MDA censorship brigade seize video at SDP’s private screening

(Singapore Rebel) Censorship in Singapore sank to a new low today (Sat, 17 May) as officers from the Board of Film Censors turn up at Peninsula-Excelsior Hotel’s Tulip Room to demand that organisers of a film screening hand over the video for classification (half-way during the screening itself).

The invitation for the screening of “One Nation Under Lee” had been circulated via email with the explicit note that it was to be a private function. Still, the BFC delivered a letter to the Singapore Democratic Party’s office last night, warning the organisers that Section 14 of Films Act requires all films (and they do mean ALL videos, including videos stored on your mobile phone) to be submitted to the Board for classification.

Read more of the Singapore Rebel article here.

Read the SDP article here.

Netizens call for WP’s Yaw to resign or be sacked.

Netizens have felt so betrayed by WP Organizing Secretary Yaw Shin Leong’s recent fiasco over the publicizing of his GE2006 vote that some have called for further action to be taken, even resignation or sacking.

Pro-Singapore (Deenlee) said that Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim are in a fix now as “to admonish Yaw will also lead to further controversies … it is up to Yaw to decide how he should take responsibility for his indiscretion.” (Sammyboy link)

Scroobal2 was more direct, saying, “At the minimum, he must be sacked. He cannot be allowed to resign as this is serious.” (Sammyboy link)

However I disagreed in the same forum thread. My opinion is that calls for resignation/sacking should be strictly reserved for PAP ministers and MPs, with DPM Wong Kan Seng being the foremost example. Furthermore, I still felt that WP could do damage control and repair Yaw’s political career provided this incident was merely a major slip-up and not reflective of a deeper character flaw in Yaw.

Scroobal2 was of a different view. “The convenant with the people has been broken. He has rationalised the decision to such an extent that there is no going back. No man is bigger than the party or any party. Its best that the party acts decisively. A clear signal has to be sent to the public, its members, its supporters in order that the trust is regained.” (Sammyboy link)

In a New Paper article published on Friday 16 May entitled “Opposition candidate stirs Net debate when he says he voted PAP. MP says: I knew because he told me“, it was revealed that Yaw Shin Leong had told PAP candidate Dr Teo Ho Pin a couple of weeks before the nine-day election campaigning started that he and his mom intended to vote for him.

Before the story broke, Yaw had also written in the Comment section of his blog posting, “Admittedly I deliberated on the point, ‘for the better serving interests of Singapore’ that I should perhaps just vote for the SDP candidate. However, in view of Mr Ling’s past performance & antics, I just could not bring myself to vote for him.”

Mr Yaw told The New Paper, “It doesn’t mean that you’re at the forefront of the opposition means you have to vote for the opposition.”

The New Paper article mentioned that Yaw “does not see any contradiction in being an opposition member and voting for the ruling party“, and he had no regrets publicizing his vote.

WP candidate publicized on his blog that he voted for PAP, draws flak on the Internet. My personal take.

According to a Straits Times article in the Online edition (15 May 08), it began with just an innocuous message on Yaw Shin Leong’s personal blog that PAP candidate Teo Ho Pin was a good MP and that Yaw had voted for him in GE 2006. (The Straits Times will release a fuller article in the Print edition on 16 May 08.)

Yaw Shin Leong is the Organizing Secretary and a CEC member of the WP. He stood in Ang Mo Kio GRC against PM Lee’s team in GE 2006, along with other WP stalwarts like Lee Wai Leng and Melvin Tan.

Yaw Shin Leong, a Bukit Panjang resident, had revealed in his blog that he voted for the PAP’s Teo Ho Pin who was contesting the single-member ward against SDP chairman and former MP Ling How Doong.

The disclosure on Yaw’s blog was just a one-liner: “Teo Ho Pin (MP) - Good MP. I voted for him in GE06“. And it was hyperlinked to Dr Teo’s blog.

However, that message appeared in the Sammyboy Coffeeshop Forum recently, and Yaw was prompted to post a further explanation on his blog. He said that he did not believe in opposition for opposition’s sake, and in his own words, “… there is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community (Bukit Panjang SMC).”

Clearly Yaw was implying that he felt PAP candidate Teo Ho Pin would make a better MP than SDP’s Ling How Doong, thus justifying his vote for the PAP.

Yaw also said, “The interesting question perhaps would be, if a WP candidate is to offer himself/herself for election in the constituency I reside, will I vote for this WP candidate? Partisan considerations will certainly weigh heavily in my considerations. Having said that, ultimately this WP candidate has to convince me that he/she has what it take to better serve the interests of our country and the constituents to win my vote.”

Yaw’s blog posting sparked a outrage amongst Sammyboy forum participants who expressed their disappointment, ire, even anger.

Personally, I think that Yaw should not have publicly announced that he voted for the PAP, especially since he is not only a leading figure in an opposition party, but also a candidate himself. If Yaw told his supporters to pluck up the courage to vote for the WP, wouldn’t his supporters feel let down or even betrayed to some extent that he has voted for the PAP instead (even granting that Teo Ho Pin was standing against a candidate from another party, namely the SDP)?

In the run up to GE 2006, Yaw Shin Leong himself said that the reason they contested Ang Mo Kio GRC was to allow people the chance to vote against PAP and balance out the playing field. Isn’t that opposition for the sake of opposition itself — in a positive way? Why then does Mr Yaw contradict himself now in his most recent blog posting, by saying that we should not have opposition for the mere sake of opposition?

How opposition members themselves vote must depend on the prevailing state of affairs at the national level. Are we already a stable multi-party democracy where rights are respected? Or are we still struggling to achieve political plurality against a party that has almost 100% domination of Parliament? Unfortunately in Singapore the latter is the case.

Since we are clearly very far from achieving political plurality, opposition must vote with one clear voice. Mr Yaw has deviated from that ideal. If we feel certain Opposition parties are inadequate or have flaws, let us approach them and give them constructive feedback, rather than just posting on our blogs that we voted against them. Wouldn’t that be much fairer?

A vote for the PAP is not just an endorsement of its candidate, but more importantly, is an endorsement of its policies. In Mr Yaw’s zeal to endorse MP Ho Teo Pin, perhaps he forgot about this.

Woes faced by households hiring maids

Yet again, letters have been pouring in to the mainstream media on the woes faced by households that hire maids.

In the Straits Times Forum page (Print edition), 15 May 08, there were 3 letters written on the difficulties faced by employers who hire maids, in particular, difficulties caused by government legislation and rules.

1. Ms Jennifer Chan wrote that she worries about being saddled by huge medical bills incurred by her maid. She related that her newest maid was with her for less than three weeks when she had to undergo an emergency operation to remove an ovarian cyst. Ms Chan had to foot her entire medical bill as the ministry’s ruling makes employers solely responsible for all medical and hospitalisation costs incurred by their maids (where such is not covered by the maid insurance). She had to pay more than $6,000 in medical bills.

My Take: This ruling is hardly fair at all. How can an employer be made financially responsible for the medical treatment that the maid requires in the case where it is obvious the employer was not responsible for causing the medical condition (through neglect, ill-treatment, etc)? Furthermore in Ms Chan’s case, the maid’s medical condition was already pre-existing.

Ms Chan correctly pointed out that it is the norm for employees to pay out of their own pockets for medical expenses that are not covered by their company’s insurance. Why then the blatant disparity for maids?

My opinion is that maids should enjoy subsidized medical care from the Government in the event they fall ill during their tenure in Singapore. The burden should not be passed solely to the employer. Maids are here to provide us a service. They should not become instruments of burden to their employers.

Ms Chan also related in another incident involving a different maid. She had to repatriate that maid who was caught stealing. Ms Chan had to pay for her airfare home as that was the law. She was honest enough not to save on the repatriation cost by transferring the maid to another employer and foisting the problem onto someone else. But for her honesty, she suffered financially.

2. Mr Samuel Tang wrote that he was unable to hire a maid who could speak Mandarin, despite 8 appeals and an MP’s help. He needed a maid to take care of his ailing father who could only converse in Mandarin. He managed to find a maid who could speak the language, but was not allowed to hire her, as she she failed to pass the entry test in English repeatedly. Mr Tang appealed to have her entry test waived, but to no effect.

Mr Tang asked very correctly, “Shouldn’t the criterion for allowing an appeal be based on meeting my father’s needs, instead of passing a test?”

After 8 appeals and help from an MP, he was still unable to hire the maid he wanted. So, in the end, he had to hire a maid based on ministry policy, rather than his family’s needs.

3. Ms Tai Yin Yee faced a similar problem to Mr Tang. She wrote that she was keen to hire her former Indonesian maid because of her previous good care given to her late, bedridden grandmother for 10 years in Malaysia. However this maid does not understand English, so Ms Tai was unable to hire her. Ms Tai said she must now pick a maid based on the biodata sheet provided by the maid agency and a phone interview.

As can be clearly seen, poorly formulated and overly-rigid government rules have caused unnecessary inconvenience to employers who clearly know far better than the Government which maid can best take care of their needs. In particular, the English language test should be waived on request of the prospective employer.

Another Government policy that discriminates against employers is the policy that employers are to forfeit their $5,000 security deposit in the event that the maid commits a crime or offence, or gets herself pregnant — actions on the part of the maid which are clearly beyond the control of the employer (except for the case where the employer himself got the maid pregnant).

That is the reason why many employers are reluctant to give their maids a day off. It is not because they want their maids to work overtime and want to deny them adequate rest, but because the law penalizes the employer for actions on the part of the maid that are manifestly beyond his control.

In my opinion, employers should be fine and punished (even jailed) when they have ill-treated their maids, cheated them, or caused them to fall into vice through their own actions. But certainly employers should not be punished for things beyond their control. While we berate many Singapore employers for ill-treating their maids by refusing them their day off, we need to understand that one possible underlying cause is lop-sided and ridiculous Government rules, which urgently need to be amended.

Blog Highlight - Simply Gab: More Govt Lapses

By Simply Gab.

This latest revelation of public fund mismanagement is strangely reminiscent of the MSK debacle.

This Public Accounts Committee (PAC) reminds me of the Committee of Inquiry (COI) set up by the MHA to investigate into MSK’s escape. The PAC comprises a group of Members of Parliament that acts like the “Audit Committee” of the Government.

“Acts” is the operative word as it really has no real authority or expertise to conduct audit checks. In fact, they merely consider the Auditor-General’s Report, and examine the Government Financial Statements and other accounts which are presented to the Parliament.

Read the full blog posting here: More Govt Lapses.

Internet freedom: Rights come with responsibilities. My response to a ST letter.

The Straits Times Online has published a letter in the online forum page written by Mr Mok Wing Tat.

Mr Mok’s letter concerns the proposals for Internet freedom submitted by a group of 13 bloggers (one of whom is me) to the Ministry of Information. Communications and the Arts. Mr Mok raised the issue of freedom versus responsibility on the Internet, and voiced his concerns about Internet discussions degenerating into insults and harassment, suggesting that where virtual speech has consequences in the real world, it should be subject to legal regulation.

Mr Mok’s letter is reproduced as follows, and my response to his letter is appended after it.

Mr Mok’s letter:

Internet freedom: Rights come with responsibilities

12 May 2008

I REFER to the proposals for Internet freedom sent by a group of 13 bloggers to the Ministry of Information. Communications and the Arts (’Govt looking at lighter touch on the Net’, Thursday).

It is all very well to argue for rights and freedoms, as the group of 13 do, but the opposite side of the coin must also be emphasised. This is that rights come with responsibilities. We should also consider a Charter of Net Responsibilities for those who seek to promote political debate in cyberspace.

Read the rest of this entry »

No change in CPF interest and HDB mortgage rates

12 May 2008

CPF board will keep the interest rate for CPF Ordinary Accounts at 2.5 per cent for the third quarter of 2008.

According to a joint statement by CPF and HDB on Monday, the computed CPF interest rate derived from the major local banks’ interest rates for the three-month period - Feb 1 to Apr 30, is 0.74 per cent per annum.

CPF will pay the minimum rate of 2.50 per cent from July 1 to Sept 30, as specified by the CPF Act.

An extra one per cent interest will be also paid on the first $60,000 of a member’s combined balances, with up to $20,000 from the Ordinary Account (OA). The extra interest from the OA will go into the member’s Special or Retirement Account for retirement savings.

The Housing Development Board’s concessionary interest rate for its mortgage loan - pegged at 0.1 percentage point above the CPF interest rate for the Ordinary Account - will remain unchanged.

The interest rate for CPF’s Special, Medisave & Retirement Accounts (SMRA) for the period July to September will announced later in June. The SMRA interest rate, currently at 4 per cent, is calculated based on the 12-month average yield of the 10-year Singapore Government Security plus one per cent.

Delay to start of hearing on assessment of damages for SDP’s defamation case

Adapted from Straits Times Online article
May 12, 2008

A HIGH COURT hearing that would have seen the Prime Minister go on the stand did not start on Monday as scheduled, but has been adjourned by two weeks, to May 26, after Mr M. Ravi, the lawyer representing the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), sought more time to prepare their counter to an application by the Lees to strike out the affidavits of Dr Chee, his sister and Francis Seow.

The three-day hearing this week was to assess the damages SDP chief Chee Soon Juan, his sister Chee Siok Chin and the party would have to pay as a result of a defamation suit filed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, alleging defamation in articles published in the SDP newsletter two years ago.

Much of the day’s proceedings took place in chambers, away from the public eye.

The Chees wanted these to be heard in open court, but Justice Belinda Ang turned down this request.

The Chees also wanted a Malaysian lawyer who is a member of the human rights committee of the Malaysian Bar Council, a Mr Saha Deva, to be allowed to sit in the chambers hearing as a trial observer. This was also rejected.

They also wanted Justice Ang to disqualify herself from hearing the case on the grounds that she had awarded the Lees a summary judgment in 2006 after the Chees had walked out of court, but again Justice Ang turned down this request.

The defendants however succeeded in their fourth application: for court to be adjourned so that they could have more time to prepare their counter to an application by the Lees to strike out the affidavits of Dr Chee, his sister, and former solicitor-general and opposition politician Francis Seow.

The Lees’ lawyers, led by Mr Davinder Singh of Drew and Napier, have argued that these affidavits are scandalous, irrelevant and an abuse of process. They filed a court notice of their intent to have them struck out on April 7.

If struck out, the Chee siblings will not take the stand and be cross-examined by the Lees’ lawyers.

Mr Ravi told reporters he needed time for a rebuttal as he was only given the Lees’ ‘800-page’ bundle of documents last Friday evening.

Justice Ang allowed the delay, and will hear the Lees’ application - again in chambers - on May 22.

The open court hearing is now scheduled for May 26.

AFP: Free detainees or face demos, M’sian activists say

Adapted from AFP article
11 May 2008

MALAYSIA’S ethnic Indian activists on Sunday warned the government to provide medical aid to one of its leaders and free those detained under tough internal security laws or face more street rallies.

More than 50 protestors from Indian rights group Hindraf blocked the entrance to a shopping mall at the iconic Petronas twin towers in downtown Kuala Lumpur to demand medical attention for P. Uthayakumar, who is diabetic.

Mr Uthayakumar and four other members of the rights group Hindraf have been detained under the tough Internal Security Act (ISA) since December after holding an anti-discrimination rally.

Opposition lawmaker Sivarasa Rasiah, who turned up to support the event, said the government should release ISA detainees unless they had proof to charge them in open court.

‘As far as I am concerned, one day under ISA detention is too long, one ISA detainee is too many,’ he added.

Close to 300 policemen were deployed outside the busy shopping mall to control the protestors, with water cannon vans and riot police waiting nearby.

Burmese junta distributes foreign aid - with generals’ names on it

Adapted from Associated Press article
10 May 2008

The Burmese military regime distributed international aid Saturday but plastered the boxes with names of top generals in an apparent effort to turn the relief effort for last week’s devastating cyclone into a propaganda exercise.

The United Nations sent in three more planes and several trucks loaded with aid even though the junta took over its first two shipments. The government agreed to let a US cargo plane bring in supplies on Monday, but foreign disaster experts were still being barred entry.

State-run television continuously ran images of top generals - including the junta leader, Senior Gen. Than Shwe - handing out boxes of aid to survivors at elaborate ceremonies.

One box bore the name of Lt Gen Myint Swe, a rising star in the government hierarchy, in bold letters that overshadowed a smaller label reading: ‘Aid from the Kingdom of Thailand.’

‘We have already seen regional commanders putting their names on the side of aid shipments from Asia, saying this was gift from them and then distributing it in their region,’ said Mr Mark Farmaner, director of Burma Campaign UK, which campaigns for human rights and democracy in the country.

‘It is not going to areas where it is most in need,’ he said in London.

The first UN aid convoy for victims of last weekend’s devastating cyclone to arrive by land reached Burma without incident on Saturday from Thailand, the UN refugee agency announced.

‘We hope it opens up a possible corridor to allow more international aid to reach the cyclone victims,’ said Mr Raymond Hall, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees representative in Thailand.

The convoy, which crossed the border unhindered, included two trucks carrying 20 tonnes of material, such as tents and tarps, the agency said in a statement.

UNHCR officials at the border were to supervise the loading of the material onto Burmese trucks, then accompany the convoy to Yangon, it said.

State media say 23,335 people died and 37,019 are missing from Cyclone Nargis, which submerged entire villages in the Irrawaddy delta. International aid organisations say the death toll could climb to more than 100,000 as conditions worsen.

But the junta has refused to grant access to foreign experts, saying it will only accept donations from foreign charities and governments, and then will deliver the aid on its own.

Chia Ti Lik: Converging Parallels - Burma & Singapore

Written by Chia Ti Lik
9 May 2008

The killer cyclone has made its mark. The People of Burma are suffering again.

The preparatory actions of the Junta (or lack thereof) and the disaster reaction / recovery ability (or the lack thereof) further make their mark.

As aid agencies and disaster rescue teams attempt to do what they do best - disaster recovery and rescue, we stand in silent support and prayer for the good work being done. However, there is a role left empty in this situation. The biggest hurdle to international aid reaching the affected Burmese fast is the Junta and its idiotic administrative policies. In the light of the suffering and grave urgency for disaster relief and rescue, let not the magnitude of the disaster cloud or hide the damage and danger an incompetent Government can add to a situation of dire need.

News reports have conflicting claims of whether or not the Burmese people had been adequately warned of the cyclone’s impending onslaught. We need not read too much into the reliability of the conflicting reports. One needs only to pay attention to the latest facts uncovered - 100,000 dead. So much for preparation.

We read from the Straits Times (and AFP) report that the Junta had been holding up aid from reaching the Burmese people. Singapore’s aid package went directly to a Burmese Colonel who incidentally was not very well positioned in the Social Welfare Ministry (according to their own designation).

While other international Aid agencies attempt to go directly to the people in need, Singapore’s efforts concentrates on being diplomatically correct and tactful, which the Junta naturally found it difficult to reject without giving them media publicity (they had a photograph to show the handover). It makes me wonder if Singapore’s aid package taking this route would reach the most affected Burmese first.

I laud the French military officer’s push for direct flights into Burma via helicopters from their ships in the area. “4 Hours is all we need to reach the zones, I am sure the same applies to our British friends.” This is the kind of gutsy and bullshit-less approach we need to have when it comes to disaster rescue. Such independent thinking, good positioning, and the ability to avoid being clouded by diplomatic bullshit involving an illegitimate Burmese government, originates from a developed country which is a known democracy.

I wonder, will the officers in our Singapore administration be able to display the same kind of ability given the rigid conformist attitude exhibited by our political leaders?

Take a trip down memory lane, and recall that the pilot flying the RSAF Bell UH-1H Huey helicopter in the cable car disaster rescue in 1983 was a foreign pilot. Recall also that the mission to rescue the trapped passengers was ordered only after a very long deliberation — as much as 9 hours. The local officer in charge of the rescue mission who gave the go ahead only after so many hours has since risen to a high leadership position in Singapore.

Now return to the present: If there is an indicator of the ability of the administration recently - we all just need to look at Mas Selamat Kastari or should i say Mas’ disappearance.

During the Burmese military crackdown on the demonstrations some months ago, many have argued against supporting the Junta, cavorting with them, investing in Burma, giving the Junta recognition or legitimizing them, or selling arms to the Junta. Singapore for one has not only refrained from giving real pressure to the Junta to relinquish power, but reiterated their policy of maintaining trade ties with them. I for once made it clear that whoever did any of the above had the blood of Burmese monks on their hands.

In the wake of the killer cyclone, and the Junta’s complete incompetence, whoever continues to support the Burmese Military Junta financially, militarily or technologically, has the splattered blood and suffering of the Burmese people on their hands.

AFP: Myanmar junta has seized all aid material

Adapted from AFP article
9 May 2008

A UN official says Burma’s junta has seized all the food and equipment that the World Food Programme (WFP) had flown into the country for cyclone victims.

Earlier on Friday, WFP spokesman Paul Risley said that all ‘the food aid and equipment that we managed to get in had been confiscated’.

Mr Risley said it is not clear why the material was seized. It was also not clear if the shipment seized was the one that was flown in Thursday or another one.

The UN’s WFP then said it was suspending aid flights into cyclone-hit Burma because of ‘unacceptable’ restrictions imposed by the country’s military rulers.

‘Yes, WFP is suspending the flights,’ its Burma country director Chris Kaye said. ‘The restrictions on us are unacceptable.’

‘Two flights landed this morning with food, which has not been taken out yet,’ he said, without specifying why the supplies had not been unloaded.

‘We have made a request to the Social Welfare Ministry,’ Mr Kaye said. ‘We have to find a way to resolve the problem as soon as possible.’

Burma has said it was not ready to let in foreign aid workers, rejecting international pressure to allow experts into the isolated nation where disease and starvation are stalking cyclone survivors.

One week after the devastating storm killed tens of thousands, Burma’s ruling generals - deeply suspicious of the outside world - said the country needed outside aid for those still alive, but would deliver it themselves.

The Burmese foreign ministry said some relief workers who arrived on an aid flight from Qatar on Wednesday had been deported.

The military regime that rules this impoverished country has long been wary of any influences that could threaten the iron grip on power it has maintained for almost half a century.

Even with the country battered by tragedy, the generals insist they will hold a constitutional referendum on Saturday 10 May 08, brushing off criticism they are ignoring the plight of the homeless while devoting resources to the vote.

Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy said the junta should delay the vote on a document her party says will merely enshrine military rule.

The United Nations estimates more than one million people have been left homeless by the disaster and, as each hour passes without clean water and food, they are at ever greater risk of starvation and disease.

‘The situation is getting critical and there is only a small window of opportunity if we are to avert the spread of diseases that could multiply the already tragic number of casualties,’ said Noeleen Heyzer, the top UN official for the Asia-Pacific.

Rotting bodies of people and animals are piled up in many places across the remote southern Irrawaddy delta, where the storm’s high winds and waves washed entire villages away.

In many places, the stench of death is overwhelming. Houses have been demolished, roads and bridges are damaged and huge swathes of land are still underwater a week after the disaster hit.

The United States has said the death toll could be around 100,000, but the regime on Thursday increased its official death toll by 17. It gave figures of 22,997 dead, 1,430 injured and 42,119 missing.

Compounding the disaster, the worst-hit area was the major rice-growing region, wiping out the main local food source until the government is able to deliver supplies.

Ministry for Information, Communication & the Arts reply to bloggers’ Proposals for Internet freedom in Singapore

The Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts has responded to the bloggers’ paper entitled “Proposals for Internet freedom in Singapore”. (The full text of the proposal can be read here.)

The e-mail reply from the Ministry is addressed to Alex Au, and is reproduced as follows (my own comments to the reply can be found after the letter):

Dear Mr Au

My Minister would like to thank you and your blogger friends for the effort in putting up the proposals for Internet deregulation which you had emailed to him on 20 April 2008.

MICA is well aware of the fact that Internet and new media technology have evolved by leaps and bounds since we introduced our light-touch approach in 1996. Back then, MICA had recognised the potential growth and impact of the Internet, and the tremendous opportunities and benefits that it will bring to all of us. We were also wary of its negative aspects. Hence, our response to the Internet was to take a balanced light-touch approach. Our intent with this light-touch approach was to foster the growth of the Internet and to enable us to exploit its vast potential while safeguarding our society from its undesirable aspects. That 79% of our households subscribe to broadband and many Singaporeans especially the younger citizens own a blog or participate in some form of new media clearly show that the light-touch approach had not been without merit.

To keep up with the fast-evolving new media landscape, we have been reviewing our light-touch approach and are considering how we could take a lighter touch approach. We have appointed the Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS) in April last year to study the new media and how best to refine our regulatory framework.

We will consider the views expressed in your proposal and other feedback in our review.

Yours sincerely

K.BHAVANI (Ms)
Press Secretary
to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts

MY COMMENTS ON THE MINISTRY’S REPLY:

At first glance, the reply seems a little superficial. It is just concentrates on MDA believing in a light touch approach, and possibly seeking an even lighter touch going forward.

However it is still unclear precisely what they mean by lighter touch.

Still, it is a positive that at least, they bothered to write a coherent reply, and not just ignore the issue totally or reply with a computer-generated two-line dismissive comment. It showed that they actually read what was written.

The thrust of their reply as well as MDA’s earlier position on the internet suggests to me that they think the rapidly changing nature of information technology is the key thing that forces them into greater and greater degrees of liberalization.

While I certainly welcome that mindset, it also disturbs me to some extent that they do not view political and civil rights, or the need for free political discourse, as another key thing that would also force their hand into greater liberalization.

In other words, they are still guided primarily but hardware, and not by heartware.

I can understand why, as a govt proxy, they feel compelled to be thus. But that is something we should try to change also.

Blog highlight - Mr Wang Says So: Aljunied Town Council And A Matter of Principle

Straits Times Article dated May 5, 2008: “Aljunied trash index aims to wipe out litterbugs”

TIRED of hardcore litterbugs, Aljunied GRC plans to start measuring the cleanliness of its precincts under a new litter index to be introduced in October.

Officials also said they will consider raising the conservancy charges for the dirtiest precincts to cover the extra work that goes into maintaining them.

Would it be right, as a matter of principle, for Aljunied Town Council to raise conservancy charges in the manner proposed above? Let’s discuss.

The most obvious objection is that all the residents in the dirty precincts would have to pay higher conservancy charges, even though the large majority of them may be civic-minded residents who do not litter.

It is one thing to catch a litterbug and impose a fine on him. It is quite another thing to impose a fine (or a higher conservancy charge) on a resident, just because he happens to live in an area with more litterbugs around.

Read the full blog entry here

Singapore Courts to decide fate of SDP in Lee Kuan Yew lawsuit

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) will know its fate next next Monday, 12 May 2008, when it goes to court to face Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. This hearing is to assess the amount of damages the party will have to pay to the Lees.

Background

The Lees sued the SDP in 2006 for defamation after the party published in its newsletter comparing the running of Singapore to a scandal involving a charity. Because they refused to apologise to the plaintiffs, two party leaders, Ms Chee Siok Chin and Dr Chee Soon Juan, are also being sued.

In the present case, the matter was awarded to the plaintiffs in a summary judgment, which meant that there was not even a trial. The defendants were not allowed to call witnesses or to cross-examine the Lees.

Consequences

The hearing on 12 May will be to assess the amount of damages the defendants will have to pay to the Lees. The amount awarded is likely to be more than USD500,000.

The consequence is that the SDP will be made bankrupt as the party will not be able to pay off the damages demanded. This will allow MM Lee and PM Lee the option (but not the obligation) to de-register the SDP.

Read the following related articles by SDP:

Judge Ang confirms that hearing will be in open court

Guess who’s presiding over LKY’s lawsuit hearing?

Chee to cross-examine the Lees at hearing on 12 May

GIC won’t move to Temasek level disclosure: PM Lee

Singapore’s prime minister said on Tuesday that its sovereign wealth fund GIC will not move to the same level of financial disclosure as its sister fund Temasek.

“GIC and Temasek are different,” said Lee Hsien Loong in an interview with Reuters.

“We do not want to tell people exactly how much we have, so people can take a run on the Singapore dollar.”

He also said inflation — currently running at a 26-year high — was mostly imported and he did not expect it to dent Singapore’s competitiveness.

Read a fuller report here.

MY COMMENTS/QUESTIONS:

(1) Does Temasek have a full disclosure policy in the first place? Is Temasek’s disclosure policy even adequate, so that GIC can make a comparison with it?

(2) I disagree with PM Lee that most of the inflation is imported. A substantial part of the inflation is caused by the decline in productivity especially in the services sector (see my posting in Sammyboy Coffeeshop forum for example), as well as government policies like the GST hike, and a multitude of fee increases in transport and education. A booming domestic economy as a result of very low interest rates has also allowed businesses to more quickly transfer the rapid increase in food, oil and other raw materials prices to consumers rather than being forced to absorb the increased prices themselves. Another significant contributing factor to domestic inflation is soaring rentals as a result of tighter conditions in the commercial property markets.

Labour Day round up: Who did what, who said what

The Labour Day celebrations this year kicked off with SDP posting a Youtube Video of its Chairman Ghandi Ambalam delivering the SDP May Day Message, and announcing on its web site that it was going to hold a day-long campaign at Toa Payoh Central commemorating the event. This was followed by the release of PM Lee Hsien Loong’s May Day Message by the mainstream media on the eve of May Day, and then the Worker’s Party released it message on its web site on Labour Day itself.

In PM Lee’s May Day Message, he said that 2008 will be a more challenging year due to the US subprime crisis and possible US recession. But he reiterated that the economy is still expected to grow by 4-6% and the labour market will remain tight. He also acknowledged that older and low wage workers will remain vulnerable to retrenchment, and we cannot be insulated from higher global inflation, though the strengthening Singapore dollar is offsetting some of the higher costs.

The question is who will be benefiting most from the continued economic expansion and tight labour market - locals or foreigners? According to the latest employment statistics, the unemployment rate amongst Singaporeans and permanent residents for the first quarter 2008 is 2.9 per cent, up from 2.4 per cent in 4Q2007. HSBC Bank economist Robert Prior-Wandesforde attributed this phenomenon to an expanding pool of job seekers, possibly a result of more foreigners seeking jobs here. The increase in the unemployment rate amongst Singaporeans and permanent residents could be the result of employers looking for cheaper labour, especially foreign workers.

On the other hand, SDP’s Chairman Ghandi Ambalam pulled no punches in the SDP May Day Message, saying that workers are “left with no rights under the PAP which, ironically, came to power on the backs of our workers in 1959“.

According to the SDP, the PAP introduced draconian laws in the late 60s such as the Employment Act, the Trade Unions Act and the Industrial Relations Act to deny our workers their rightful entitlements. Furthermore, workers continue to be exploited through the National Trades Union Congress, which has been a failure in representing the interests of our workers.

Read the rest of this entry »

Activists protested against media control outside SPH on 03 May 08

A group of Singaporean activists marked World Press Freedom Day by staging a protest outside the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) building at Toa Payoh on Saturday 03 May.

The activists comprising of Mr Chong Kai Xiong, Mr Ho Choon Hiong, Mr Isrizal, Ms Noora Zul, Mr Seelan Palay and Mr Shafiie released the following statement:

Today is World Press Freedom Day, an opportunity to reflect upon the principles of press freedom. Press freedom must be championed and protected as it comprises the fundamental Freedom of Expression (Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights). UNESCO’s 2008 themes for this day are Access to Information and Empowerment.

In resonance with this, we as independent activists marked World Press Freedom Day 2008 this morning, with a series of messages to share our thoughts on the state of press freedom in Singapore.

Read the rest of this entry »

SDP’s Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign @ Toa Payoh - News update

TODAY Newspaper article

By Leong Wee Keat
weekeat@mediacorp.com.sg

Wearing red T-shirts with the Malay words “tak boleh tahan” — which means “cannot take it” — members of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) once again took to the streets, as they had done on May Day in previous years.

Last year, SDP chief Chee Soon Juan and his sister Chee Siok Chin walked around the island to raise awareness about poverty. This year, the pair, joined by other SDP members and supporters, descended on Toa Payoh Central and set up a booth at a walkway near Toa Payoh Community Library.

They then began to hand out leaflets containing accusations of greed and exploitation by the Government.

The SDP members, who were selling T-shirts, buttons and books at their booth, also urged passersby to sign two petitions.

The first, addressed to the Prime Minister, contained five demands relating to ministerial salaries, the entry of foreign workers, the release of Central Provident Fund savings and transparency in the financial dealings of Temasek Holdings and the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC).

The second, to Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng, urged him to resign over the escape of Jemaah Islamiyah detainee Mas Selamat Kastari from the Whitley Road Detention Centre — a suggestion that has been dismissed by the Prime Minister.

When asked if the SDP had informed the authorities about their May Day activities or applied for a permit, Dr Chee said that the Opposition party had not.

The SDP has in the past run afoul of the law for staging public events and illegal protests without the necessary permits.

In response to media queries, the police said: “Police received a call from the Bishan-Toa Payoh Town Council reporting that Chee Soon Juan was distributing pamphlets, and had set up a table selling books and T-shirts at Toa Payoh Central. Police observation in response to the call confirmed it.

“Chee did not stage an unlawful assembly or an illegal outdoor demonstration.

“He was however peddling his books and T-shirts without a hawker’s permit.

“As this may be a case of illegal hawking, the Police has referred the matter to the National Environment Agency.”

Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign @ Toa Payoh - Video Links by SDP

SDP has posted Video Links for the Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign @ Toa Payoh. They are as follows:

Video Link 1

Video Link 2

Video Link 3

Video Link 4

Video Link 5

My friend Jaslyn Go who participated in the Campaign said that the response was very good. Some people came up to SDP and their supporters, and praised them for doing the right thing, saying that they supported what was being done. Yet others donated freely to SDP’s cause, either by outright donation or by deliberately “overpaying” for the T-shirts and campaign buttons.

Nice work, SDP!!