But he believes they are just as committed as the earlier generations of MPs. Mr Lee said: "This leadership for Singapore can only come from the PAP, and if the PAP lets Singapore down, we are all in big trouble, not only PAP but (also) Singapore.
Therefore, the PAP must never let Singapore down; (we must) make sure when we press the button, things work." He added that the new MPs have done well and have established themselves with voters.
Mr Lee also told his audience of party activists that the new office-holders have made significant contributions as well, and have gained confidence in presenting and defending policies in Parliament and on the ground. Prime Minister Lee also reminded the party convention that
Singapore will be amending the Constitution, which will result in more Non-Constituency MPs, smaller Group Representation Constituencies and more Single Member Constituencies. That means there would be more contests in the next General Election.
So Mr Lee's message to the party activists is: never assume that your division will get a walkover. Party activists asked questions about the selection process of candidates after Mr Lee's speech.
Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who is also Second Assistant Secretary-General of the PAP, said: "If you look at our party, we have got a successful blend between people who have come up from the ground and people who have come in from outside the party, and come in as MPs in the last elections; we have several who have come from the ground.
"Lim Biow Chuan and Sam Tan were branch secretaries, so we have people who have come from the ground and who are able to hold their own in Parliament and represent the people. "But we also need to make sure that we bring in talented people from outside.
We must be open to ideas and open to people. So long as they subscribe to our party ideals, our values and want to do well for Singapore and Singaporeans, we should be prepared to accept them." The PAP leaders stressed that the party's success formula is to ensure that it gets its politics right so that it can attract good people to enter politics. - CNA/so/ms
Copyright © 2008 MediaCorp Pte Ltd
APEC - Showcase for POA
With APEC Leaders Week fast approaching, the showcast event for asia pacific might turn out to be a showcase for Singapore's new Public Order Act.
As a refresher, amendments to Public Order Act was passed in April 2009 in what many saw as an update to the law with APEC in mind. The new guidelines state that cause-related activities will be regulated, regardless of the number of persons involved. This is a move away from the previous definition of an illegal assembly (5 or more people).
The SDP has on numerous occasions in the past gathered in groups of 4 or even one to demonstarte the uneven application of this law. Obviously, the new definitions can be seen as a means to curb their campaigning. Lets not forget the standoff between police and the SDP during the IMF/WB meetings in Sinagpore on September 2007.
Expect more arrrests and detentions in days to follow....
As a refresher, amendments to Public Order Act was passed in April 2009 in what many saw as an update to the law with APEC in mind. The new guidelines state that cause-related activities will be regulated, regardless of the number of persons involved. This is a move away from the previous definition of an illegal assembly (5 or more people).
The SDP has on numerous occasions in the past gathered in groups of 4 or even one to demonstarte the uneven application of this law. Obviously, the new definitions can be seen as a means to curb their campaigning. Lets not forget the standoff between police and the SDP during the IMF/WB meetings in Sinagpore on September 2007.
Expect more arrrests and detentions in days to follow....
SINGAPORE: With two weeks to go before heads of state gather for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit here, Singapore is wary about allowing the entry of well-organised civil groups and disruptive individuals bent on derailing the talks or championing their causes.
Two Falungong followers, a Malaysian and an Indonesian, were reportedly denied entry into Singapore at Changi Airport last week.According to the Epoch Times, the sect's publication, the pair tried to enter the country separately on Oct 19 and Oct 22. The report also said the pair had previously made frequent trips to Singapore. Falungong, a religious sect, was banned in China in 1999 after it was accused of fanning social unrest.
Though it is not outlawed in Singapore, several of its followers here have been arrested for holding illegal assemblies.
When MediaCorp cited the Falungong example and asked if Singapore was keeping out individuals who might pose law-and-order problems, a spokeswoman from the APEC Singapore 2009 organising committee said all requests to enter the country would be treated fairly. "All sovereign nations have the prerogative to decide who cross their borders. Singapore is no exception," she said. "This is especially so in the current security climate, where we have a duty to ensure the safety and security of the public."
Security analyst Dr John Harrison from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies was not surprised with the entry ban related to APEC. "The (Singapore) government will get a variety of information in from all sources - open and classified - from partners in the region and around the world," he
said. "It will try and mitigate threats and risks as early as possible."Apart from the task of keeping out people with backgrounds tied to terrorism, the authorities would have their eye on individuals who could use the event to carry out violent protests, Dr Harrison said.
Three years ago, when Singapore hosted the International Monetary Fund-World Bank meeting, the authorities objected to 28 foreigners - all of whom had a history of taking part in violent protests or disruptive activities at previous meetings - from being allowed into the country.
Then, civil society organisations were allowed to protest in a small corner 0f the meeting venue at Suntec Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre; large-scale protests were confined to the Indonesian island of Batam.Observers say that unlike the IMF event to which many civil society groups were
invited, APEC's broader platform is not likely to warrant the same level of involvement and, hence, numbers of activists
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Town Council Reviews: Where is the Green?!
I was actually quite pleased when it was first announce that a regular and systematic review of town council performances would be instituted. With the revelations of heavy Town Council loses due to what can only be described as irresponsible and excuberant risk taking, more accountability and transparencey indeed sounded sound.
Alas, the reality will not live up to the promises; at least for the near-term.
The half-yearly review will focus almost entirely on grading the cleanliness of one town council against another. Really, what is this fascination with clean and green? The 80s are long gone. And as one concerned resident noted, wouldnt this desire to out do each other just lead to higher conservancy charges, and ultimately more wastage?
And what is missing is the detailed breakdown of sinking fund usage. This will not be included in the grading system for now, as the ministry said that it wants to focus on bread-and-butter aspects for a start.
So while they try to preoccupy us with bread-and-butter, the use of our hard-earned jam and marmalade will continue to be mystery to us.
------------------------------------------------------------
Half-yearly grading of town councils starting soon
They will be graded on how well they maintain their estates' cleanliness and facilities. -myp Thu, Sep 24, 2009, my paper
By Rachel Chan
FROM next month, town councils will be inspected more systematically.
They will be graded on how well they maintain their estates' cleanliness and facilities, including lifts, and manage conservancy charges in arrears.
Using a checklist, Housing Board officers will inspect towns under the 16 town councils every six months, for defects like litter, leaky pipes and damaged playground equipment.
They will grade each council's performance in cleaning and maintenance based on the number of defects found. For example, a town council would get the best grade for maintenance if each of its blocks has fewer than two defects on average.
Currently, inspections are done on an ad-hoc basis.
The town councils have to submit their rates of lift breakdowns and lift automatic-rescue device failures, and conservancy charges in arrears to the HDB.
The results will be published by the town councils every six months from middle of next year.
The grading is expected to spur town councils to raise their standards.
Mr Inderjit Singh, who chairs the Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chu Kang Town Council, said: "Residents will get a chance to see how their town council is performing, with respect to the others."
He added that the grading will compel town councils to improve their performance, so as to at least match one another, if not do better.
Mr Ang Mong Seng, who chairs Hong Kah Town Council, said that he would instruct his staff to conduct more frequent maintenance checks on public amenities.
The Ministry for National Development announced last December that a system to assess town councils' performance would be set up, after it came to light in Parliament that eight People's
Action Party-run town councils invested $16 million in troubled structured products.
But their use of sinking funds will not be included in the grading system for now, as the ministry said that it wants to focus on bread-and-butter aspects for a start.
Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education Grace Fu said yesterday: "This is something that we're looking to incorporate, perhaps, at the later stage."
Ubi resident David Ng, 35, a quality-assurance engineer, expressed concern that higher efficiency would translate into higher conservancy charges.
He also hoped that the sixmonthly report could include a simple statement on the use of his town council's sinking funds.
He said: "Laymen like me just need to know whether there's a profit or a loss. It's our money they're investing after all."
rachchan@sph.com.sg
Copyright ©2007 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn. No. 198402868E. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement Conditions of Access Advertise
Alas, the reality will not live up to the promises; at least for the near-term.
The half-yearly review will focus almost entirely on grading the cleanliness of one town council against another. Really, what is this fascination with clean and green? The 80s are long gone. And as one concerned resident noted, wouldnt this desire to out do each other just lead to higher conservancy charges, and ultimately more wastage?
And what is missing is the detailed breakdown of sinking fund usage. This will not be included in the grading system for now, as the ministry said that it wants to focus on bread-and-butter aspects for a start.
So while they try to preoccupy us with bread-and-butter, the use of our hard-earned jam and marmalade will continue to be mystery to us.
------------------------------------------------------------
Half-yearly grading of town councils starting soon
They will be graded on how well they maintain their estates' cleanliness and facilities. -myp Thu, Sep 24, 2009, my paper
By Rachel Chan
FROM next month, town councils will be inspected more systematically.
They will be graded on how well they maintain their estates' cleanliness and facilities, including lifts, and manage conservancy charges in arrears.
Using a checklist, Housing Board officers will inspect towns under the 16 town councils every six months, for defects like litter, leaky pipes and damaged playground equipment.
They will grade each council's performance in cleaning and maintenance based on the number of defects found. For example, a town council would get the best grade for maintenance if each of its blocks has fewer than two defects on average.
Currently, inspections are done on an ad-hoc basis.
The town councils have to submit their rates of lift breakdowns and lift automatic-rescue device failures, and conservancy charges in arrears to the HDB.
The results will be published by the town councils every six months from middle of next year.
The grading is expected to spur town councils to raise their standards.
Mr Inderjit Singh, who chairs the Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chu Kang Town Council, said: "Residents will get a chance to see how their town council is performing, with respect to the others."
He added that the grading will compel town councils to improve their performance, so as to at least match one another, if not do better.
Mr Ang Mong Seng, who chairs Hong Kah Town Council, said that he would instruct his staff to conduct more frequent maintenance checks on public amenities.
The Ministry for National Development announced last December that a system to assess town councils' performance would be set up, after it came to light in Parliament that eight People's
Action Party-run town councils invested $16 million in troubled structured products.
But their use of sinking funds will not be included in the grading system for now, as the ministry said that it wants to focus on bread-and-butter aspects for a start.
Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education Grace Fu said yesterday: "This is something that we're looking to incorporate, perhaps, at the later stage."
Ubi resident David Ng, 35, a quality-assurance engineer, expressed concern that higher efficiency would translate into higher conservancy charges.
He also hoped that the sixmonthly report could include a simple statement on the use of his town council's sinking funds.
He said: "Laymen like me just need to know whether there's a profit or a loss. It's our money they're investing after all."
rachchan@sph.com.sg
Copyright ©2007 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn. No. 198402868E. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement Conditions of Access Advertise
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
SingaNews: Divine intervention or distraction?
I was reading a Kent Ridge Common feature article on the controversy surrounding the new news website SingaNews.com and could not help but feel disturbed at the direction the debate has taken.
The article’s title, “Why a pro-family program should rise above sexual issues”, immediately made my hair stand as it set the article up to miss the point entirely.
Firstly, it is not just a simple polemic battle between pro-homosexual and pro-heterosexual camps. To paint it as such is to ignore the real bone of contention; the very real possibility of a hidden agenda.
We have all been distracted with this mainstream family values debate, that everyone seems to have forgotten to ask this question: “What business is it of a news portal to have a pro-family/procreation agenda?”. And to use Kent Ridge Common’s words, “why is a news portal having a pro-family program anyway?”.
If the people behind SingaNews were really interested in promoting the “heterosexuality of a couple with a view to procreate”, shouldn’t they start an outreach program or a pro-family council that counsels and assists families in all areas that affect family planning? How would having a news portal help with this?
Well, since no one wants to say it, I will. They need SingaNews as a propaganda tool for a whole load of agendas, pro-family included. While I agree with Sam that there is nothing inherently wrong with having an agenda and that SingaNews will add to discourse variety, I get rather annoyed with double speak, orchestrated misdirection and hypocrisy.
It is plainly obvious that there is a Christian agenda that has been purposefully watered down and made more palatable with the “mainstream values” tagline. Lets not forget that SingaNews CEO Mathew Yap introduced the site in a soft launch in church on 9 Sep 2009. The event was organized by ATRIA (Apologetics Through Rich Internet Applications), a New Media Group (NMG) project that focuses on empowering Christian bloggers and New Media publishers in various forms of “e-vangelism”. He also shared the stage with Thio Li-ann, vocal critic agains the repeal of section 337A and daughter of Thio Su-Mien, self-styled Feminist Mentor that orchestrated the hostile takeover of Aware not too long ago. The site is also funded by Christian donors.
Yet with all the writing on the wall, Mathew Yap maintains that SingaNews has no Christian agenda. And in an effort to drill home this point, we have some netters trying to paint the debate as pro-family vs gays when it is more than that.
In itself, I fully support pro-family values, but that doesn’t mean I want a news portal to craft stories with a focus on promoting it. That said, there seems to be an orchestrated effort to make it seem that if you are pro-family, you are in turn pro-SingaNews; a direction the Kent Ridge Commons is trying to take.
The power of propaganda is the persistent drilling of a desired message through both subtle and not so stubtle message delivery. The Chrisitan evangelical community have power and influence within their own circles, but have realised they are losing the propaganda battle over both the MSM and new media channels. The formations of ATRIA and SingaNews are testiment to this and their renewed desired to expand their clout. It also seems that they are roping in bloggers to help distract the netter community as well.
While they have every right to push an agenda, their actions thus far have won them few friends, and i suspect will eventually prove to be their downfall. Which is too bad really, considering that an alternative news site with a who's who of ex-journalists would have dramtically expanded the local discourse.
~~ The road to hell is paved with good intentions ~~
The article’s title, “Why a pro-family program should rise above sexual issues”, immediately made my hair stand as it set the article up to miss the point entirely.
Firstly, it is not just a simple polemic battle between pro-homosexual and pro-heterosexual camps. To paint it as such is to ignore the real bone of contention; the very real possibility of a hidden agenda.
We have all been distracted with this mainstream family values debate, that everyone seems to have forgotten to ask this question: “What business is it of a news portal to have a pro-family/procreation agenda?”. And to use Kent Ridge Common’s words, “why is a news portal having a pro-family program anyway?”.
If the people behind SingaNews were really interested in promoting the “heterosexuality of a couple with a view to procreate”, shouldn’t they start an outreach program or a pro-family council that counsels and assists families in all areas that affect family planning? How would having a news portal help with this?
Well, since no one wants to say it, I will. They need SingaNews as a propaganda tool for a whole load of agendas, pro-family included. While I agree with Sam that there is nothing inherently wrong with having an agenda and that SingaNews will add to discourse variety, I get rather annoyed with double speak, orchestrated misdirection and hypocrisy.
It is plainly obvious that there is a Christian agenda that has been purposefully watered down and made more palatable with the “mainstream values” tagline. Lets not forget that SingaNews CEO Mathew Yap introduced the site in a soft launch in church on 9 Sep 2009. The event was organized by ATRIA (Apologetics Through Rich Internet Applications), a New Media Group (NMG) project that focuses on empowering Christian bloggers and New Media publishers in various forms of “e-vangelism”. He also shared the stage with Thio Li-ann, vocal critic agains the repeal of section 337A and daughter of Thio Su-Mien, self-styled Feminist Mentor that orchestrated the hostile takeover of Aware not too long ago. The site is also funded by Christian donors.
Yet with all the writing on the wall, Mathew Yap maintains that SingaNews has no Christian agenda. And in an effort to drill home this point, we have some netters trying to paint the debate as pro-family vs gays when it is more than that.
In itself, I fully support pro-family values, but that doesn’t mean I want a news portal to craft stories with a focus on promoting it. That said, there seems to be an orchestrated effort to make it seem that if you are pro-family, you are in turn pro-SingaNews; a direction the Kent Ridge Commons is trying to take.
The power of propaganda is the persistent drilling of a desired message through both subtle and not so stubtle message delivery. The Chrisitan evangelical community have power and influence within their own circles, but have realised they are losing the propaganda battle over both the MSM and new media channels. The formations of ATRIA and SingaNews are testiment to this and their renewed desired to expand their clout. It also seems that they are roping in bloggers to help distract the netter community as well.
While they have every right to push an agenda, their actions thus far have won them few friends, and i suspect will eventually prove to be their downfall. Which is too bad really, considering that an alternative news site with a who's who of ex-journalists would have dramtically expanded the local discourse.
~~ The road to hell is paved with good intentions ~~
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Be Warned but Don't Be Fooled
Some thoughts on Minister Lui's remarks during a dialogue at Singapore Press Club.
While the MSM in media will likely, and for the foreseeable future, maintained its position as the dominant source of information, it no longer holds the monopoly in truth and breadth of coverage.
Bloggers and alternative new media sources have never set out to replace the MSM role and neither has anyone set out to conduct themselves as the pure adversary seeking to undermine the integrity and public confidence in public institutions; although they are often viewed and portrayed as such.
Minister Lui’s comments are not earth shattering as we have always understood the Government’s unease with regards to alternative and unregulated media. But they are nonetheless disappointing and betray a continued unease in dealing with dissident voices.
The fact that they were uttered by the acting - and no doubt future - Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, demonstrate a heavy lack of enlightenment and does not bode well for the maturity of the new media sector in Singapore.
It probably is also timed to forewarn that during the impending general elections, a light touch approach and easily be calibrated into a crushing hammer response in the defense of national interests.
So be warned but don't be fooled.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Singapore's mainstream media holds ground as dominant source of info
By S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 09 September 2009
SINGAPORE: Singapore's mainstream media continues to hold its ground as the dominant source of information, despite developments in the new media scene.
That's the view of Lui Tuck Yew, Acting Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts. He was speaking during a dialogue with members of the Singapore Press Club on Wednesday.
Keeping up with developments in the new media scene is an on-going challenge, especially with websites emerging daily, said Rear-Admiral(NS) Lui.
He said: "I certainly don't have an army to go and ask who all these people are; they use pseudonyms and are largely anonymous, and may they remain that way.
"There were only three occasions when the police had to step in to take action because the racial remarks that were made were so inflammatory that the police had to come in."
Despite the speed with which websites mushroom, RADM(NS) Lui said surveys showed that Singapore's mainstream media remains the preferred choice. In fact, the Nielsen Media Index of 2008 showed that 75% of people polled selected newspapers as their preferred source of news.
RADM(NS) Lui said: "Unlike some foreign newspapers, the media here in Singapore has not gone for aggressive journalism; they have not gone for aggressive campaigning. They have taken the position that they will investigate thoroughly before they publish.
"If there are good grounds for them to take a certain position, which may be detrimental to the interests of an establishment or an institution, they are prepared to do so and they do so from a point of view of responsibility."
But RADM(NS) Lui added that the established media cannot escape the speed and immediacy of the new media.
While the MSM in media will likely, and for the foreseeable future, maintained its position as the dominant source of information, it no longer holds the monopoly in truth and breadth of coverage.
Bloggers and alternative new media sources have never set out to replace the MSM role and neither has anyone set out to conduct themselves as the pure adversary seeking to undermine the integrity and public confidence in public institutions; although they are often viewed and portrayed as such.
Minister Lui’s comments are not earth shattering as we have always understood the Government’s unease with regards to alternative and unregulated media. But they are nonetheless disappointing and betray a continued unease in dealing with dissident voices.
The fact that they were uttered by the acting - and no doubt future - Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, demonstrate a heavy lack of enlightenment and does not bode well for the maturity of the new media sector in Singapore.
It probably is also timed to forewarn that during the impending general elections, a light touch approach and easily be calibrated into a crushing hammer response in the defense of national interests.
So be warned but don't be fooled.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Singapore's mainstream media holds ground as dominant source of info
By S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 09 September 2009
SINGAPORE: Singapore's mainstream media continues to hold its ground as the dominant source of information, despite developments in the new media scene.
That's the view of Lui Tuck Yew, Acting Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts. He was speaking during a dialogue with members of the Singapore Press Club on Wednesday.
Keeping up with developments in the new media scene is an on-going challenge, especially with websites emerging daily, said Rear-Admiral(NS) Lui.
He said: "I certainly don't have an army to go and ask who all these people are; they use pseudonyms and are largely anonymous, and may they remain that way.
"There were only three occasions when the police had to step in to take action because the racial remarks that were made were so inflammatory that the police had to come in."
Despite the speed with which websites mushroom, RADM(NS) Lui said surveys showed that Singapore's mainstream media remains the preferred choice. In fact, the Nielsen Media Index of 2008 showed that 75% of people polled selected newspapers as their preferred source of news.
RADM(NS) Lui said: "Unlike some foreign newspapers, the media here in Singapore has not gone for aggressive journalism; they have not gone for aggressive campaigning. They have taken the position that they will investigate thoroughly before they publish.
"If there are good grounds for them to take a certain position, which may be detrimental to the interests of an establishment or an institution, they are prepared to do so and they do so from a point of view of responsibility."
But RADM(NS) Lui added that the established media cannot escape the speed and immediacy of the new media.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Temasek Staff to get No Bonus or Less Bonus?
The ST should be careful on how they report their facts. Lest they become even more unreliable and independent.
The title of the article states unquivocally that "No bonuses for Temasek staff". Now there is nothing unclear about "No bonuses" is there? Well when you read on you will discover that a Temasek employee's bonus is drawn from a pool that is paid out over a number of years. When the company does well, the pool gets bigger and the individual's share along with it.
Hence when Ho Ching announced "negative bonuses" it could either mean each employee will get no money from the pool, or the value of the overall pool shrinks. With the latter, negative bonuses means less bonuses and not no bonuses.
The reason why i think it is more likely to be the latter is because of Ho Chings own words: "It is a tough challenge to share negative bonuses". You can't share zero but you can share less.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 30, 2009
No bonuses for Temasek staff
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_410035.html
THE entire staff of Temasek Holdings are taking personal financial hits, with annual bonuses likely to be slashed in the wake of the investment firm's losses over the past year.
Part of every Temasek employee's bonus goes into a pool that is paid out over a number of years rather than at the end of each year.
When Temasek meets its internal performance benchmarks with higher-than-targeted returns, the pool of bonuses to be distributed grows and each employee gets a bigger slice.
But when it fails to do so, employees get 'negative bonuses': They get no money from the pool, or the value of the overall pool shrinks.
This compensation structure is based on a key principle of having staff 'share in the institution's performance, both for positive and negative results', said chief executive Ho Ching yesterday.
In her speech at the IPS Corporate Associates Lunch, she said: 'We share gains and pains alongside our shareholder. This is in essence having an owner's approach to our business and operations.'
Temasek came in below its targets last year as well as this year, which means staff get 'negative bonuses'.
'From CEO to office attendants, all our staff were allocated negative bonuses last year, and will be allocated more negative bonuses this year,' said Ms Ho.
If Temasek achieves above-target returns, known as Wealth Added and reported in the annual Temasek Review, it will have gains to share with its staff.
'It is a tough challenge to share negative bonuses...it is even tougher to deliver a positive Wealth Added every year,' she said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other related stories:
The title of the article states unquivocally that "No bonuses for Temasek staff". Now there is nothing unclear about "No bonuses" is there? Well when you read on you will discover that a Temasek employee's bonus is drawn from a pool that is paid out over a number of years. When the company does well, the pool gets bigger and the individual's share along with it.
Hence when Ho Ching announced "negative bonuses" it could either mean each employee will get no money from the pool, or the value of the overall pool shrinks. With the latter, negative bonuses means less bonuses and not no bonuses.
The reason why i think it is more likely to be the latter is because of Ho Chings own words: "It is a tough challenge to share negative bonuses". You can't share zero but you can share less.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 30, 2009
No bonuses for Temasek staff
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_410035.html
THE entire staff of Temasek Holdings are taking personal financial hits, with annual bonuses likely to be slashed in the wake of the investment firm's losses over the past year.
Part of every Temasek employee's bonus goes into a pool that is paid out over a number of years rather than at the end of each year.
When Temasek meets its internal performance benchmarks with higher-than-targeted returns, the pool of bonuses to be distributed grows and each employee gets a bigger slice.
But when it fails to do so, employees get 'negative bonuses': They get no money from the pool, or the value of the overall pool shrinks.
This compensation structure is based on a key principle of having staff 'share in the institution's performance, both for positive and negative results', said chief executive Ho Ching yesterday.
In her speech at the IPS Corporate Associates Lunch, she said: 'We share gains and pains alongside our shareholder. This is in essence having an owner's approach to our business and operations.'
Temasek came in below its targets last year as well as this year, which means staff get 'negative bonuses'.
'From CEO to office attendants, all our staff were allocated negative bonuses last year, and will be allocated more negative bonuses this year,' said Ms Ho.
If Temasek achieves above-target returns, known as Wealth Added and reported in the annual Temasek Review, it will have gains to share with its staff.
'It is a tough challenge to share negative bonuses...it is even tougher to deliver a positive Wealth Added every year,' she said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other related stories:
Monday, July 20, 2009
AG Report - MDA Conflicts of Interest & Financial Mismanagement
Media reprint
GOVT AGENCIES' RESPONSE TO AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT
MDA backed mentors' stakes in start-ups
By Nur Dianah Suhaimi
July 19, 2009
It was no secret.
The Media Development Authority (MDA) was fully aware several of the mentors it appointed to recommend interactive and digital media start-ups for funding held stakes in the companies they rooted for.
The mentors had declared their stakes before funding was approved. In fact, MDA not only approved the funding, but it also viewed the mentors' stakes in the companies favourably.
MDA revealed this when asked to comment on the Auditor-General's (AG) report released last week, which faulted the way MDA handled the Microfunding Scheme.
The scheme allows MDA to disburse $40 million to start-ups in the interactive digital media (IDM) sector over five years, as part of the Government's drive to boost the industry. Each approved start-up can get up to $50,000 each.
The AG report noted how four start-ups which got grants were founded and co-owned by their mentors. There was also a conflict of interest in the evaluation of applications for funding.
In 10 approved cases, one of the three experts appointed by MDA to evaluate the applications was either a shareholder of the company he evaluated or a business partner of the mentor.
Responding to the report, Mr Michael Yap, the agency's executive director for the IDM research and development programme office, said MDA's efforts over the last two to three years have focused on encouraging experimentation and supporting young start-ups and entrepreneurs in their innovations.
'Critical to their success is matching them with more experienced incubators, that is mentors, who can value-add, provide networks and advice on their growth,' he said.
'This being a young industry, the pool of incubators is small and it is common for incubators to have ownership in start-ups. This can help further the growth of the industry as it gives them a stake in the success of the IDM ventures.'
On the four start-ups in question, 'the incubators had fully declared their involvement with the start-ups during the application process', he said. 'Their applications were approved on their own merits and the participation of the incubators was viewed as positive.'
MDA said it will be strengthening its application procedures and will also require the evaluation panel members, who are volunteers, to declare their independence.
The Microfunding Scheme is expected to benefit some 750 to 1,000 projects over the next five years. So far, 200 start-ups have received funding from MDA. The mentors, or incubators as they are referred to, get $10,000 for each project for providing services such as mentoring, legal guidance and matchmaking with venture capitalists.
According to the scheme's website, there are nine mentors, including NUS Enterprise and Singapore Infocomm Technology Federation.
These mentoring companies are usually represented by their heads.
Lapses by MDA filled nine pages in the 40-page AG report. Other salient lapses included overcollecting $6.06 million in radio and TV licence fees from some 684,000 households since 2005. The money has yet to be refunded.
It did not collect $844,600 in licence fees from a broadcaster and almost $10 million of sales revenue from films it co-invested in.
MP Zaqy Mohamad, Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) chairman for Information, Communications and the Arts, declined to comment on the matter as he was part of the Public Accounts Committee.
The committee, comprising eight MPs, pores over financial statements of government agencies and the AG's annual report, and seeks written explanations from agencies concerned.
The GPC's vice-chairman, Mr Baey Yam Keng, said the approval process in the Microfunding Scheme should be fine-tuned such that mentors are not put in the position that they are able to recommend their own interests.
However, he does not think the funds which have been disbursed to the four start-ups should be returned.
'Ultimately, the whole purpose of the scheme is to look out for good start-ups. So if the companies are really deserving of funding, then it's fine,' he said.
On MDA's failure to collect $10 million in revenue from the films it invested in, Mr Baey said MDA has probably not fine-tuned this process as the programme started only some years back. He was less forgiving on the agency's overcollection of some $6 million in radio and TV licence fees.
He said: 'MDA has been collecting licence fees for many years. There is no reason why the system is not robust enough to prevent this from happening. By now, there should not be any problems with this simple task.
'MDA should really look into how it can close the gaps.'
GOVT AGENCIES' RESPONSE TO AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT
MDA backed mentors' stakes in start-ups
By Nur Dianah Suhaimi
July 19, 2009
It was no secret.
The Media Development Authority (MDA) was fully aware several of the mentors it appointed to recommend interactive and digital media start-ups for funding held stakes in the companies they rooted for.
The mentors had declared their stakes before funding was approved. In fact, MDA not only approved the funding, but it also viewed the mentors' stakes in the companies favourably.
MDA revealed this when asked to comment on the Auditor-General's (AG) report released last week, which faulted the way MDA handled the Microfunding Scheme.
The scheme allows MDA to disburse $40 million to start-ups in the interactive digital media (IDM) sector over five years, as part of the Government's drive to boost the industry. Each approved start-up can get up to $50,000 each.
The AG report noted how four start-ups which got grants were founded and co-owned by their mentors. There was also a conflict of interest in the evaluation of applications for funding.
In 10 approved cases, one of the three experts appointed by MDA to evaluate the applications was either a shareholder of the company he evaluated or a business partner of the mentor.
Responding to the report, Mr Michael Yap, the agency's executive director for the IDM research and development programme office, said MDA's efforts over the last two to three years have focused on encouraging experimentation and supporting young start-ups and entrepreneurs in their innovations.
'Critical to their success is matching them with more experienced incubators, that is mentors, who can value-add, provide networks and advice on their growth,' he said.
'This being a young industry, the pool of incubators is small and it is common for incubators to have ownership in start-ups. This can help further the growth of the industry as it gives them a stake in the success of the IDM ventures.'
On the four start-ups in question, 'the incubators had fully declared their involvement with the start-ups during the application process', he said. 'Their applications were approved on their own merits and the participation of the incubators was viewed as positive.'
MDA said it will be strengthening its application procedures and will also require the evaluation panel members, who are volunteers, to declare their independence.
The Microfunding Scheme is expected to benefit some 750 to 1,000 projects over the next five years. So far, 200 start-ups have received funding from MDA. The mentors, or incubators as they are referred to, get $10,000 for each project for providing services such as mentoring, legal guidance and matchmaking with venture capitalists.
According to the scheme's website, there are nine mentors, including NUS Enterprise and Singapore Infocomm Technology Federation.
These mentoring companies are usually represented by their heads.
Lapses by MDA filled nine pages in the 40-page AG report. Other salient lapses included overcollecting $6.06 million in radio and TV licence fees from some 684,000 households since 2005. The money has yet to be refunded.
It did not collect $844,600 in licence fees from a broadcaster and almost $10 million of sales revenue from films it co-invested in.
MP Zaqy Mohamad, Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) chairman for Information, Communications and the Arts, declined to comment on the matter as he was part of the Public Accounts Committee.
The committee, comprising eight MPs, pores over financial statements of government agencies and the AG's annual report, and seeks written explanations from agencies concerned.
The GPC's vice-chairman, Mr Baey Yam Keng, said the approval process in the Microfunding Scheme should be fine-tuned such that mentors are not put in the position that they are able to recommend their own interests.
However, he does not think the funds which have been disbursed to the four start-ups should be returned.
'Ultimately, the whole purpose of the scheme is to look out for good start-ups. So if the companies are really deserving of funding, then it's fine,' he said.
On MDA's failure to collect $10 million in revenue from the films it invested in, Mr Baey said MDA has probably not fine-tuned this process as the programme started only some years back. He was less forgiving on the agency's overcollection of some $6 million in radio and TV licence fees.
He said: 'MDA has been collecting licence fees for many years. There is no reason why the system is not robust enough to prevent this from happening. By now, there should not be any problems with this simple task.
'MDA should really look into how it can close the gaps.'
Friday, July 3, 2009
Are our Friendly Skies ... Safe?
UPDATE: ST Aerospace President Tay Kok Khiang has responded to my query on the legitmacy of the claims. Here is his response (emphasis are mine):
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In lieu of the tragic Air France and Yemeni air crashes, aircraft safety is very much in the foreground of our thoughts as we embark on holidays or send love ones of at the terminal.
When I spoke of my concerns to a relative that was flying off to London, she confidently replied that if iwas scared I should just pay more and fly SQ. I felt reassured then, but now I am not so sure.
In an age of globalisation, the only thing that spreads across national borders faster than information and goods, is greed and incompetence.
I saw the article attached below in the 3in1kopitiam Forum and needless to say i was dissappointed. In a nut shell, aircraft mechanics, yes the ones supposed to do the safety checks, were being 'imported' into the US by companies that are subsidiaries or direct entities of ST Aerospace, a company of ST Engineering. And in order to cut costs and maximize margins, their qualifications, such as their ability to read the english instruction manuals, are being overstated.
I am not well informed enough to known the level of direct involvement of ST Aerospace in this hiring policy, but I do think they have a responsibility to respond and clarify their position.
I will be sending this post to the ST Engg management, Our Labour Chief and to The Press
==========================================================
Aircraft repair jobs sold to foreign workers, resumes not important
02:12 PM CDT on Wednesday, July 1, 2009
By BYRON HARRIS / WFAA-TV
A News 8 investigation found that hundreds of aircraft mechanics have been brought into the United States to work at aircraft repair facilities.
Insiders say the companies that are importing the mechanics are so eager to save money, they’re overstating their qualifications. The result may be a threat to safety, abetted by lax enforcement of immigration law.
At daybreak any morning at San Antonio Aerospace, hundreds of workers amble through the gates for the day shift. They repair big jets like Airbuses, Boeing 757s and MD-11s. But, despite the fact that it's a huge facility in the middle of the San Antonio International Airport, a large number of the mechanics are only temporary workers from foreign countries.
News 8 found they’re from Mexico, the Philippines and Chile, among other places. They have been brought specifically to the United States to work for San Antonio Aerospace (SAA). News 8 followed a special bus San Antonio Aerospace, used to pick up foreign workers every morning. Workers riding on the bus were from the Philippines. The workers, who wouldn’t say how much money they make, are part of a stream of imported mechanics brought to this country at cut-rate wages, according to several sources familiar with the business.
Jada Williams used to work for one of the contracting companies, Aircraft Workers Worldwide (AWW), based in Daphne, Alabama. AWW supplied workers for two facilities, Mobile Aerospace Engineering (MAE) in Mobile, Alabama and San Antonio Aerospace, which are both controlled by ST Aerospace. San Antonio Aerospace is a division of ST Aerospace, the largest aircraft repair company in world.
"They’ve employed over 200 since I left,” said Williams, who said she was unfairly fired by the contractor last fall. "And I know we had over a hundred when I was in there, just in Mobile.”
She said in San Antonio, AWW supplied 600 workers. The workers stay in the United States and come from various countries because of the different kinds of visas available in those places.
San Antonio Aerospace uses several contracting companies to supply it with workers. It can be a high-profit business for the contractors. They can make $3 to $12 an hour for every worker hired by SAA, contractors say.
The drive for profits is so big, Williams and other insiders said, that the contractors often falsify the qualifications of the imports.
"We had two,” she said. “One of them was a female. She was about 16. It was a brother and a sister. One guy was a grocery bagger, one was a security guard in Puerto Rico. Their ages were between 18 and 22.”
Their ages are important because it takes years of experience or schooling to learn how to repair a big jet, experience they couldn’t have had.
"There had been padded resumes at SAA before,” said an administrator at another contractor. “That’s why another contract house was kicked out (of SAA).”
One former SAA mechanic, who spent years learning his trade before being laid off, said foreign workers got their training on the job from the Americans they worked with.
"The more experienced mechanics, we would get paired up with either one or two of these guys,” he says. “And they would watch us for a month or so. And that’s how they would get their training.”
Williams is suing her former boss, Daniel Harding, for unlawful termination and racial discrimination. She has a computer full of company documents that were acquired accidentally when AWW got new computers for its office and gave her an old one. Spreadsheets, resumes and payrolls revealed many company practices, from interviews, to trips to the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City for visas, charts marked the progress of Mexican workers to the United States. Documents also showed workers were charged $3,500 each by AWW to get into the United States.
Williams also has an e-mail trail from AWW president Harding to Moh Loong Loh, the President of San Antonio Aerospace. He described one candidate as having “ 25 percent English skills.” Workers need English to communicate with their supervisors and to read repair manuals, so this is a key safety issue. American SAA workers said many imports cannot speak English at all.
In another e-mail, Harding described a group of imported workers from Mexico, just like a commodity.
“I hope to be able to bring increments no larger than ten at a time,” he wrote to Loh.
While this was happening, SAA former wokers said they got laid off.
WFAA-TV The companies involved may face serious questions, said a former judge.
“I feel like we are being betrayed in our own country,” said one who was terminated. “And I feel it is not right.”
“These big layoffs of 20 to 30 people would go out,” said the contract administrator. “The very next Monday, 30 or 40 [imports] would be coming in.”
Williams said in Mobile the numbers were even bigger. She said she picked up a group of 60 people from Puerto Rico at Mobile Regional Airport last February. Since Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory, its residents are U.S citizens. For the contractors, this is a bonus because they can pay the Puerto Ricans low wages without having to deal with foreign immigration requirements.
When the FAA came to inspect San Antonio Aerospace, the company got a one-hour warning, said a former employee.
“And a lot of guys who were not able to read English, they would hide those guys or send them home for the evening," the former employee said.
News 8 submitted written questions to both SAA in San Antonio and MAE in Mobile. The questions asked how many foreign workers they employ and what they are paid. The response from each said “we are an equal opportunity employer.” Another question was whether AWW is owned by ST Aerospace. The terse answer was no, “AWW is an independent contractor.”
AWW did not respond to questions. An attorney retained by the company and Daniel Hardin said “Mr. Hardin is a responsible businessman who has greatly benefitted his community and his country.”
In Dallas, former judge David Finn, now in private practice, told News 8 that all the companies involved may face serious questions.
“Federal prosecutors would probably look at making false statements, material false statements," he said. "That’s a federal offense, a felony ... Mail fraud, wire fraud, there are any number of statues on the books that would apply to a situation like that.”
Thank you for your interest and feedback.
You are assured that the allegations being made by the wfaa are untrue. We have the highest regard for safety of our products and would notcompromise that. Our customers are also fully aware of our exacting qualitystandards and are with us.
Have a good day.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In lieu of the tragic Air France and Yemeni air crashes, aircraft safety is very much in the foreground of our thoughts as we embark on holidays or send love ones of at the terminal.
When I spoke of my concerns to a relative that was flying off to London, she confidently replied that if iwas scared I should just pay more and fly SQ. I felt reassured then, but now I am not so sure.
In an age of globalisation, the only thing that spreads across national borders faster than information and goods, is greed and incompetence.
I saw the article attached below in the 3in1kopitiam Forum and needless to say i was dissappointed. In a nut shell, aircraft mechanics, yes the ones supposed to do the safety checks, were being 'imported' into the US by companies that are subsidiaries or direct entities of ST Aerospace, a company of ST Engineering. And in order to cut costs and maximize margins, their qualifications, such as their ability to read the english instruction manuals, are being overstated.
I am not well informed enough to known the level of direct involvement of ST Aerospace in this hiring policy, but I do think they have a responsibility to respond and clarify their position.
I will be sending this post to the ST Engg management, Our Labour Chief and to The Press
==========================================================
Aircraft repair jobs sold to foreign workers, resumes not important
02:12 PM CDT on Wednesday, July 1, 2009
By BYRON HARRIS / WFAA-TV
A News 8 investigation found that hundreds of aircraft mechanics have been brought into the United States to work at aircraft repair facilities.
Insiders say the companies that are importing the mechanics are so eager to save money, they’re overstating their qualifications. The result may be a threat to safety, abetted by lax enforcement of immigration law.
At daybreak any morning at San Antonio Aerospace, hundreds of workers amble through the gates for the day shift. They repair big jets like Airbuses, Boeing 757s and MD-11s. But, despite the fact that it's a huge facility in the middle of the San Antonio International Airport, a large number of the mechanics are only temporary workers from foreign countries.
News 8 found they’re from Mexico, the Philippines and Chile, among other places. They have been brought specifically to the United States to work for San Antonio Aerospace (SAA). News 8 followed a special bus San Antonio Aerospace, used to pick up foreign workers every morning. Workers riding on the bus were from the Philippines. The workers, who wouldn’t say how much money they make, are part of a stream of imported mechanics brought to this country at cut-rate wages, according to several sources familiar with the business.
Jada Williams used to work for one of the contracting companies, Aircraft Workers Worldwide (AWW), based in Daphne, Alabama. AWW supplied workers for two facilities, Mobile Aerospace Engineering (MAE) in Mobile, Alabama and San Antonio Aerospace, which are both controlled by ST Aerospace. San Antonio Aerospace is a division of ST Aerospace, the largest aircraft repair company in world.
"They’ve employed over 200 since I left,” said Williams, who said she was unfairly fired by the contractor last fall. "And I know we had over a hundred when I was in there, just in Mobile.”
She said in San Antonio, AWW supplied 600 workers. The workers stay in the United States and come from various countries because of the different kinds of visas available in those places.
San Antonio Aerospace uses several contracting companies to supply it with workers. It can be a high-profit business for the contractors. They can make $3 to $12 an hour for every worker hired by SAA, contractors say.
The drive for profits is so big, Williams and other insiders said, that the contractors often falsify the qualifications of the imports.
"We had two,” she said. “One of them was a female. She was about 16. It was a brother and a sister. One guy was a grocery bagger, one was a security guard in Puerto Rico. Their ages were between 18 and 22.”
Their ages are important because it takes years of experience or schooling to learn how to repair a big jet, experience they couldn’t have had.
"There had been padded resumes at SAA before,” said an administrator at another contractor. “That’s why another contract house was kicked out (of SAA).”
One former SAA mechanic, who spent years learning his trade before being laid off, said foreign workers got their training on the job from the Americans they worked with.
"The more experienced mechanics, we would get paired up with either one or two of these guys,” he says. “And they would watch us for a month or so. And that’s how they would get their training.”
Williams is suing her former boss, Daniel Harding, for unlawful termination and racial discrimination. She has a computer full of company documents that were acquired accidentally when AWW got new computers for its office and gave her an old one. Spreadsheets, resumes and payrolls revealed many company practices, from interviews, to trips to the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City for visas, charts marked the progress of Mexican workers to the United States. Documents also showed workers were charged $3,500 each by AWW to get into the United States.
Williams also has an e-mail trail from AWW president Harding to Moh Loong Loh, the President of San Antonio Aerospace. He described one candidate as having “ 25 percent English skills.” Workers need English to communicate with their supervisors and to read repair manuals, so this is a key safety issue. American SAA workers said many imports cannot speak English at all.
In another e-mail, Harding described a group of imported workers from Mexico, just like a commodity.
“I hope to be able to bring increments no larger than ten at a time,” he wrote to Loh.
While this was happening, SAA former wokers said they got laid off.
WFAA-TV The companies involved may face serious questions, said a former judge.
“I feel like we are being betrayed in our own country,” said one who was terminated. “And I feel it is not right.”
“These big layoffs of 20 to 30 people would go out,” said the contract administrator. “The very next Monday, 30 or 40 [imports] would be coming in.”
Williams said in Mobile the numbers were even bigger. She said she picked up a group of 60 people from Puerto Rico at Mobile Regional Airport last February. Since Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory, its residents are U.S citizens. For the contractors, this is a bonus because they can pay the Puerto Ricans low wages without having to deal with foreign immigration requirements.
When the FAA came to inspect San Antonio Aerospace, the company got a one-hour warning, said a former employee.
“And a lot of guys who were not able to read English, they would hide those guys or send them home for the evening," the former employee said.
News 8 submitted written questions to both SAA in San Antonio and MAE in Mobile. The questions asked how many foreign workers they employ and what they are paid. The response from each said “we are an equal opportunity employer.” Another question was whether AWW is owned by ST Aerospace. The terse answer was no, “AWW is an independent contractor.”
AWW did not respond to questions. An attorney retained by the company and Daniel Hardin said “Mr. Hardin is a responsible businessman who has greatly benefitted his community and his country.”
In Dallas, former judge David Finn, now in private practice, told News 8 that all the companies involved may face serious questions.
“Federal prosecutors would probably look at making false statements, material false statements," he said. "That’s a federal offense, a felony ... Mail fraud, wire fraud, there are any number of statues on the books that would apply to a situation like that.”
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Losing touch and sense of proportion
While Temasek is losing its investment touch, Alvin Foo of the ST is losing his sense of proportion and reality (as you will see from his article attached below). With great conviction it is declared that Temasek out performed nearly very index and person worth noting (Buffet no less), but it comes with a caveat: "assuming the value of its portfolio remained unchanged since November last year".
What value is there in making a comparison for a 10 yr period that ends in March 2009 when the data is only updated to November 2008??
It is also quite convenient that the period of comparison ended at march 2009; a period that many analysts consider to be the bottom of this economic downcycle. Temasek's recent investment disasters were offload either prior to or during this period. This meant that they did not benefit from the vicious rebound since the march lows to date. Would Temasek still beat the street if the months of april to june were included? It probably would if you continue to only consider their holdings as of Nov 2008.
The first 3 months of 2009 were torrid times for ALL investors, including Buffet that earnestly came out and declared he had make big investment mistakes in late 2008 and apologised to his sharehlders.Did Mdm Ho make such public apologies for her countless blunders? No. She had no regrets and picked up an award for it.
We must also understand that Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway is unlike Temsasek which has constant captial injection (tax payers money). This naturally puts Temasek at an advantage as we all know the market moving power of big money. And without fear of losing this captial injection, Temasek can basically throw caution to the wind and place their bets at the roulette table knowing full well that their chips will be replenished every month at a rate of 33% of gross salary.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_392459.html
SINGAPORE investment agency Temasek Holdings may have taken a hit recently on some of its high-profile banking investments, but over the longer term it has outperformed key global benchmarks.
Figures obtained by The Straits Times show that over a 10-year period to March this year, Temasek outgunned several closely-watched equity indexes.
It also beat other notable long-term investors such as Berkshire Hathaway, a top US investment company headed by billionaire Warren Buffett.
Temasek's performance has come under scrutiny in recent months after it suffered significant losses earlier this year on investments in Western banks Barclays and Bank of America (BoA).
The state investment house delivered an annualised total shareholder return by market value of 5.4 per cent from March 1999 to March this year, assuming the value of its portfolio remained unchanged since November last year. That is the date of the last available update of the value of its investments.
This compares with a return of 4.5 per cent in the same period for the MSCI Asia Pacific excluding Japan index, 3.1 per cent for the MSCI Singapore index, and -3 per cent for the MSCI World index, according to figures obtained by The Straits Times.
MSCI indexes are key indicators commonly used by institutional investors to see how well they are doing relative to the market.
Temasek's main investments are in stocks, with the bulk of its assets in Singapore and Asia, so these indexes are regarded as a useful gauge of its performance.
Temasek's returns were also better than that of long-term investors like Swedish investment firm Investor AB, which delivered 3.7 per cent, and Berkshire Hathaway, which yielded 0.7 per cent.
Last month, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam told Parliament that Temasek has performed 'respectably' compared to relevant market indexes and reputable institutional investors.
What value is there in making a comparison for a 10 yr period that ends in March 2009 when the data is only updated to November 2008??
It is also quite convenient that the period of comparison ended at march 2009; a period that many analysts consider to be the bottom of this economic downcycle. Temasek's recent investment disasters were offload either prior to or during this period. This meant that they did not benefit from the vicious rebound since the march lows to date. Would Temasek still beat the street if the months of april to june were included? It probably would if you continue to only consider their holdings as of Nov 2008.
The first 3 months of 2009 were torrid times for ALL investors, including Buffet that earnestly came out and declared he had make big investment mistakes in late 2008 and apologised to his sharehlders.Did Mdm Ho make such public apologies for her countless blunders? No. She had no regrets and picked up an award for it.
We must also understand that Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway is unlike Temsasek which has constant captial injection (tax payers money). This naturally puts Temasek at an advantage as we all know the market moving power of big money. And without fear of losing this captial injection, Temasek can basically throw caution to the wind and place their bets at the roulette table knowing full well that their chips will be replenished every month at a rate of 33% of gross salary.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_392459.html
SINGAPORE investment agency Temasek Holdings may have taken a hit recently on some of its high-profile banking investments, but over the longer term it has outperformed key global benchmarks.
Figures obtained by The Straits Times show that over a 10-year period to March this year, Temasek outgunned several closely-watched equity indexes.
It also beat other notable long-term investors such as Berkshire Hathaway, a top US investment company headed by billionaire Warren Buffett.
Temasek's performance has come under scrutiny in recent months after it suffered significant losses earlier this year on investments in Western banks Barclays and Bank of America (BoA).
The state investment house delivered an annualised total shareholder return by market value of 5.4 per cent from March 1999 to March this year, assuming the value of its portfolio remained unchanged since November last year. That is the date of the last available update of the value of its investments.
This compares with a return of 4.5 per cent in the same period for the MSCI Asia Pacific excluding Japan index, 3.1 per cent for the MSCI Singapore index, and -3 per cent for the MSCI World index, according to figures obtained by The Straits Times.
MSCI indexes are key indicators commonly used by institutional investors to see how well they are doing relative to the market.
Temasek's main investments are in stocks, with the bulk of its assets in Singapore and Asia, so these indexes are regarded as a useful gauge of its performance.
Temasek's returns were also better than that of long-term investors like Swedish investment firm Investor AB, which delivered 3.7 per cent, and Berkshire Hathaway, which yielded 0.7 per cent.
Last month, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam told Parliament that Temasek has performed 'respectably' compared to relevant market indexes and reputable institutional investors.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Temasek Losing Its Touch?
Today marks the 20th anniversary of the Tianamen massacre. Today also brought a news update of yet another massacre; a financial massacre.
It was announced that Temasek Holdings sold its stake in British banking giant Barclays in December and January, at an estimated loss of between 500 million pounds (S$1.2 billion) and 600 million pounds.
Guess we can’t be too shocked by this news as the MSM was preparing us for it by softening the sentiment with ‘good’ news the day before:
Once again thanks to ‘astute’ investment timing, Temasek chose to offload its stake just as the stock hit its lowest levels since 1985. It is rumoured that this round of panic selling was over fears that Barclays could be nationalised. That didn’t happen in the end but they would argue that at that time, it was a very real threat. With that said, shouldn’t then GIC be worried about its investment in CitiGroup? Or will the excuse be that the investment thesis changed as it did for its investment in Merril?
There are ways to divest can still make a profit. Just look at the Abu Dhabi government which unlike Temasek, made a killing in its Barclays investment. It invested into Barclays last October sold out for a US$2.5 billion profit only last month.
Jeremy Warner of The Independent questions if Temasek is losing its touch. He adds “Temasek's loss on a similar investment in Bank of America was an even more jaw-dropping $3bn. If they haven't been already, someone, somewhere, is going to get fired.”
If there were a silver lining to be found, perhaps the decision makers at Temasek would be more cautious before they run head in and dump millions into another company laden with financial woes and uncertainty. Ooopss ... spoke too soon. Now they are looking at AIG.
It was announced that Temasek Holdings sold its stake in British banking giant Barclays in December and January, at an estimated loss of between 500 million pounds (S$1.2 billion) and 600 million pounds.
Guess we can’t be too shocked by this news as the MSM was preparing us for it by softening the sentiment with ‘good’ news the day before:
Once again thanks to ‘astute’ investment timing, Temasek chose to offload its stake just as the stock hit its lowest levels since 1985. It is rumoured that this round of panic selling was over fears that Barclays could be nationalised. That didn’t happen in the end but they would argue that at that time, it was a very real threat. With that said, shouldn’t then GIC be worried about its investment in CitiGroup? Or will the excuse be that the investment thesis changed as it did for its investment in Merril?
There are ways to divest can still make a profit. Just look at the Abu Dhabi government which unlike Temasek, made a killing in its Barclays investment. It invested into Barclays last October sold out for a US$2.5 billion profit only last month.
Jeremy Warner of The Independent questions if Temasek is losing its touch. He adds “Temasek's loss on a similar investment in Bank of America was an even more jaw-dropping $3bn. If they haven't been already, someone, somewhere, is going to get fired.”
If there were a silver lining to be found, perhaps the decision makers at Temasek would be more cautious before they run head in and dump millions into another company laden with financial woes and uncertainty. Ooopss ... spoke too soon. Now they are looking at AIG.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
My Thoughts on NMP Siew Kum Hong's Police Report
NMP Siew Kum Hong has come under attack recently for his role a 'legal advisor' for the Aware Old Guard at the last EOGM. More recently, a slew of accusations have perpetuated in online forums, insinuating that he had received foreign funding from a Swedish politician (who allegedly funds the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), and is somehow the SDP's representative or "mole" in Parliament.
Siew has unequivocally denied these allegations and has filed a police report and requested the removal of said posts.
First, I would like to clearly state that i have a tremendous amount of respect for Mr Siew. This respect was formulated from his performance in parliament and his genuine interest in serving society and providing a voice for the disempowered.
Second, I do not, nor have ever, condoned nor encouraged irresponsible and inflammatory comments under the cloak of anonymity on the Net.
Having established these two points, I am slightly perturbed by the potential ripple effects that his legal actions may have. I hate the "slippery slope" argument but unfortunatley, things always have a way of escalating.
Although Alex at yawningbread.org fully supports Siew's actions, he did note that "those who put themselves in the public eye should be more tolerant of public discussion of their activities and motives than truly private citizens." This is just something I hope Mr Siew and other public figures will keep in mind.
Obviously both are lies and as Alex has noted, the burden of proof (in libel law) lies on the person making the allegation.
While we are on the subject of libel, there are some cases to bear in mind:
1) The Lee's defamation suit against the publisher and editor of FEER
http://www.aseanaffairs.com/page/singapore_pm_ups_stakes_in_libel_case
2)The use of defamtion against CSJ
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA36/010/2001/en/dom-ASA360102001en.html
3) Libel suit against Gopalan Nair http://cpj.org/2008/06/singapore-detains-us-blogger-over-libel-commentary.php
Obviously these cases are different from Siew's curretn predicament, but they serve as reminders that what is deemed fair comment is often skewed by those with the power and money to sue.
When the little guy has to watch every single word he uses in fear of being accused of at best innuendo, and at worst libel, the only form in which free speech can take place is ironically in the shape of anonymity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also read: http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=3072
Siew has unequivocally denied these allegations and has filed a police report and requested the removal of said posts.
First, I would like to clearly state that i have a tremendous amount of respect for Mr Siew. This respect was formulated from his performance in parliament and his genuine interest in serving society and providing a voice for the disempowered.
Second, I do not, nor have ever, condoned nor encouraged irresponsible and inflammatory comments under the cloak of anonymity on the Net.
Having established these two points, I am slightly perturbed by the potential ripple effects that his legal actions may have. I hate the "slippery slope" argument but unfortunatley, things always have a way of escalating.
Although Alex at yawningbread.org fully supports Siew's actions, he did note that "those who put themselves in the public eye should be more tolerant of public discussion of their activities and motives than truly private citizens." This is just something I hope Mr Siew and other public figures will keep in mind.
I have to date refrained from taking any legal action in response to the lies and falsehoods that have been levelled at me. But this latest attack goes beyond anything that a reasonable person could possibly perceive as being a valid or legitimate exercise of the right to free speech, and I certainly will not tolerate the latest rounds of character assassination from cowards hiding behind the perceived anonymity of he Internet. -- Siew Kum HongAlthough I am sympathetic to Mr Siew - no one should be subject to the concerted attacks on his person - I do have doubts over a move to track down anonymous netters when and no action was taken against the real life agents of the former Aware New Guard when they operate in the light of day and accuse him of abusing his position as NMP to further a Gay-agenda.
Obviously both are lies and as Alex has noted, the burden of proof (in libel law) lies on the person making the allegation.
While we are on the subject of libel, there are some cases to bear in mind:
1) The Lee's defamation suit against the publisher and editor of FEER
http://www.aseanaffairs.com/page/singapore_pm_ups_stakes_in_libel_case
2)The use of defamtion against CSJ
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA36/010/2001/en/dom-ASA360102001en.html
3) Libel suit against Gopalan Nair http://cpj.org/2008/06/singapore-detains-us-blogger-over-libel-commentary.php
Obviously these cases are different from Siew's curretn predicament, but they serve as reminders that what is deemed fair comment is often skewed by those with the power and money to sue.
When the little guy has to watch every single word he uses in fear of being accused of at best innuendo, and at worst libel, the only form in which free speech can take place is ironically in the shape of anonymity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also read: http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=3072
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Temasek and Bank of America - Are we missing something?
Published first at http://singaporeenquirer.sg/?p=3762In December 2007 – the nascent and uncertain times prior to the eventual global credit meltdown – Temasek Holdings placed a strategic US$4.4 billion bet on troubled US investment bank Merrill Lynch. As markets continued to unravel from the subprime crisis and credit squeeze Temasek nearly doubled down with an increased stake of US$ 3.4 billion in July 2008.
In justification of this tremendous capital injection in uncertain times, and perhaps to calm nervy Singaporeans, Temasek declared “great confidence” in then Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain.
MP Lim Hwee Hua – Singapore's minister of state for finance – announced in parliament that “Because our reserves are invested with a long-term horizon, this long-term orientation will keep us from selling in panic in a market downturn” and that “The downturns also offer opportunities for our agencies to invest in good quality assets at prices that are attractive from a long-term perspective.”
History is cruel and unforgiving as less than a month later, Lehman Brothers went bust; setting off a chain of events threatening to take down giant insurers, banks, motor companies, … etc down with it.
Having already suffered heavy loses on initial investments, optimism sprung eternal when Bank of America bought over Merril Lynch to prevent it from going bankrupt.
The conversion of Merril into Bank of America shares promise some long term recovery given that Bank of America is a much bigger franchise.
Had Temasek sold its stake after the Bank of America takeover in Sep 2008, it could have gained US$1.5 billion, according to an estimate by Ilian Mihov, an economics professor at graduate business school INSEAD in Singapore. The stock price of Bank of America ranged from US$26 – US$37 per share in Sep 2008.
Perhaps Temasek believed in its mantra of having a long term investment horizon and sought to retain the Bank of America stock to earn more than what to them was a measly potential 20% return on investment.
That resolve, or foolishness, was short lived and today it was confirmed that Temasek had sold its entire stake by 31 Mar 09. Choosing instead to increase investments in emerging markets and reduce exposure to developed economies.
Market timing is clearly not a strong suit of Madam Ho Ching. Since the end of March, when Temasek completed the sale (at an average price of US$6.73), Bank of America stock has risen 66 percent (presently it is US$11.31).
US$11.31 is not much compared to the US$37 it could have made in Sep, but its obviously much better than US$6.73.
I’m not an economist but I am well aware of the shortcomings of attempting to time markets. It is often described as a fool’s quest and I therefore can appreciate the long term investing philosophy. So why the sudden abandonment of this philosophy? We will probably never know the real reason.
Meanwhile, we continue to reward incompetence over and over, AND over again.
Am I missing something?
In justification of this tremendous capital injection in uncertain times, and perhaps to calm nervy Singaporeans, Temasek declared “great confidence” in then Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain.
MP Lim Hwee Hua – Singapore's minister of state for finance – announced in parliament that “Because our reserves are invested with a long-term horizon, this long-term orientation will keep us from selling in panic in a market downturn” and that “The downturns also offer opportunities for our agencies to invest in good quality assets at prices that are attractive from a long-term perspective.”
History is cruel and unforgiving as less than a month later, Lehman Brothers went bust; setting off a chain of events threatening to take down giant insurers, banks, motor companies, … etc down with it.
Having already suffered heavy loses on initial investments, optimism sprung eternal when Bank of America bought over Merril Lynch to prevent it from going bankrupt.
The conversion of Merril into Bank of America shares promise some long term recovery given that Bank of America is a much bigger franchise.
Had Temasek sold its stake after the Bank of America takeover in Sep 2008, it could have gained US$1.5 billion, according to an estimate by Ilian Mihov, an economics professor at graduate business school INSEAD in Singapore. The stock price of Bank of America ranged from US$26 – US$37 per share in Sep 2008.
Perhaps Temasek believed in its mantra of having a long term investment horizon and sought to retain the Bank of America stock to earn more than what to them was a measly potential 20% return on investment.
That resolve, or foolishness, was short lived and today it was confirmed that Temasek had sold its entire stake by 31 Mar 09. Choosing instead to increase investments in emerging markets and reduce exposure to developed economies.
Market timing is clearly not a strong suit of Madam Ho Ching. Since the end of March, when Temasek completed the sale (at an average price of US$6.73), Bank of America stock has risen 66 percent (presently it is US$11.31).
US$11.31 is not much compared to the US$37 it could have made in Sep, but its obviously much better than US$6.73.
I’m not an economist but I am well aware of the shortcomings of attempting to time markets. It is often described as a fool’s quest and I therefore can appreciate the long term investing philosophy. So why the sudden abandonment of this philosophy? We will probably never know the real reason.
Meanwhile, we continue to reward incompetence over and over, AND over again.
Am I missing something?
--------------------------------
Also read: http://wayangparty.com/?p=9407
Update: Temasek explains BoA sale - http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_380131.html
Friday, May 8, 2009
I will not begrudge the series of self-back-patting that will commence from here on. We as Singaporeans demanded that MSk be recaptured and the authorities have delivered in this.
MSK's recapture will now provide the real accounts of his escape and this will be put side by side with the COI report to be check for disprepencies. If there are more loopholes in the system, now is the time to identify them and rectify them.
MSK's recapture will now provide the real accounts of his escape and this will be put side by side with the COI report to be check for disprepencies. If there are more loopholes in the system, now is the time to identify them and rectify them.
Mas Selamat’s rearrest a good lesson — Zuraidah Ibrahim
Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com
MAY 8 — To the paranoid, Singapore’s Internal Security Department, or the ISD, is omnipresent. To many others, it is an organisation to be feared, respected and admired for its ability to keep Singapore safe from any untoward incident that threatens the peace here. But mostly, it is to be feared.
It knew the country's business and, if it needed to, it knew your business. So, it was with great incredulity that the public received the news on Feb 27 last year that the organisation had let one of its biggest catches escape.
That sultry afternoon, the wily Mas Selamat Kastari went into a Whitley Road Detention Centre toilet and out into the wilderness — using nothing more than his wits and the indolence of officials on his watch as his escape kit. That, plus a baju for a change of clothing.
When details of the escape emerged in dribs and confusing drabs over the immediately following days, Singaporeans were dismayed that it was complacency that had created the lax conditions that enabled Mas Selamat to bolt. For a while too, Singaporeans wondered and debated whether complacency had indeed set in to taint their national psyche.
Then, there were the conspiracy theories that abounded about how he must have been re-arrested and then beaten to death in detention. By then too, the baju had become a burqa. Hands up those of you who did not receive an e-mail with a photoshopped picture of Mas Selamat wearing a tudung.
Amidst all this, a wan-looking Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng had to tackle questions in a parliamentary debate that was less wrathful than the mood of the public, but no less intense.
He was under severe pressure and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong stepped in to say that he had full confidence in Wong and the ISD chief. There was no need for Wong to resign, as was being demanded by some quarters, said PM Lee.
Since then, even as Wong and others have consistently said that they had not given up hope that Mas Selamat would be found, many other people were sceptical.
When The Straits Times' senior regional correspondent Leslie Lopez called to tell me about his scoop which we reported on today's front page, my first reaction too was of sheer doubt. Mas Selamat caught in Johor Baru? Within sneezing distance of Singapore? Not in some remote corner of Indonesia or the Philippines?
It didn't help when he said that Mas Selamat was caught on April 1. Too late for that April Fool's joke, I told him.
But his thorough checks across the region proved solid and we decided to go with the story.
So, it would appear that Mas Selamat was good, but not that good. This is the third time he has been caught while on the run. Security analysts say that fugitives eventually slip up and try to resume contact with the people they know. The challenge for security operatives is to know whom the fugitive knows and be unrelenting in connecting the dots to find a trail.
Sources said that it was the Singapore ISD that gave the Malaysians the lead on Mas Selamat's trail. If so, the department, which has come under the heaviest fire, has redeemed itself.
The recapture will clear the stain that his escape had left. Indeed the ISD had up to then been doing credible work in the arrest of suspected militants. After the first and second wave of arrests of Jemaah Islamiah (JI) members in Singapore in 2001 and 2002, the department had beavered away at finding out about others who escaped the two dragnets.
In the past five to six years, a check of published reports found that it had managed to reel in more than a dozen who had been on the run overseas. This is work that should have enhanced its reputation, but has been largely forgotten in the aftermath of the Mas Selamat episode.
Security analysts have often remarked at the high degree of cooperation among regional intelligence agencies that do their work diligently and are unswayed by the political temperature of bilateral and regional cooperation.
That the Singapore and Malaysian security agencies work closely is well-known. Mas Selamat's capture is yet another affirming signal of how such cooperation can pay dividends and how such ties must continue to be ring-fenced from the politics of the times.
The Home Affairs Minister and the ISD have reason to be satisfied and relieved. With the arrest, they have brought some closure to an embarrassing episode.
But this is not to say that there are no more questions to be asked. Once further details of his capture are released, a lot more will be asked about how it all happened.
How did he manage to get out of Singapore? Just how porous are Singapore's borders? Can there be steps taken to make them impenetrable without encumbering freedom of passage for law-abiding citizens? Did Mas Selamat have accomplices who were aiding and abetting him here? What other steps are being taken to close whatever loopholes his arrest have exposed? What punishment awaits him?
Meanwhile, if nothing else, Singaporeans may have learnt from Mas Selamat's escape the costs of complacency. His recapture should teach us the value of patience and persistence. — Straits Times
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
CDC Bonuses: Take it Back
First published in Singapore Enquirer.
It has been a year since Bear Stearns, one of the largest global investment banks and trading firms went under in dramatic fashion, sending global financial markets and economies into a seemingly never-ending tailspin. The massive capitulation expected from another spectacular failure of a globally interconnected institution forced the U.S. Government to step in and rescue AIG, the world’s biggest insurer, with a US$85 billion bailout in September last year.
Six months on from the dramatic bailout of AIG, details of bailout money use are made known but are far from being transparent. We now know that US$53 billion went to paying off its debts to foreign banks. Controversially, AIG felt compelled to pay US$165 million in bonuses to its staff in the financial products division – the very division that sunk the conglomerate, and the rest of the world with it, to its knees.
In the grand scheme of things, US$165 million is peanuts compared to the billions that have been poured into economic stimuli, rescue plans and t-loans. But the principle of the matter cannot be overstated. When individuals take unprecedented risks and are later rewarded for their failures through bailouts form the average citizens who do not have the luxury of such safety nets and exorbitant payouts, we are effectively rewarding incompetence and greed. The Merril Lynch bonus fiasco is another case in point.
I have written previously that when taxpayers’ monies are involved, we as taxpayers rightfully are entitled to some amount of accountability and transparency. I harp on this topic again as controversies across the Pacific Ocean are rearing their ugly heads in Singapore.
We have now learnt that two Northwest CDC staff were allegedly given 7 months of bonus and 1 month of AWS for their 2008 performance. We were also informed that only staff at the lower-end of the salary range who will receive a higher performance bonus range. If this were true, then perhaps the majority of us would be able to accept a structure that compensates for lower wage with more varying bonus structures. But alas, the Government and government-linked individuals are once again using their text-book “everything is aboveboard”, “this is not an NKF” reasoning, only to be found wanting later.
Eugene Yeo of the Wayangparty Blog has exposed the fact that the recipients of these bonuses were in fact senior managers; thus altering the structure from sensible to downright excessive.
CDCs are quasi-governmental bodies with the primary role of initiating, planning and managing community programmes to promote community bonding and social cohesion. No doubt some of their work is commendable; but they are ultimately responsible for managing the use of public taxpayer money to finance their activities such as community events and the dispersement of financial aid to the needy. Therefore, their key performance indexes should correlate with their bonuses and be the tied to the efficacy and accessibility of their social safety nets that they provide (i.e. public assistance, comcare…etc). Excessive reward for senior management that concoct elaborate schemes which are increasingly difficult to qualify for let alone survive on is ludicrous and has to be put to a stop.
President Obama is looking into legal options to rescind the bonus payouts of AIG. I hope our own President Nathan or PM Lee would do the same. Can we really do that? I say, in the spirit of Obama, yes we can!
The AIG staff had pre-existing contracts (prior to bailout) that mandated the payment of bonus. But so too did the U.S. auto workers that had to renegotiate their terms all in order to ensure they have an industry to return to after collecting their bonuses and pay checks. Similarly, CDC staff were paid for performances in 2008. But given the severity of the recession we find ourselves in, wouldn’t a larger reduction in the bonus pool and a lower cap for senior management be more prudent? Could the savings in 2008 bonus payout be then channeled into community programmes for the truly needy and these self-sacrificing servers of the community be judged and rewarded on how they alleviate the financial strains of the pre-existing poor and newly created poor? Otherwise taxpayers are made to fund these projects and salaries during booming times and even more so during trying times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
