TR EMERITUS

OPINION The security lapse at a SMRT depot which saw two foreigners entering it and spraying graffiti on a train completely undetected has shocked the entire nation, leaving Singaporeans to wonder what the outcome might be had the intruders been terrorists instead. The incident took place on 17 May 2010, but a police report was lodged only two days later. SMRT later clarified that its staff mistook the graffiti as advertisements. Following a public uproar, SMRT CEO Saw Phaik Hwa was finally forced to issue an official statement in which she expressed "regrets" for the lapse which was dressed up as an "apology" by the state media. She also urged Singaporeans to play their parts in ensuring security of SMRT trains and depots. What do Singaporeans think of her response?   TR Policy Forum, 9 June 2010   Md Subil: Tis CEO is real 'gundu'. She want to play 'taichi' - "but wants commuters to do their 'parts' ..." wat, she wants commuters to 'jaga' her 'choo-choo trains' parked @her depot !! Real 'gundu'.   Jason Yang: Is anybody here surprised? If anything, they are at least consistent - in not so many words, this is the same tagline when Mas Selamat escaped - it is YOUR fault as Singaporeans because you were too complacent, failed to report the incident and therefore allowed this guy to break into the depot. She of course conveniently omits to mention that the break-in happened after hours at the depot and not exactly during office hours at a busy train station / on a busy train - it is beyond me how any member of the public can be expected to hang out at the MRT depot in the dead of night in order to report suspicious incidents. The truth of the matter is that they have NOBODY to blame but themselves. But they have never had, nor will they ever have, the moral courage to take responsibility for their actions and make an unqualified apology.   Aaron Heng: As for the escape of Mas Alamak, this joker made a big joker of our entire nation lah, from the military to the police and the special force. And guess what, everyone below the Home Minister was sacked except him. Why? Cos he's the uncle of PM Lee...   Andrew Neo: Hole in the fence unnoticed for 2 days...cant beat that..lol   Byrant Bey: This is expected in a country where the security of everything is based on the mouth (i say im secure, therefore im secure). train depots aren't the only "soft targets" that are used by the public that are not secure. but no one will do a damn thing because installing CCTVs (with and without FLIR) and motion sensors at the perimeter is costly.... unless there's a body count. the CEO can wayang all she likes, and talk about Madrid and whatever nonsensical security audits and ask for public vigilance (hah). if a vandal can still infiltrate the depot after all the security audits and spend a lot of time spraying the graffiti, we can only assume that she's looking to be a comedian/satirist in the future.   K Y Ang: I think the word 'sorry' is not in the self-righteous PAP's dictionary. Can see they are not humble at all. So all those talks of olden times when times was hard and they were poor and lived in small atap houses are just nostalgic crap! Most PAP ministers are not humble at all, they walk and talk with an air like they are kings and emperor. So you expect a kign or emperor to be humble?... This SMRT CEO is the same flock as the PAP, that is why she can beat around the bush, zig-zag here and there and still no "sorry".   Thomas Chua: Today morning as I watch the Chinese Zao An Ni Hao, I was very frustrated. There was a section where caller can call in to view their views on this incident, the headlines were "MRT painted with graffiti, anti-terrorist loopholes". One of the caller mentioned about potential risk of bombs and terrorist, guess what happen ? The male TV compere just said ok, and move on to next caller. I cannot believe the way our TV is being aired and news report, no mention about risk, just said about the culprit, what laws applied and etc. I am too, going to do my part at the polling. Damn it.....   Douglas Lam: Spent so much money on security measures- did a wacky video, have patrols on board trains, security post at stations, repeated chanting of reminder to passengers on security awareness. Yet, in areas where "you do not see it", they did nothing. Any tango could have sabotage the trains without them knowing.... This is not a security lapse, this is a total security failure.... We thank the 2 vandals for exposing it before any disaster strike.   Benjamin Yeo: This is actually a 'cheap' wake up call for SMRT. Imagine if the security lapse leads to terrorist act. Imagine the chaos if an explosive device was detonated somewhere around CBD area during peak hours. By then, it is too late to rectify.   Please view the rest of the discussion here.  Read More →

Singapore has seen a massive influx of foreigners in recent years, mostly lured in by the promise of (by the standards of the countries they come from) high-paying jobs. The country’s population has now swelled to over five million, 36% of whom are foreigners. This has resulted in a host of social problems, ranging from spiraling costs of housing to over-crowded streets and public transportation. This in turn has led to a rise in tensions between the native-born citizens and the new arrivals. Aware of the rising social tensions but refusing to admit their mistake of allowing so many immigrants into the country within such a short period of time, the government has announced a $10,000,000/- budget to integrate the new arrivals with the local population. Not surprisingly, this has led to even greater resentment towards the government and new arrivals among the locals. In a country where needy locals are left to fend for themselves with the bare minimum government support at best, the thought of taxpayers’ hard-earned money being used to provide welfare programs for foreigners has left most locals with a bad taste in the mouth, with many complaining that they are being marginalized in favor of the newcomers in their own country, and by their own government no less. It is very clear that the government has lost the plot here. First and foremost, the foreigners came to Singapore of their own free will; they were not forcibly brought in at gunpoint. The onus is therefore upon them to adapt to the mannerisms and ways of the locals, including language and dietary preferences, and not for the locals to adapt to their ways. Secondly, with local males having to serve NS and local females having to juggle the dual roles of working woman and homemaker, it is the duty and responsibility of the government to find ways and means of alleviating the burden on locals, and not for them to demand that they become “cheaper, better and faster” in order to compete with the newcomers. If the government expects locals to become “cheaper, better and faster” like the newcomers, then they should walk the talk and lead by example by paying themselves the same salaries as the ministers from the newcomers’ home countries. Only then can they prove that they themselves are equally competitive. Thirdly, many of the newcomers come from Third World nations where the rule of law is non-existent. In stark contrast, Singapore is supposed to be a country where the rule of law prevails. It is therefore the responsibility of the government to ensure that the newcomers respect the country’s laws and to come down hard on them when they break them. It has absolutely no business telling native-born Singaporeans, whose blood, sweat, tears and toil and those of their ancestors have built the country up to what it is today to show tolerance and understanding to the foreigners when they break the law instead. A good example of this was the incident several months ago when a PRC family hijacked an SBS bus because they were angry that the driver refused to carry the wheelchair-bound family matriarch despite the fact that his bus was not licensed to carry wheelchair-bound passengers. The police were called in, but instead of arresting the family for hijacking a public vehicle, technically an act of terrorism punishable by death, SBS had to provide them with a free taxi ride home instead. One wonders what the police would have done had it been a local family that pulled off the stunt. Would they have received a free taxi ride home like the PRC family did, or would they have ended up as guests of the President or be tried and executed for terrorism instead? More than anything else, it is incidents like this, the government’s failure to deal swiftly, effectively and decisively to ensure that the culprits be severely punished for them and its mollycoddling of the newcomers at the expense of locals instead that have lead to such widespread resentment against the newcomers. Respect, tolerance and understanding of their ways, customs and traditions are fine, but respect, tolerance and understanding is a two way street. Just like locals should show tolerance and respect to the (harmless) mannerisms of the newcomers no matter how bizarre they may seem to Singaporeans, so too should the newcomers show tolerance and respect to the mannerisms of locals, and nowhere is this more important than in the ultrasensitive areas of race, language and religion. It should be very clear to everyone that if the newcomers want to reside here, then the onus is upon them to integrate with the locals and conform to the local ways, and not form their own ethnic enclaves or expect locals to integrate with them and conform to their ways. And they should do it of their own accord, and not expect the government to squander local taxpayers’ monies for them to do it instead. But herein lies the rub: what happens if the foreigners refuse to conform to local ways? What would happen if the foreigners insist on doing things according to their own ways regardless of how offensive their ways may be to the racial or linguistic sensitivities or religious beliefs of locals? (The following article is all true. While the opinions expressed within are the writer’s own, the local family, the bullying they have suffered from their foreign neighbors and the apathetic responses they have received from the authorities are factual. Only the family’s identity has been changed to protect their privacy.) For one unfortunate local family, this is no mere rhetorical question: it is a very real problem to them, one that the local authorities either cannot or simply will not resolve for them. The family had sought this writer’s aid in highlighting their plight online in the hopes of raising public awareness of the bullying they are being subjected to since the mainstream media simply refuses to publish their story. The narrative that follows is their story as told to this writer by “V”, the family daughter. For the “Chiang” family (name changed to protect their privacy), their problems began shortly after their new neighbors, a Hindu Indian family from Malaysia (hence called the “Rajas”) moved in next door [Blk 764 #XX-XXX Woodland Circle S(730764)]. The trouble began when members of the “Raja” family kept washing their feet in the common corridor. The “Rajas” kept doing this despite repeated appeals from the “Chiangs” to them not to do it as the family matriarch is elderly and sickly, and the Chiangs fear that that by washing their feet there, the “Rajas” will make the floor slippery and pose a slipping hazard to her. They also explained that the washing of feet in front of the “Chiang’s” home was disrespectful to their deity Guan Yin, whose idol is located just behind their front door. Instead of respecting their concerns, Mr. Raja scolded them and said that he owns the whole place including the common corridor and can do whatever he wants there. He told them to shut up and mind their own business because back home he always washed his feet in front of his home and nobody complains about it. Mrs. Raja even laughed at the “Chiangs” straight to the face when they told her that her family’s actions were disrespectful to their patron goddess Guan Yin. To further show his contempt for the “Chiangs”, Mr. Raja kept shoving their broom and dust pan, which they keep outside their house aside as he says that by keeping it there, the “Chiangs” are showing disrespect to the statue of his deity Ganesha. According to “V”, he even went so far as to deliberately pour large amounts of water on their cacti, which they keep in front of their flat in the common corridor to kill them. When the “Chiangs” confronted him about it, he claimed that they had no proof, but they strongly suspect that he probably did do it, as he had previously demanded that they remove the cacti as he says that they will hurt his deity when it visits them. The “Chiangs” have since replaced the dead cacti with fresh ones, but they also that know it’s only a matter of time before he (Mr. Raja)starts damaging them again. V” informed this writer that the “Chiangs” know and understand that the “Raja” family has the right to practice their religious beliefs, but that they should also show respect to the religious beliefs of others and not disturb other people with their rituals. She said that going by their behavior though, that was something that the “Raja” family either does not understand or simply do not care. For one thing, they sometimes conduct their rituals, which involve the ringing of bells, even very early in the morning or late at night, disturbing the peace as a result. Also, despite the HDB ban on the indoor burning of large quantities of incense and other offerings, whenever they complete their rituals, they will open their doors to release a thick cloud of smoke, indicating that they are burning offerings in defiance of the ban. Unfortunately it appears that the “Rajas’” lack of respect for the rights and beliefs of others do not just stop there. On 19th July 2009, Mr. “Raja” deliberately kicked over the “Chiangs” ritual urn that they use to burn offerings and which they keep outside their flat. When “D”, “V’s” older brother confronted him to demand an explanation for his disrespectful behavior, he began shouting abuse at the whole “Chiang” family. The quarrel got so heated that “V” had to call in the police. Incredibly, the officer who arrived didn’t even take pictures of the overturned urn as evidence of Mr. “Raja’s” behavior. This was not the first time that the “Chiangs” had to call the police in to report his behavior, not that the repeated calls to the police had been effective in restraining him. They had previously reported him to the police after he had threatened the “Chiang” family matriarch with violence. Why the police refused to arrest him for this when they arrested a taxi driver for warning MP Lee Yi Shyan that he hoped that history would not repeat itself with him is a mystery. According to “V”, Mr. “Raja” was so arrogant that he kept repeated challenging the “Chiangs” to call the police if they dared as he claimed that he was not afraid of them. An elderly woman who lives with Mr. “Raja” and whom “V” thinks is his mother even threatened the “Chiangs” by saying that her son is a policeman, and that he can make life very miserable for them should the family choose to. While it is not known whether this is true or not, going by his arrogance and the indifference the police seem to show to Chiangs’ plight, “V” said that she wouldn’t be surprised if it was true. On Sunday, 30th August 2009, the “Raja” family hung their wet umbrellas next to the “Chiangs” cacti pots instead of outside their own home, thereby encroaching into the “Chiangs” space. However, they declined to call the police this time or even remove the umbrellas as they were trying to show tolerance and avoid unnecessary ugliness and confrontations, since they want nothing more than to live in peace. "V” said that one major reason why the “Chiangs” kept appealing to the “Raja” family not to wash their feet outside their home was because it was disrespectful to their goddess Guan Yin, whose statue they just behind their front door. The “Raja”s claimed that they do not do such thing, and that the “Chiangs” are just trying to stir up trouble against them. However, pictures taken by “V” without the family’s knowledge prove that they were lying about it as the images clearly show them washing their feet outside the “Chiangs’” flat. On 27/03/10, this writer, who happened to be paying “V” a visit to learn more about her situation also personally witnessed the woman washing her feet right outside “V’s” house. According to “V”, this is a practice that her Hindu friend said is only done in the temples, never at home. This raises some interesting questions: if washing of feet is only done at the temple, then have they actually converted their home into one? If so, does the HDB actually allow this to be done? And if not, then why didn’t the HDB at least send someone to investigate “V’s” allegations of it? "V” stated that from other pictures that she had taken, it was equally obvious that the “Rajas” were deliberately trying to provoke them as originally the “Rajas” only placed a small pail outside their own house. Now, they have placed a much larger one right outside the “Chiangs’” door. Tensions between the two families finally came to a head on 01/04/2010. That day, Mr. “Raja” washed his feet outside the “Chiangs’” flat as usual. “D”, the “Chiang” family son went out to wash away the water. Angered by his action, Mr. Raja threw down several of the “Chiangs’” cacti pots, which in turn provoked “D” into kicking the “Rajas’” water bucket over. Mr. Raja then punched “D” several times until “D” kicked him hard in the crotch. “V” called the police, but apart from taking statements from both parties, refused to pursue the matter any further even though “V” gave them a document showing the “Rajas’” repeated provocations against them. It seems that the police consider making even vague, unspecified threats against members of the PAP is a criminal offence, but actually beating up a “lesser mortal” is not. Why else would the cabbie who told Lee Yi Shyan off be arrested for it whereas Mr. “Raja” and his family were only asked to go for mediation with the “Chiangs” to resolve their differences? Incidentally, it was always the “Chiangs” who called for the mediation; the “Rajas” have always refused to go for it and according to the authorities, there is absolutely nothing that they can do about that. So it also seems that the authorities are saying that if one doesn’t like one’s neighbors, one can commit acts of violence against them and get away with it Scot-free. Stupid question time: what would happen if a brawny, 20-something year old YPAP member with a black belt was to beat up Mr. Chiam See Tong? Will he be arrested for committing assault and battery against a frail, sickly old man, or will Mr. Chiam be told that it is a non-seizable offence and hence no police action can or will be taken against the YPAP member? In his National Day Rally speech, PM Lee stressed the need for inter-racial and inter-religious tolerance. Unfortunately for the “Chiangs”, according to “V”, going by their behavior, the “Rajas” appeared to be exhibiting blatant bigotry towards non-Indians. She said that the best proof of this would be Mr. “Raja” kicking over their ritual urn, which the “Chiangs” use to burn offerings in the void deck for their ancestors, and their damaging of the “Chiangs’” cacti, as they grow them as protection against evil spirits. The “Chiangs” claimed that they have shown the utmost tolerance towards the “Rajas” and their religious beliefs; nonetheless, they added that the “Rajas” had no right to chuck the “Chiangs’” broom and dustpan around in the name of their religious beliefs, let alone the disrespect they exhibit towards the “Chiangs” and their religious beliefs. "V” said that she had appealed to all the relevant authorities, ranging from the HDB to the police to the Town Council several times to take decisive action against the “Rajas” to force them to show tolerance and understanding towards them, as their behavior, if left unchecked, can easily escalate to the point where Indian – Chinese and Hindu – Taoist relations can be damaged. This is particularly so should the Chinese in the neighborhood learn of the disrespect that the “Rajas” had demonstrated towards the “Chiangs’” religious beliefs and retaliate against them. "V” said that in order to keep not to inflame passions, the “Chiangs” have not complained about the “Raja” family’s selfishness and inconsiderate behavior to the rest of their neighbors, with whom they have cordial relations. Still, with the repeated quarrels and police visits, it will only be a matter of time before people learn of the feud, and when that happens, minor tensions may escalate very quickly into full-blown inter-communal violence. “V” said that she feared that such a tragedy could happen in Singapore one day because of people like her neighbors. This writer admits that the reason why “V” approached him to tell their story is because she knows him personally. He also admits that he had been unable to contact the “Rajas” to get their side of the story because they refuse to talk to anyone about it, so he understands if the readers were to doubt his complete objectivity. Nevertheless, he has personally witnessed Mrs. “Raja” washing her feet outside the “Chiangs’” home as well as the other pictures “V” had taken, and he has also seen the letter from the Ministry of Law stating that the “Rajas” had declined to go for mediation, so this in part at least corroborates their version of events. It is only logical: if the “Raja” family genuinely believes that they were being misunderstood and were in fact doing no harm to anyone, and that the “Chiangs” were only being petty and vindictive, then surely they would welcome mediation as an opportunity to clear the air and resolve their differences. So it only stands to reason that the reason why they keep refusing to attend mediation is simply because they think they can do anything they want regardless of how they were infringing upon the sensitivities of others. Interracial and inter-religious violence over even the most trivial matters in neighboring countries should serve as a grim warning that nobody should take inter-communal harmony for granted. The government is constantly exhorting the people to be vigilant and to do their part to foster inter-communal harmony. Unfortunately, like in so many other things these days, once again the government itself has fallen short here in having failed to walk the talk and practice what it preaches. It is truly a sad day for Singapore when foreigners such as the “Rajas” can bully native-born Singaporeans like the “Chiangs” and all the Singapore government can say is that there’s absolutely nothing they can do about it. It is practically a throwback to the bad old days of foreign colonialism, where native-born Singaporeans were told that they were not allowed to enter certain areas open to the colonial masters and their foreign friends. If nothing else, this should make each and every Singaporean, male and female alike question exactly why males should serve National Service at all when the government cannot even stand up to foreigners bullying their own native-born citizens in their own country. No one doubts that the government-owned mainstream media has its own part to play in not inflaming inter-communal tensions. However, it also has a duty is to expose the misdeeds of those whose actions threaten such harmony and not to sweep the dirt under the carpet in the increasingly typical “deaf frog” manner that government-linked organizations are now becoming increasingly notorious for. Just as it is of the utmost importance that the people should work together to foster good relationships with anyone of any race, language or religion, so too is it of the utmost importance that the government and its organs, including the mainstream media should read the riot act against those who pose a threat to national harmony by their actions. If it does not, then surely some day the streets of Singapore will run red with the blood spilt from intercommunal violence, because of the government’s failure to pre-empt such violence by punishing those whose actions had fueled such tensions.   Tan Keng Leng     Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

Under-fire Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong has written a letter to the Straits Times Forum to defend his track record in managing Potong Pasir. A series of negative press reports lately has cast doubts on Mr Chiam's ability to manage the ward which was first won by him during the 1984 general election. A self-proclaimed Potong Pasir resident wrote a letter to the Forum last week complaining about the poor maintenance of the estate followed by the release of a highly controversial town council management report in which Potong Pasir is ranked last among all the constituencies in Singapore. Mr Chiam claimed that it is not "appropriate" to compare the performance of town councils "as the profile and age of the properties are totally different." in addition to the "inequality in the funds granted among the town councils and the improvement works carried out by the Government." "Potong Pasir is a mature estate where the blocks are 25 to 35 years old. Constant efforts are being made using our available resources to maintain the estate as best as possible," he wrote. While his efforts in running the estate has not gone unnoticed by its residents, there are increasing number of complaints from the ground it is lacking in certain amenities enjoyed by PAP-run wards. Mr Chiam has already indicated his desire to leave Potong Pasir to contest in a GRC in the next general election with his wife Lina Ng contesting Potong Pasir on his behalf. With the PAP kick-starting its smear campaign against Mr Chiam through its mouthpiece media, it is likely that Potong Pasir will return to the PAP's fold after 25 years.   Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →