TR EMERITUS

Written by Our Correspondent Despite the announcement by 98.7FM 2 days ago that Ris Low joining them as a Deejay was no more an April Fool's joke, Singaporeans continue to join the Facebook to remove Ris Low from the embattled radio station which has garnered more than 10,000 members so far: [Source: Remove Ris Low from 98.7 Facebook] Deposed beauty queen Ris Low Yi Min was reported to have join the Rozz and Shan show as a Deejay in the beginning of the week after which she peeved off DJ Rozz with her "attitude" causing the latter to "stomp" out of her radio talkshow in disgust. It was subsequently announced during the Rozz and Shan Show on 1 April that the entire fracas was a hoax. Ris Low appeared unfazed by the brickbats hurled at her and blogged about her experience: "The experience was really good and it was out of the world, i have to say. Literally out of the world because inside the studio, there are so many buttons it feels like a spaceship. Haha. What a three days experience! Geogina (the Program Director of 987FM), the really chio chio bu in the station was the Mastermind! Thank you for the opportunity and everything was so well executed (as planned). BOOMZ 987!" In the same post, she wrote that her boyfriend Date was her driver for the entire day and she had "tons of fun" when they were together attached with a photo of her neck with a love-bite on it. Readers may google up her blog and view the photo yourselves, but please make sure you do so on an empty stomach. You have been WARNED.   EDITORS’ NOTE: Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent Indulging in shameless self-praise and self-aggrandizement is becoming a favorite past-time of Singapore's multi-millionaire ministers these days. Coming right after Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean, Minister for Community, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan became the latest PAP minister to wax lyrical about its manifold "accomplishments". In a recent speech at his alma mater NUS, Dr Vivian heaped generous praises on the PAP's CPF scheme as a "sustainable" system which ensures sufficient retirement funds for Singaporeans as they grow old. He also took a pot shot at other systems which pay the holders as they go along unlike the CPF which holds the savings of its members ransom till they reach 62 years of age: "It (CPF) is a fully funded, defined contribution scheme. This is based on the important principle that every generation has to earn and save enough for itself. This is the only way to ensure the future sustainability of the scheme. All 'pay as you go' systems will sooner or later either go bankrupt or will saddle future generations with unsustainable levels of taxation," he added. Dr Vivian criticized such schemes as "political Ponzi schemes". A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned. "There have been some academic papers published that argue 'pay as you go' defined benefit schemes will provide better protection against inflation and are more redistributive in nature. Let me be very blunt about such arguments: I think these are political polemics. When we start off with a young society, the inflow of funds will exceed the outflow in a 'pay as you go' system. But with an ageing population, these political Ponzi schemes will run out of money, and the fiscal pressures will eventually become unsustainable." He claimed that many countries are "learning" from Singapore and are moving towards a scheme which resembles CPF: "Many countries curtailing pension benefits are in fact trying to move towards a scheme that resembles ours: a defined contribution plan. Yet we still get calls from Singaporeans for the Government to introduce old age pension benefits for all senior citizens." He expressed concerns that there may be increasing demands on the government to use more of its reserves to care for Singaporeans: "It always starts like this: the Government is rich; we can afford to carve out a small percentage of our gross domestic product or utilise a small percentage of our reserves. This is the beginning of a slippery slope. The moment you have a government that embarks on such a course, you better start worrying about the future. We are worried about an entitlement mentality. Today, people know that the primary responsibility to provide for their lives falls on themselves; and secondly, their families." Though Singapore is the second richest nation in Asia after Japan in terms of GDP per capita income, Singaporeans enjoy few social welfare benefits from the PAP which has always eschewed "welfarism" in preference for "self-reliance". While the cash-flushed state is able to lose billions of dollars of national reserves via its two sovereign wealth funds to bail out ailing U.S. and European banks, it balks at providing more aid to needy and poor Singaporeans. When asked by MP Lily Neo in 2007 to increase the monthly Public Assistance allowance so that its recipients can have three basic meals a day, Minister for Community, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan retorted: “How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?” He added that “one limiting factor must be the sum that we give through public assistance cannot be so generous as to erode the work ethic.” [Source: Channel News Asia, 9 March 2007] The Straits Times reported of late that there were only 11 successful PA applicants between July 2008 and Deccember 2009. MCYS said that the low numbers showed that Singaporeans want to be as “self-reliant” as much as possible. Dr Vivian  Balakrishnan earns nearly $2 million dollars a year, or more than 4 times the annual salary of U.S. President Barack Obama. He had already earned a few thousand dollars in his pocket by making this speech at NUS.   EDITORS’ NOTE: Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.   Related articles: >> Dr Vivian: I am confident we have done our duty >> Only 6 participating teams in YOG soccer tournament >> Dr Vivian urged Singaporeans to rally around YOG  Read More →

By Hurr Riyahi Over the last year Mustafa has run into trouble with SCDF and URA regulations. SCDF is taking a court order to shut down part of Mustafa Centre for fire safety violations. URA took out a summons and the court has fined Mustafa $10K for supposedly using wholesale space for retail business. Is Mustafa a serious violator of regulations, displaying absolute disregard to authorities? In almost every news article by CNA, Straits Times and Today there is a repetition that Mustafa has chalked up 37 fire safety violations in past three years. However the response by Mustafa to both SCDF and URA shows the shopping giant is indeed mindful of regulations but is caught in between the rising demand from shoppers and the inflexibility of SCDF and URA who are sticking by their patriarchical approach of doing their duties. In the aftermath of URA shutting down Mustafa warehouse and issuing a sommons, the Mustafa founder said ‘We will definitely comply with the law. If we can’t sell things, we will continue with all other activities but stop sales of items,’ he said. He also explained then that the Mustafa warehouse was using a model of bulk purchasing and he did not feel it fell within the definition of retail business. Nevertheless he also said at that time he will not contest the charges and instead work with URA to find out why is there is violation as he still felt he was not running a retail shop and strongly felt it was of a different nature. He explained that he rather work with URA, find a solution and focus on doing business than waste time contesting in court. This more than clearly shows Mustafa's commitment to want to try to satisfy all regulations. Obviously URA did not work with Mustafa to find a solution but instead pursued court action to which Mustafa pleaded guilty and was fined $10K. What is funny is that Mustafa had explained that the Mustafa warehouse was opened chiefly to reduce the crowd size in their shopping centre in Little India. In an attempt to satisfy the regulations of SCDF they ran into trouble with URA regulations. However the plight of Mustafa is an unique one. Mustafa's security manager Shamim Ahmad had earlier said the large number of foreign workers and tourists who patronise the shopping centre during weekends make the controlling of access very difficult. controlling access to the 24-hour shopping centre is difficult because of the large number of tourists and foreign workers who come on weekends.  His comments to local media that 'It's not like a cinema, this is a shopping centre...We are trying hard to come up with some solution' clearly shows the desperation of Mustafa. Both URA and SCDF have never a history of working in partnership with businesses to find solutions. Instead all they know is enforcement. To them the problem belongs to the businesses and the solution has to be found by the businesses. Such patriarchical approach by URA and SCDF leaves with no flexibility to deal with complex cases like Mustafa. The real loser in this fiasco is not Mustafa. The shopping department can downsize or shut down their operations and move to Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok, Jakarta or Dubai instantly. Already they own a shopping complex in Jakarta though they do not operate a department store there. Likewise they have some minimal operations in other ASEAN and South Asian countries as the family business has given priority to focus in Singapore. Both URA and SCDF need to discard their patriarchical approaches. Though they may have within them the mechanisms for enforcement, they should develop within themselves other mechanisms to deal with business entities with Mustafa. SCDF can jointly work with Mustafa over a planned period of time to find solutions to the overcrowding. They can implement a series of strategies and jointly assess the effectiveness. This alternative approach makes more sense and provides a permanent solution than for SCDF going and checking Mustafa time and again and finding violations here and there. URA should work with Mustafa and see how the warehouse can continue function without any violation of current rules. This too may take a period of 3-6 months to find a solution. Is URA capable to such flexibility and positive partnership? Or does it still want to stick by its patriachy baton?  Read More →