FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

10 December 2013, Singapore

STATEMENT BY THE NATIONAL SOLIDARITY PARTY ON THE RECENT RIOT

NSP calls for an examination into the underlying causes of the recent riot.

The National Solidarity Party regrets the riot which occurred in the vicinity of Race Course Road and Hampshire Road on 8 December 2013.

Whatever their grievances, the rioters’ actions broke the law and the rule of law must be respected by all, Singaporeans or not.

The Party commends the manner in which the police, auxiliary and civil defence officers acted quickly and decisively to restore order on our streets.  We wish speedy recovery for our 39 officers who were injured in the course of their duty.  

We also extend our condolences to the family of the traffic accident victim, Mr Sakthivel Kumaravelu.

The Government has announced (on 9 December 2013) that it will be setting up a Committee of Inquiry (COI) to investigate the causes of the riot.  According to the Prime Minister, “This riot was an isolated incident arising from the unlawful actions of an unruly mob reacting to a fatal traffic accident.”  

Even before the COI has commenced its work, two Ministers have suggested that alcohol consumption was a contributing factor for the riot.

To blame the riot, the first in decades, on alcohol consumption is a narrative that is convenient to the ruling party. It is a narrative which ignores the flaws in the Government’s immigration and manpower policies and their impact on the social fabric of Singapore.  

The recent riot brings to mind the 2012 illegal strike by foreign national SMRT bus drivers.  The bus drivers’ strike and now the riot should serve as a wake-up call to our Government.  Not only do we need to re-look the extent of our dependency on foreign labour, we also need to urgently examine how well (or not) we are treating our foreign workers who have come to Singapore to earn a living for themselves and their families back home.  

Are the labour laws and regulations which apply to them fair or skewed against them? How are they assured of decent living conditions and of getting fair and timely wages?  Are we giving enough consideration to their emotional and social needs?  

Even as the authorities step up their efforts to ensure the safety of all who live and work in Singapore, we need to guard against unnecessarily stereotyping people according to their appearance or the colour of their skin.

We should also refuse audience to those who seek to use this unfortunate incident to stoke racial disharmony and xenophobia.     

It is important for the COI to investigate the riot in an independent and impartial manner, without regard to any embarrassment it may cause the ruling party because of its policies. Once completed, the COI must present its findings to Singaporeans openly and transparently.

If our Government fails to get to the root of the problem, the stressors and underlying factors which had caused the incident will only manifest itself in another, perhaps uglier way.

Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss, Secretary-General

On behalf of the 15th Central Executive Committee

of the NATIONAL SOLIDARITY PARTY

For media inquiries, please contact Mr Reno Fong, Asst Secretary-General at HP 98181994.

In an effort to stem online speculations Shanmugam has come out to say that there is “no evidence” to suggest that the rioter were unhappy with their employers or the government.

He was addressing some comments and the popular speculation that the workers involved in the riot had acted as a way of venting their frustrations at their exploitation.

Despite his denial that this is the case, Shanmugam has at least acknowledged that most Sinagporeans want the migrant workers to be treated in a humane way.

“You know, the majority, they recognise that many of them are needed. They recognise that many of them are good people, they are here to earn a living. But we must make sure the minority don't create trouble." He said.

He also emphasised that there is no excuse for the men acting the way they did, being violent. He said that these people will be dealt with swiftly by the law and further commented that the rules are in place to try and maintain a peaceful and orderly society.

Shanmugam went on to say that despite the rules, there will be a minority who choose to break them and this is the case for Singaporeans too. However, he also expressed that Singaporeans tend to “accept” societal norms while foreign workers may be less aware of these norms.

It seems that Shanmugam doesn’t know the cause of the riot and is not willing to accept that it may have been contributed to by the working conditions and unhappiness of foreign workers.

Meanwhile, other ministers have put it down to alcohol consumption.

Acting on these assumptions, there have been alcohol bans announced as a quick-fix measure. Seemingly contradicting these actions,  Shanmugam said that it’s “premature” to tweak laws in reaction. 

<above pic: click to read the letter clearly>

Many Singaporeans are upset about a news bulletin by Chennai-based SunTV (9 December, 7pm). I went online to see it for myself. The reporting was erroneous and irresponsible. The report stated that an Indian national who died on Sunday in Little India was pushed out of the bus by the female bus driver. The report then said that Singaporeans and Chinese attacked the foreign Indian nationals, who were now hiding in their homes for fear of being harassed by the police or attacked by locals. 

These allegations are quite untrue. It is a pity that such sensational allegations have been made without any reference to what actually happened. The deceased was not pushed out of the bus. He was led off the bus as it was full. He was in an intoxicated state and was causing trouble in the bus. At one stage he even dropped his pants in the bus. The initial investigations show that after he got off the bus, he ran alongside the bus unsteadily, fell under and was killed instantly as the bus turned a corner. This triggered the ensuing riot. The situation was contained by the police with 28 arrested for rioting and vandalism that day. The riot was an isolated accident arising from the unlawful actions of an unruly mob reacting to a fatal traffic accident. PM Lee has announced the convening of a Committee of Inquiry (COI) to look into the incident. We will get to the root of this. 

A letter has been sent by our High Commissioner to India, to Sun TV. A copy of that letter is enclosed (above picture).

Minister Shanmugam

*Article first appeared on his FB page here.

Editor's Note: We applaud Minister Shanmugam's quick and tactful response to ensure that Singapore tries it's best to rectify the false information. However, this just shows how flawed the MDA regulations are. Local media is heavily restricted with the "purpose" of preventing such inaccurate and inflammatory content from being published.

However, international news remains untouched despite many of the international news channels being available in Singapore through pay-TV. Would the MDA ask all other media companies around the world to register and pay $50,000 before being able to report on Singapore issues? Or is this another case where a set of law is applied exclusively to Singaporeans and another for foreigners.

Lim Swee Say, the Labour Chief said at an NTUC community event yesterday that Singaporeans and foreign workers have been working harmoniously together for many years.

He said that it is important to maintain this harmony and ensure that the riot on Sunday night is an isolated case.

He reiterated that most of the foreign workers in Singapore are “here to earn a living, and along the way they also make a contribution to our society, to our economy.”

He said that up until now, locals and foreigners have been living peacefully together and that this must continue.

NTUC had visited many foreign workers and urged them to remain calm. It was also noted that Singapore should work to improve the working and living conditions of the workers.

It seems that Lim Swee Say is ignoring certain feedback to claim that Singaporeans and foreigners have been working together harmoniously.

There are complaints all the time that foreign PMETs are taking away Singaporean jobs and there is rising tensions and large levels of xenophobia.

Often, we hear stories online of rude foreign talents and lost jobs. Is this Mr Lim’s definition of living and working harmoniously together?

Even the recent bus driver strike was an example that foreign workers do not fell happy with their work and living conditions.

How can Lim Swee Say claim that we are all living peacefully and harmoniously together?

Every now and then, history gifts humanity someone who embodies all that we aspire to but did not have the courage to pursue. Nelson Mandela was just such a man. Together with the rest of world, the SDP mourns the passing away of this truly great man.

Universally beloved, Mandela's legacy is not that he possessed riches or power, for he craved neither. Rather he leaves behind a vision of peace brought about by compassion and the unwavering love for justice. He cherished freedom, fought for democracy and celebrated human rights.

South Africans are, indeed, a fortunate people to have had such a leader who put them, not profits, first. Even when Western corporations enticed him with wealth in exchange for his people's freedom, Mandela had the wisdom to choose to put in place first a sound foundation of democratic practices for his country.

This is a lesson that Mandela has taught the world – that money cannot buy what is right and just. Alas, even as our Government leaders sing the praises of South Africa's first democratically elected president, they have not heeded the lesson that another great leader, Martin Luther King, Jr, had taught: "True peace is not merely the absence of violence but the presence of justice.”

With the Internal Security Act still in place, our country cannot be blessed with true peace. Just as Mandela was imprisoned for nearly three decades, we have Singaporeans who have been just as harshly incarcerated. The tragic difference is that while Mandela has been exonerated, justice has not yet been won in Singapore.

Perhaps the wrong will be eventually made right. Perhaps we may require a truth and reconciliation commission of our own to close the chapter on the abuse of our people. Until then, Mandela's immortal words will inspire all freedom-loving Singaporeans to work even harder for true peace.

Singapore Democrats

Source: YourSDP.org

Flipping through the MND Newsroom from 2009, I read some laughable replies from MND, in response to why Opposition MPs cannot be the main player for estate upgrading. [Link] 

This goes down to my Top 10 List of Ridiculous Replies from PAP.

I guess the only way to change it is to replace the 'ruling party' with more opposition parties to form a voting bloc in Parliament.

The Little India Incident has been contained and we are glad that calm and reason have returned after an evening of madness and loss of control. Let us not forget that however we may choose to call it, the following things have actually happened: 
1. Injuries inflicted upon our law enforcement officers
2. Destruction of public property and
3. Disturbance of a massive nature affecting other people

We are happy that swift and immediate police action has been mounted and we hope the Government will thoroughly and fairly look into the matter. It is in our interest to protect the Singaporean way of life, apart from safeguarding the property of our country and our people and taking all necessary preventive measures to prevent such an incident from ever recurring.

This was an unfortunate incident and the issue of "foreign workers versus local people" should not be called to question and be overblown. The government claims it was an isolated case of "rioting". Isolated or otherwise, we think it was an unfortunate incident which perhaps, could have been prevented if the authorities had listened carefully to the sentiments of residents and people who frequent the facilities of Little India and taken more proactive measures to size up the situation whereby the public has expressed serious concerns about the mushrooming of retail outlets dispensing alcohol drinks to consumers, resulting in a rise of intoxication among foreign workers and other drinkers.

It is obvious that the glaring lack of effective measures from the authorities contributed to the incident which was waiting to happen. While it is reassuring that it has promised to take swift and fair action to nail the offenders, we are concerned with what the government has in mind with regard to the implementation of measures to protect the people and safeguard the interest of all who live and work in Little India.

We wish the government will understand that we do not need any more knee-jerk reaction from their ministers than is necessary. Is the implementation of measures to safeguard the rights and interests of both drinkers and residents really that difficult? If longer term measures take time to roll out, how about introducing short term measures at least to allow room for the negotiation of space between residents and drinkers?

We are quite sure that the public must have been shocked when they viewed in disbelief just how easily our police cars were overturned and set ablaze. What lessons can we glean from this? The relevant authorities should seriously review their mode of operation when managing a situation of this nature.

Finally, we would like to take this opportunity to say a big thank you to all our law enforcement and medical officers for their valour in the management of the incident, and to the officers especially who have been injured in the course of carrying out their duties, I wish you all a speedy recovery.

Lim Bak Chuan Desmond

Secretary-General

Singapore Justice Party

对于小印度的暴动,我们相信市民一定是震惊,他们也难以置信观察到暴徒那么容易的把我们的警车被掀翻并纵火.

但是我们很高兴看到警察能迅速的行动把一个失控又疯狂的暴徒给控制,快速的把整个局面给安定下来以及回复了往常的社会平静和理性的秩序。

让我们不要忘记以下面的事情确实发生了：

1。造成我们的执法人员和国人受伤

2。破坏公共以及私人财产

3。对社会和其他国人造成巨大的影响和不便

为了我们的国家和国民的利益和保护我们的的生命以及财产。我希望政府能公正和彻底的调查此事,并采取一切必要的预防措施,以避免此类事件的再次发生。

这是一个很不幸的事件也不应该被有企图人士质疑或夸大于“外国工人与新加坡人”的问题。

政府声称这是“暴乱”的一个孤立的事件。 我们觉得这不幸的事件也许本来是可以避免,如果当局认真听取了居民的表达酗酒闹事时而发生, 及时审时度势 并采取更积极的措施严格管制酒零售执照避免导致外国工人和其他饮酒者之间的兴起如雨后春笋般严重问题。

很在明显的是有关当局缺乏有效的措施,像鸵鸟等待事故发生。但是令人欣慰的政府已经承诺采取迅速和公平的行动打击罪犯，我们关心的是政府是否考虑长远和根治基本问题的措施来保护人民,维护所有居住在小印度生活和工作的国人。

我们也希望政府明白在先推出短期措施时至少要预留空间的空间给居民和外国劳工过正常活动。采取任何的措施时要保障双方的饮酒者和居民的权利和利益,希望这样的安排不会难道他们。如果需要较长的时间实行较长期的措施,我们相信居民会理解。

我们也可以从这起事故搜集教训,认真看待地方的情况,调整有关当局在地方管理运作模式和对地方问题做出及时的反应。

我们也想借此机会再次的向我们所有的执法人员说声非常感谢以及感激他们能复杂又混乱的环境中保持冷静,英勇和专业精神来处理整个事件以及避免使它严重化,而让爆徒有机会把暴力的范围扩张到其他地区。

我们也祝那些因执行任务而受伤的执法人员早日康复。

林睦荃

秘书长

新加坡正义党

Calvin Cheng was a former Nominated Member of Parliament and a member of the Media Literacy Council. He writes in his own capacity and blogs at www.beyondtheemotive.com

Any hope the Government still harboured of the electorate accepting the "6.9 million"Population White Paper may have just gone up in flames.

One must not underestimate the shock to the Singaporean psyche in seeing images of burning police vehicles, crowds attacking ambulances and rioting masses; for Singaporeans born post-independence, these things just do not happen in Singapore. They see them on the TV, or the internet, or the papers -- but not in their own backyard.

When news of a riotous crowd attacking police vehicles started filtering out, the reaction from Singaporeans, online and on the streets, was one of utter disbelief.

People do not attack police vehicles in Singapore, much less set them on fire. The most difficult situation ambulance drivers have to normally handle is unruly patients; never in their wildest dreams have they imagined themselves running for their lives from an angry mob.

The Government may try its best to deny that the riot has anything to do with immigration policy, but it will fail. It may exhort Singaporeans not to politicise the issue but it will fail too. The Government may rail against xenophobia but it will also fail, because I fear reason cannot overcome the images from Sunday's riot already burnt into the mind's eye.

Cost of immigration

I have written elsewhere that I support the Government’s immigration policy because I have seen the statistics, the facts and I know that if we do not take in immigrants, we would be faced with a rapidly ageing population and a shrinking workforce. I also know that we need a foreign migrant workforce because in order to build more homes and infrastructure for a growing population, we need these foreign workers to do the jobs Singaporeans are not willing to do at an economically feasible wage – construction, building sewers, paving roads.

But the best way for the Government to convince the population of these facts is not to merely present its vision for a rosy future, but to be honest about the costs involved.

And one of those costs is that immigrants need to be assimilated, and foreign migrant worker populations do not just disappear during weekends after toiling the entire week to build our homes and roads.

It may, however, be too late.

Even if the amateur psychologists and sociologists on the internet may all be wrong in speculating why the foreign workers rioted, their narrative is a powerful one.

The Government may like to frame the issue as simply a law-and-order matter, but no amount of briefings will make people forget the fact that the people who rioted were foreigners. There is no way that the Government can make the events of Little India disappear from the psyche of an electorate already skeptical about its immigration policy.

Two alternative scenarios

It now has two choices.

First, it can roll out all the bar graphs and pie charts again and show the people the bleak future Singapore faces with an ageing population, minus immigrants. But this time, it must be completely honest about the costs of this policy.

The Government needs to show how it intends to work with Singaporeans to ameliorate these social costs. These include a plan on assimilating new immigrants, as well as that of dealing with an ever-increasing foreign migrant worker population, needed to build infrastructure for a growing population.

With a bigger foreign worker population, the Ministry of Manpower will also have their work cut out, policing cases of exploitation and employer malpractice, as well as finding ways to house the foreign workers. Trade-offs have to be made with businesses having to commit financial and human resources to ensure foreign workers hired are treated well and paid fairly; these increased costs to businesses means highers prices to consumers, which makes raising productivity even more urgent.
The population at large will also have to expect these migrants workers to be in their midst and adjust to it.

This is not an easy ask: as can be seen in Little India, enclaves of foreigners can form, and we can neither expect them to assimilate (since they are transient workers) nor to completely follow the norms of a foreign culture.

Thus, the Population White Paper may be anchored on irrefutable facts and figures, but the costs and challenges of implementing the policy paper must be made clear to the electorate.
It may well be that the electorate find these costs too much to bear, even in the face of a dire population problem.

The second option then is for the Government to abandon the Population White Paper and come up with a Plan B.

Plan B

What is Plan B? It is certainly not some watered-down version of the Government’s plan that the Workers' Party has presented.

Plan B has to deal with the other alternative -- that of an AGED (rather than ageing) population, with a small work force, but a small immigrant population.

Plan B is an economy less reliant on foreign workers, with Singaporeans taking up jobs in construction, and all the other manual work that we now take for granted.

In this, critics of the Government, as well as opposition politicians, need to be honest too.

There will also be social costs to plan B, and these costs will also be painful for Singaporeans to adjust to.

Firstly, Singapore will need higher taxes from a smaller active work force to support an aged population. There will also be a less vibrant Singapore, with old people making up a larger proportion of society. We may even have to draw down on our reserves, if taxes on the work force are not to become prohibitively high.

We will (as we are already presently) have to get used to more old people taking on work that the young do not want; retirement age also has to go up. The entire economy has to be re-configured to adjust to an aged workforce, a task that will be fraught with risks and no guarantee of success.
In order for more Singaporeans to take up the jobs that foreign workers are now doing, wages have to go up. But that means prices may have to go up as well.

If bus drivers are to be paid more in order for Singaporeans to take these jobs, then bus fares will either have to rise, or taxes have to rise in order for the Government to subsidise fares. Homes may be built less cheaply, even if productivity rises. That means either HDB flats will either cost more, or again, more tax revenue has to be raised for bigger subsidies.

Singaporeans have to learn to do a lot more household maintenance jobs, like in some developed countries, where blue-collared jobs are highly paid. These are also not easy challenges to adjust to.

Plan B is a possible scenario, but it is not enough for detractors of the PAP to criticise its immigration policy and not present the alternative with the trade-offs. There is no perfect solution and both sides in the debate must be honest about the costs of the options available.

The problem I fear is that the shock of the riots of Little India has irreparably tarnished the PAP’s immigration plan. Every conversation it will have from now on will consciously or subconsciously be associated with images of foreign workers flipping over a police car and setting it on fire.

The Committee of Inquiry will not be as important as the Government presenting to the population how it intends to manage the growing foreign migrant worker numbers, needed to build the infrastructure for a larger population.

And it needs to be a convincing story.

Otherwise, it is time to seriously consider Plan B.

Calvin Cheng

*The writer blogs at http://www.beyondtheemotive.com/

Reform Party condemns the unlawful activity that occurred on December 8 2013 in ‘Little India’ when a riot was sparked by the death of a pedestrian involved in a traffic accident. This kind of violence cannot be condoned under any circumstances.

We commend the police and auxiliary services for efficiently bringing the situation under control whilst avoiding any serious injuries or loss of life. Our thoughts are with the 18 members of our law enforcement and emergency services who were injured during the course of their duties.   However, we view with concern the deployment of Gurkha troops, who are foreign mercenaries, to put down a domestic disturbance. The Reform Party demands the government’s assurance that it will not use foreigners against its own citizens.

Reform Party also extends its condolences to the family of Sakthivel Kumaravelu, the expatriate construction worker killed by the private coach hired to ferry him and his fellow workers back to their dormitory. We note from reports in the Indian Press that his family background was tragic and whilst this riot may be used as an excuse in some quarters to stir up divisions in our society, we are heartened by the many compassionate messages left by fellow Singaporeans on our new media pages.

Reform Party welcomes the Government’s decision of December 09^th to set up a Committee of Inquiry to investigate the causes of the riot. We call on the government to make the COI hearings public and to invite public consultation.  Even before the COI has been set up, PAP ministers are conveniently suggesting that alcohol consumption is to blame for the riot rather than looking to their own failed immigration and labour policies. Blaming alcohol is a simplistic approach which fails to explain why riots have not occurred in other areas where alcohol consumption is high such as Clark Quay and Boat Quay.

Statements such as these also carry the subliminal message that ‘Indians’ are somehow more likely to abuse alcohol and become violent than other groups. In Singapore violence against property, injury and even death has been caused by expatriate workers of many nationalities including Britons, Australians and New Zealanders, in brawls often fuelled by alcohol and in one case by a Romanian diplomat drunk driver. Profiling only serves to deflect attention away from searching for the real causes of the riot.

That subliminal message is reinforced by the government’s announcement of a complete ban on alcohol sales over the weekend restricted to one part of Little India. This is a knee jerk reaction by the Government with the potential to do more harm than good. 374 local businesses will now suffer economically and tourism will be badly affected. Applying the ban to only one area will no doubt simply move it to another neighborhood and prohibition of alcohol in other countries has been shown to push drinking underground and even increase unlawful behavior.

Reform Party believes this is a call to Singaporeans to wake up from their slumber and take note of the human cost of our economic growth. Human rights groups and NGOs have been calling for more humane living and working conditions for our guest workers for years. Indications are that construction workers take home about US $14 a day  which is barely improvement on wages of 30 years ago and is a cut in real terms.  In November 2012, Chinese bus drivers for SMRT went on strike in a doomed attempt to gain living conditions and wages in line with those enjoyed by their domestic  colleagues.  It was discovered that they did not even enjoy individual sleeping areas but were ‘hot bedding’. The expatriate bus drivers’ unlawful strike followed by the riot in little India shows that the PAP’s ability to rely on the exploitation of cheap and docile foreign labor to generate growth is highly questionable.

We believe the root cause of this social unrest is social and economic inequality. This has been created by  the government’s obsolete economic model of boosting GDP growth through imported labor,  no matter what the cost to our society and no matter how inequitable the treatment of that labor.  Not only has this model reduced Singaporeans’ real incomes, pushed up property prices, led to overcrowding of public amenities and competition for employment and education but it has contributed to increasing xenophobia amongst Singaporeans.

The riot was indeed shocking to all Singaporeans but it should not have taken us by surprise.

The government’s most urgent task now is to seize this chance to conduct a full, impartial and public enquiry, rather than the usual whitewash applied behind closed doors.

Kenneth Jeyaretnam

Secretary General

I seriously think that our DEAR Prime Minister will need to try harder to get close to the people. In his greatest effort to sound "like the ground" and seen to be "grounded" person, he has made hilarious and sometimes, embarrassing remarks in his important speeches.... It just shows how disconnect he is from the ground people... first it was "Mee Siam Mai Hum" and it makes us wonder whether he eats from our local hawker centres at all... or just that he didn't have the chance to eat Mee Siam... or just that he actually got his personal chef to put "Hum" in his daily Mee Siam! 

Mee Siam Mai Hum is just a hilarious joke for the street people... and that is perfectly ok, you know. Just learn to laugh at ourselves sometimes for our little mistakes we make. 

However, my jaw dropped dramatically when I heard he said "Kow Peh Kow BU" (kpkb) in his keynote speech to his party comrades..... Excuse me! That is really "vulgar" words in Hokkien... literally means that "don't make noise like you are crying for your parents' funeral"! It can basically be interpreted into cursing the death of the parents of those who are making noise! A Prime Minister cursing the death of those who disagree with him and his party, and making "noise" in the internet? Oh My Buddha! 

Luckily he was speaking to his own cadre and this is only reported in MSM for local consumption. Just hope that he doesn't repeat all these silly remarks when he meet up with some world leaders.... imagine him cursing the death of their parents... Ouch!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86T5LA-V9PI

Goh Meng Seng

*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/gohmengseng.freedom/posts/10202108592529504

Poverty is a significant problem in Singapore: senior citizens scrounging for cardboard and aluminum cans to sell to recyclers, cleaners sleeping in public to save on transport costs, and even outright homelessness. Amid the futuristic weaves of The Interlace and the iconically quirky design of the Marina Bay Sands, the prevalence of such overt poverty is shocking.

In this article, I hope to articulate the need for a coherent response to poverty and show, by way of example, that such a response is indeed possible.

What gets measured gets managed

Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing is right that no single poverty line should be drawn; that we should not introduce policy that includes a "cliff effect”. However, Chan's argument that poverty should not be administratively recognized on the basis of the deep flaws of a policy straw man is fundamentally unsound.

In the absence of suitable formal metrics for tracking poverty, busy public administrators monitoring a myriad of other trends are more likely to overlook poverty, which is one reason why so many senior citizens are reduced to such dire straits. It is thus important to, at the very least, track poverty at a formal level.

How to measure poverty: General ideas

It is necessary to recognise that poverty is a blanket term for a number of different sorts of deprivation stemming from low or no income. Any assessment of the depth of poverty of a household must therefore be needs-based and take into account the financial and health status of the individual members as well as their needs and obligations. At the same time, it would be neither reasonable nor practical to track all Singaporeans at too detailed a level of resolution.

A reasonable compromise would be to use coarse-grained information such as household income and the number of members of that household (and their ages) to compute estimates of the deficit between income and the cost of a "required standard of living". For the young, this standard might be pegged to a level that permits them to escape poverty by dint of hard work, while for the older and middle-aged, it could be pegged to a level commensurate with leading a decent life. The deficit as a percentage of the total required, the "income-needs deficit”, might be used as a coarse measure of the extent to which a household is "poor". 

Example: 

Suppose a household with two 30-year-old adults and a 10-year old child has a monthly household income of $1,000, and a "required standard of living" is estimated to cost $500 for each 30-year-old adult and $400 for a 10-year-old child. Then there is a $400 deficit (out of $1,400) or an income-needs deficit of 28.6%.

Example: 

Suppose a household with two 73-year-old adults has no formal monthly household income but a monthly payment from their CPF accounts of $700, and a "required standard of living" is estimated to cost $450 for each 73 year old adult. Then there is a $200 deficit (out of $900) or an income-needs deficit of 22.2%.

*Article first appeared on Mr Baey Yam Keng's Facebook page here.

Editor's Note: Even though this is just a small issue, Mr Baey went all the way to clear up the misunderstanding and did not blame the entire online community for spreading his photo like wildfire. He understands that views online tends to differ to the each extreme ends and this is the reality of the online world. Kudos to him!

Background Story: MP BAEY & HIS CONTROVERSIAL $2.50 NASI PADANG DISH

Nasi Padang

(translation of my article in MyPaper, 17 Dec 2013)

I love local hawker food. There are not many countries in the world like Singapore where one can easily find reasonably priced food with the same high level of hygiene and great variety. Singapore is indeed a food paradise.

Typically, when I cannot be home for my meals, or even when I am eating out with my family, I like to frequent hawker centres, coffee shops and food courts. In parliament, I have spoken a few times on hawker centres, hawker food and our hawker culture. I have urged the government to help preserve this heritage and national identity of Singapore, and even proposed setting up a Singapore Food Museum.

I like to post photos of the hawker food I eat on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. I am not a food critic so I tend not to comment on the food quality. Nor am I promoting the stalls. I just want to document and celebrate the richness of our hawker food that many of us love. 

Last Wednesday, I was in Tampines and decided to drop by the nasi padang coffee shop at Street 44 Blk 475 for my lunch. I ordered a piece of chicken and two veggies, plus a Bandong drink. After I sat down, I gave the attendant $10 and he gave me $7 change. I thought the price was quite cheap. As the coffee shop was new in the neighborhood, I thought it could be a promotional price. I seldom order nasi padang so I am also not familiar with the typical price. I have encountered similar pricing at some Chinese rice stalls, so I did not think too much about it. As usual, I posted a photo of my nasi padang. 

Subsequently, a netizen asked me how much the nasi padang was. I knew that the cordial Bandong drink would not cost too much, probably 50 cents out of the $3 I paid. So I estimated the nasi padang to be $2.50 and replied the netizen on Wednesday night. 

The following day, another netizen posted on his Facebook that after seeing my post, he went to the same coffee shop and showed my nasi padang photo. However, he was charged $6. Hence, he felt that it was double standards and wondered why MPs could enjoy preferential pricing. 

His post was shared widely on various social media platforms. Some netizens opined that it was the coffee shop owner who offered a discount to me, as he would for his regular customers. I had not asked for it and hence I have done nothing wrong. However, other netizens disagreed and felt that the coffee shop owner was ‘bribing’ me and this was corruption for a MP to accept discounts. Hence, CPIB should investigate. They also felt that when MPs enjoy such discounts, we would be out of touch, and not understand the real costs of living and hence could not appreciate the public’s financial burden. 

I wanted to get to the bottom of this matter and went back to the coffee shop two days ago on Sunday. As the owner has been approached by reporters, he was aware that this matter had been widely circulated online. In fact, he had wanted to see me at my Meet People Session on Monday to explain. He acknowledged that his staff had recognized me that day and out of respect for my work and service in the community, charged me only $3 when it was more than $4. It was really out of simple goodwill and there was no ulterior motive or expectations on his part. He was deeply apologetic that the matter has somehow been blown out of proportion.

The owner shared with me that since the coffee shop opening, he has been offering a special $2.50 deal for a meal and a drink for senior citizens and students. According to him, his prices are lower than other nasi padang stalls because he would like to reach out to more customers.

He was aware that a netizen claimed that he was charged $6 for ordering a chicken item and an egg item, but he seriously doubted the authenticity as it would not have cost so much. He must have ordered something else he did not declare. As there were no price labels for the different food items, the owner explained that they would usually give an overall discount depending the type of items ordered, hence the final price would differ from order to order.

I thanked the owner for his goodwill and explanation, and asked him not to feel bad as we have done nothing against our conscience.

As part of his corporate social responsibility, the owner intended to offer the $2.50 deal for one nasi padang and a drink to all customers over lunch time (11am-2pm) this coming weekend (21-22 Dec). Up to 100 customers per day will enjoy the special offer and he would donate all proceeds to the Tampines North welfare fund to help needy residents. I naturally applauded and supported his initiative. 　

I shared this charity plan with my activists. One of them decided to give his support by pledging dollar for dollar so as to raise more money to benefit the community. 

As an elected member, I know I have to be totally above board in what I do. If there is a price clearly listed, I would not accept any discount even it was kindly offered to me. 

And if I were to jump to a conclusion that all food is cheap just because I had paid $2.50 for a nasi padang, that would have been too naïve of me. 

On Sunday, I also had nasi padang for lunch at the coffee shop. I ordered a mutton item, an egg item and a veggie. The owner charged me the full price of $3.70. However, some netizens still refused to accept that it was the reality and insisted that I had been ‘corrupt’ again. 

I decided that any explanation was futile and I would just let actions speak for themselves.

Mr Baey Yam Keng

Dr Chee Soon Juan spoke on a TV panel about population growth in Singapore. Titled "Is Singapore overcrowded?" the episode was recorded in September this year by Internet television station Happy-TV hosted by Mr Kenneth Liang of Dream Forest Productions.

The show is divided into six parts:

[Part 1]: Is Singapore overcrowded?
 

[Part 2]: The hot 6.9 million population number.

[Part 3]: Is foreigner influx overwhelming us?

[Part 4]: Could immigration planning have been better handled?

[Part 5]: More open discussion our Singapore Conversation

[Part 6]: What future do we want for Singapore?

Transcripts are available here.

Source: YourSDP.org

There has been much speculation about the recent riot incident at Little India on 8 Dec 2013. However, not all information that you read online is true. Here are some facts:

When and how did the police respond to the incident?

On 8 Dec 2013, a fatal traffic accident occurred involving a private bus and a foreign worker, Sakthivel Kumaravelu, at the junction of Race Course Road and Hampshire Road. Mr Sakthivel was believed to be drunk at the time and tried to board the bus which was already full.

Were there people injured as a result?

37 Police Officers, 5 Auxilliary Police Officers and 12 SCDF Officers sustained injuries and lacerations during the riot. The driver of the private bus, a 55- year-old Singaporean, and his 38-year-old timekeeper were also injured.

Contrary to some online reports, Mr Sakthivel was not decapitated. He was pronounced dead at the scene as a result of the traffic accident.

16 Police cars and 9 SCDF vehicles were also damaged during the riot.

Who was involved in the rioting?

A total of 420 persons were called up for investigations, in connection with the rioting incident. A total of 28 persons were found to be active participants in the riot and will be charged under Section 147 of the Penal Code. They were found to have committed acts of violence, damaged property, defied police orders or incited others to do so. 35 persons were earlier charged in court. AGC has withdrawn charges against the remaining 7 persons, out of which 4 were warned in lieu of prosecution, while no further action were taken on the other 3.

Another 53 persons have been identified for participating in the riot and for failing to disperse despite Police's order. They will be repatriated and prohibited from returning to Singapore. In addition, another 200 persons were also present at the scene, but whose involvement have been assessed to be passive. They will be issued a formal Police Advisory and no further action will be taken against them.*

A foreign news outlet had incorrectly reported that an Indian national had been pushed out of a bus and was killed instantly. They also reported that Singaporeans and Chinese nationals had attacked the foreign Tamils, resulting in the escalated riot situation.

This is NOT true. Mr Sakthivel passed away as a result of being knocked down by the private bus. Singapore’s High Commissioner to India haswritten to India’s Sun TV Network to request for an immediate correction. They have since apologised and aired a corrected version of its report.

*Last updated: 17 December 2013

Did the police resort to violence when handling the incident?

No shots were fired. Police officers displayed maximum restraint and did not fire any weapon throughout the incident. Their main objective was to contain the situation and minimise any injuries to all present, particularly innocent bystanders.

So what’s happening next?

The Police have substantially completed investigations into the riot as of 17 Dec. 28 subjects were charged in court as of 17 Dec. The Police will continue to monitor the situation at Little India.

Investigations
The bus driver involved in the initial accident has been arrested as well for Causing Death by Negligent Act. He has been released on bail, pending further investigations.

COI
PM Lee has called for a Committee of Inquiry to look into the factors surrounding the incident, and how the incident was handled on the ground. It will also look at measures to manage areas where foreign workers gather.

Anyone with information on the riot should come forward and contact the Police. Information can also be submitted at www.spf.gov.sg/iwitness andwww.spf.gov.sg/CrimeStopper.

Alcohol Ban and Bus Services**
A ban on consumption of alcohol at public places (e.g. at void decks, open areas) in Little India will be in effect every weekend, public holiday and eve of a public holiday, until the Committee of Inquiry makes its recommendations.

Retail and wholesale licence holders (e.g. liquor shops) are allowed to continue selling alcohol but only from 6am to 8pm on weekends, public holidays and eve of public holidays.

This will not affect the consumption and sale of alcohol at other public houses with licences (e.g. hawker centres, coffee shops, restaurants) as long as the alcohol is consumed within the premises.

As for bus services, the 25 Little India Bus Services run by private bus operators will resume operation from Sunday, 22 Dec 2013, but at half the number of scheduled buses. They will also only operate from 2pm to 9pm instead of the previous 2pm to 11pm schedule.

**Last updated: 18 December 2013

For more information and the latest updates, please visit the following sources:

http://www.spf.gov.sg/
https://www.facebook.com/SCDFpage
https://www.facebook.com/singaporepoliceforce
https://twitter.com/singaporepolice
https://twitter.com/SCDF

Sources

• Press Statement by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Little India Riots
• Singapore Police Force- Press Release 14 December 2013
• Singapore Civil Defence Force Statement on 9 December 2013
• Singapore Police Force's Facebook Page- Clarification of Facts (9 December 2013)
• Little India Riot: Victim of road traffic incident that sparked off mob identified: The Straits Times
• MHA Press Release- Government takes action against Little India Rioters
• SPF Press Release: Calibrated Measures to Reinstate Bus Services and Liquor Sales at Little India (18 Dec)

Source: http://www.gov.sg

In GE2011, ESM Goh Chok Tong boldly called NSP as a No Substance Party when Nicole Seah decided to contest in his Marine Parade GRC.

However, when I clicked on PAP Manifesto recently (Link), I thought I would read a 30 page Manifesto. 

Instead, the English version was only 13 page and the rest are in Chinese, Tamil and Malay and all are collated into a 30 page Manifestor.

To add icing on the cake, it had at least one picture on each page and had more pictures than a children's story book. It has slogans "Securing the Future Together" and other fluff. 

So look who's calling No Substance?

CJ

TRS Contributor

Today, I turn 30.

Part of my birthday will be spent with my residents and volunteers at MPS tonight. But I will also be bidding farewell to my 20s among friends who have stuck with me through thick and thin. A rather unusual manner of spending a birthday, but also a very apt and meaningful way of marking the milestone.

Looking back at the decade past, my life took many twists and turns, much like a roller coaster ride. There were dreams fulfilled and broken, moments of deep sadness and pure joy, comforting and worry-filled episodes, rocky paths and smooth roads. All in all, I am thankful for reaching 30, maybe with a few more bruises and scars but nothing more acute, and I am grateful for my family members, friends and team members who accompanied, encouraged and supported me through this journey. Truly, I am grateful.

Not everyone is fortunate enough to make it to 30 and I silently pray for them. In MacPherson, I have witnessed a few heart-wrenching cases of young parents who lost their children to illnesses or accidents. The bereaved parents often recounted to me how intelligent and endearing their children had been, and how much hope they had pinned on them. I remember holding one extremely shaken young mother, trying all I could to console her as she wailed in despair. There was so much pain. It was heart-breaking. Moments like this remind us that life is to be cherished, for every breathing moment is a blessing. I wish these families well with all my heart and I hope they will find the strength to overcome their grief. 

I would also like to offer my best wishes to others who still struggle with their lives. MacPherson has more than its fair share of families in distress. Over the past years, I have met families straining to make ends meet, families with ailing grandparents or kids with disabilities, and families struggling to cope with profound losses. I have been inspired by children from dysfunctional families working hard to rise above their circumstances, by single mothers enduring social stigma and working doubly hard to raise their kids, by elderly aunties and uncles making the best out of what little they have, with fortitude and tenacity. My volunteers and I try our best to help them, and I am thankful for the many donors and volunteers who contribute their resources and service to the community. I hope I can continue to count on their support. And I hope that these Singaporeans going through tough patches in life will eventually overcome the challenges they face, and soon see better days. 

Looking ahead, I seek to do more for the community and for Singapore, both of which I care about very much. In MacPherson, I will continue to build on what my predecessor Mr Yao had done, refine and roll out programmes to help needy residents and fight for funds to extend infrastructural, financial and social support for residents. In Parliament, I will continue to speak up for the elderly, the young and those with mental health conditions, and on issues that affect Singaporeans, like housing, transport and healthcare. I believe that each of us, in ways big and small, can all make a positive difference to the lives of others. Therefore, I hope that more big-hearted individuals will volunteer their service and together make MacPherson and Singapore a truly inclusive and caring home for all. And as you read this, I ask that you join me in this quest for a better tomorrow.

Today marks a new milestone for me. The past decade will certainly be unforgettable, but birthdays are not the time to lament the passing of years. Yes, we ought to recount the past, learn from our experiences, and hopefully become wiser and stronger. But our eyes should be firmly focused on the future that is yet to be shaped – to see what wrong needs to be put right, to act boldly to make things better, to seize the day and fulfil our dreams. 

~Carpe Diem!~

Tin Pei Ling

*Article first appeared on Tin Pei Ling's FB page here.

Hi TRS,

I have a relative living in Thomson Garden Estate and I understood it to be under Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC ward, according to their GE 2011 polling card and the electoral maps found on-line. Recently, I found out they received  "Our Home", a newsletter of the Ang Mo Kio Town Council. Does this mean that the precinct is now cut out and part of Ang Mo Kio GRC? If not, then does it mean that there are left over copies given to residents living in Thomson Garden. If the latter is the case, I would find it strange as I don't see how the Ang Mo Kio TC have any responsibility to the residents.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is true and can see why. It's probably due to the potential loss of PAP votes into Bishan-Toa Payoh coming from that state due to the closure of the walkway saga (http://www.tnp.sg/content/thomson-garden-residents-outraged-over-shunfu-villes-move-demolish-shortcut) which have served the residents by providing convenient  access to the Shunfu Market for over the past 15 over years.

The move to privatise the adjacent Shunfu HUDC was handled badly by the Bishan Toa Payoh TC when the handed the Estade, now named Shunfu Ville into private hands without solving the dispute between the residents of the two communities. This resulted in the unilateral decision by the residents of the newly privatised Estate to demolish the walkway.

Meanwhile, it seams the PAP is going out of it's way to please residents from the opposite Shunfu HDB blocks by providing government sponsored exorbitant upgrading works even when the facilities are still in good condition. At the expense of taxpayers, of course.

Brendan Chong

TRS Contributor

This is the Town Council office at Kaki Bukit division.

There is a story behind this simple office. For years on end, residents staying in the ward have to go to Block 201A, Bedok North Street 1, #01-563 which is some distance away to meet any staff, see to any estate issues and/ or make payment for their monthly service and conservancy fees.

Requests for an office to be set up in the vicinity of the ward were repeatedly put to the then members of parliament in charge of the ward but nothing happened.

This request was also put to the Workers' Party Aljunied GRC team when they were campaigning there in 2011. They listened and shortly after taking over the Town Council, worked out a financially feasible and sustainable arrangement to build an entirely new office at Block 549, Bedok North Avenue 1, right in the middle of the ward and besides MP Faisal's Meet-the-People session at Block 550.

A simple feedback from the ground translated into a workable solution to benefit the residents. No fanfare, no major opening ceremony, just an office built for the residents.

 — at Block 549, Bedok North Avenue 1.

Chen Jiaxi Bernard

*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151816225396625&set=a.485418621624.256579.530146624&type=1&theater

Using the spirit of Christmas for political mileage.

That's what the PAP is up to this Christmas day. What else can we expect from an atheistic government?

We know that the spirit of Christmas is the spirit of giving and counting our blessings in the spiritual sense. However, with these PAP morons, they are using it to tell Singaporeans to reflect on the good things in life - obvious to the fact that they are insinuating, that their good life is credited to the PAP.

They want to claim credit for the spirit of Christianity. How desperate they are.

Since they are politically inclined, we too have to source out the reason why they are doing so. 

Perhaps this is their new strategy - to tell Singaporeans that the peace and order they are living in is due to the governance of the PAP. Perhaps, they want Singaporeans to feel indebted to them, that their peace and safety are the cornerstone of life.

How silly can they be. Peace, stability and safety are the basic duties of every government. It is not something unique with the PAP. If a government fails to deliver on these, they fail. As simple as that.

Singaporeans are no longer taken in by such smokescreens.

The Alternative View

*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=628679573860045&set=a.360220640705941.85354.358759327518739&type=1