English proficiency for foreign frontline service workers

Hi friends,

In May 2008, I wrote to the papers to suggest that foreign frontline service workers be required to take basic English proficiency tests. This will increase productivity (as English is our lingua franca) and reduce the angst of many Singaporeans who had encountered frontline workers who could not understand English.

If such a worker was working at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, one would not have bat an eyelid, but the thing is that these non-English speakers are working on Mainstreet Singapore.

Anyway, please click here to read my blog post on this.

The government has responded.

In this little red dot, things move- but sometimes at a glacial pace.

So if there is anyone out there with bright ideas- don’t give up.

Cheers,

Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan

Only if they speak English ...
05:55 AM Dec 03, 2009 (Today)
by WANG ENG ENG AND ALICIA WONG

SINGAPORE - It could be the next best thing to outright requiring all foreign service staff to be conversant in English, for those tired of encountering sales assistants and waiters who don't speak a word of it.

From the third quarter of next year, work permit holders in the retail, food and beverage and hotels sectors will need to pass an English language proficiency test in order to qualify for skilled levy status.

It passes the buck, literally, to employers who pay just $150 a month for the skilled workers levy but $240 for the unskilled levy.

And while some industry players applaud this, others lament the cost of training.

The Manpower Ministry will partner NTUC Learning Hub and the Workforce Development Agency to train workers, and they are anticipating a two- to three-times increase in demand for English classes. More details of the tests will come next year.

The move, said Restaurant Association of Singapore Ang Kiam Meng, will force employers to look "more proactively" at the communication problems of foreign service staff. "It will encourage the restaurateur to upgrade their non-speaking English workforce ... As a whole it's positive for the industry," he said. But he wondered if it would prove an "extra (cost) burden" for employers.

At the Migrant Workers Centre, which yesterday saw its first batch of foreign workers graduate from a basic English course, subsidised fees are under $200 a person.

Businesses have other concerns. "Half of our workers will not make it (past the test) and might not be able to continue to work. We're going to face problems," said Ms Christine Chan, human resource manager at Riverview Hotel.

The affected half are mainly the backend staff who do not deal with customers. "When we employed them, we did not expect them to speak good or simple English," she said, pointing out that the hotel might not be able to convert all those who fail the proficiency test to unskilled worker status, as there is a quota for unskilled workers too.

And with the integrated resorts opening, "if we send staff for the English course, if they improve their competency, will they continue to work with us or move on? Cannot make them sign bond, right?" said Ms Chan.

How would the move affect companies' hiring decisions - would they give priority to those proficient in English, or willingly hire first and train later?

"The more enlightened businesses will train their staff before putting them in the frontline," said Singapore Chinese Chamber Institute of Business senior sales and marketing manager Chew Kheng Fui - while another option could be to ensure frontline staff pass the proficiency test but resign to paying the unskilled levy for backend staff.

Or would employers turn to hiring more Singaporeans? "I wish it could but I don't think it will happen," said Mr Chew. "Getting foreigners to do the job will still be much more cost effective. Employers will just be more selective in hiring foreigners that can speak better English - so maybe the Filipinos have the advantage, compared to mainland Chinese."

Minister of State (Manpower and Trade and Industry) Lee Yi Shyan said: "We want to encourage employers to look at it as building a more productive workforce ... If they look at how much better service they can provide, that should incentivise them to send the workers for the programme.

"The cost in training is a small factor. Whether local or foreign, you have to continue to train our workers ... Otherwise, if we stand still in our skill level, our economy will not be competitive."

AWARE- Appeal for cool heads and compromise

AWARE: Appeal for cool heads and compromise ( Unpublished letter to the Forum editor)

Dear Editor,

I read with concern of how the recent AWARE AGM had led to the emergence of two groups of Singaporeans who are now set on an apparent collision course.

This is not just any ordinary boardroom tussle where the losers nurse bruised egos and live to fight another day. The stakes are much higher. Everyone stands to lose.

In this fight , battle-lines are already drawn and allegedly, God’s name is even invoked amidst warning that He does not want “our nation crossing that line”.

Singapore has been fortunate to have racial and religious harmony for the past decades. This should not be taken for granted for we have seen with our own eyes in regions as close as Indonesia and as far as the Baltics, how religion, when stirred by provocateurs, had become the root cause of hatred instead of love; strife instead of harmony.

In those places, it did not take much to spark off hatred and mistrust amongst previously peace-loving neighbourhoods. Communities, many with families of different faiths living side by side for generations, were torn apart and like poor Humpty Dumpty, can never be put “back together again”.

Hence I totally agree with Minister Vivian Balakrishnan that religion must be kept out of this debate and that a “rainbow coalition” is needed in order for AWARE to work effectively.

May I humbly suggest:

1.Some of New AWARE ex-co members should voluntarily step down to make way for a more inclusive “rainbow coalition” ex-co. In order to allay fears that this is a “church-based” conspiracy, no more than 2 members should be from the same church.

2.New ex-co members, preferably from racial minorities and of different faiths should be co-opted.

3. The Old AWARE should now know that there is a substantial group of people who are conservative and who are suspicious of any attempts at sexual liberalizations, even if these are well-intended. Old AWARE might consider working with the “rainbow coalition” ex-co by being co-opted.

It is apparent to most of us that there are many parents who are not comfortable with or are misinformed about Old AWARE’s work in the schools. Parents need more information if they are to wholeheartedly support this work.

4.As a gesture of goodwill, Old AWARE should retract the “motion of no confidence” in order to give this new “rainbow coalition” time to work.

I hope that cool heads will prevail for the sake of our nation, a nation that all of us love and treasure.

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Addendum (4.5.09): At EOGM ( 2nd May 09)- The NEW AWARE ( led by Josie Lau) lost a vote of no-confidence by a ratio of 2:1 and resigned. New committee headed mainly be Old-guards retook control of AWARE.

NB: Letter sent to Forum Page Editor- Not published.

Tribute to Emeritus Professor Wong Hock Boon

Hi Friends,

I sent the following letter to the forum page and ST has confirmed that it will be published:

Tribute to Emeritus Professor Wong Hock Boon

The passing on of Emeritus Professor Wong Hock Boon has saddened Singapore’s closely-knit medical community.

Professor Wong Hock Boon was without a doubt the father of Paediatric Medicine in Singapore and had almost single-handedly influenced the lives of thousands of undergraduate and postgraduate students and doctors who had the fortune of being taught by him during his famous didactic lectures and the grand ward rounds. The latter were held 365 days a year!

Prof Wong’s academic credential is world renown but he is also remembered by patients and friends for his humility and humanity. As Prof. Wong’s wife Lily commented recently, he shunned media attention and would rather focus his energy on his research and patients.

Even though his daughter Julia, also a paediatrician (what else?), had to “wrestle” with scores of doctors for a share of her father’s love and affection, she must be immensely proud that her father is one of Singapore’s greatest sons and that he will be greatly missed by all of us.

Young doctors in Singapore, have lost a role model- one that I can safely vouch, will not be seen again in my lifetime.

The authorities should honor Professor Wong in a way befitting his immeasurable contributions to our nation.

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

PS:I was Julia's classmate in Medical school and schoolmate in JC

Of Lorenz's Chaotic Butterflies and Singapore

Obituary: Edward Lorenz; Pioneer in Creation of Chaos Theory (1917-2008)

By Patricia SullivanWashington Post Staff WriterThursday, April 17, 2008; B07

Edward N. Lorenz, 90, a meteorologist who laid the groundwork for chaos theory, memorably asking whether the flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil can set off a tornado in Texas, died of cancer April 16 at his home in Cambridge, Mass. He was an emeritus professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

At MIT, Dr. Lorenz accidentally discovered how small differences in the early stages of a dynamic system, such as the weather, can trigger such huge changes in later stages that the result is unpredictable and essentially random.

At the time, Dr. Lorenz was studying why it's so hard to accurately forecast the weather, but the implications of his work go far beyond meteorology.

The new science of chaos fundamentally changed the way researchers address topics from the geometry of snowflakes to the predictability of which movies will become blockbusters. The butterfly effect became a popular way of describing unpredictability, most recently in "An Inconvenient Truth" (2006), the Academy Award-winning documentary with former Vice President Al Gore.

It also "brought about one of the most dramatic changes in mankind's view of nature since Sir Isaac Newton," said the committee that awarded Dr. Lorenz the 1991 Kyoto Prize for basic sciences.

Yet Dr. Lorenz's 1962 paper on chaos theory was largely ignored for years. A decade later, when he gave a talk about predictability, with a title asking the famous butterfly question, the scientific establishment was ready to consider the idea. Other scientists who had been working on similar questions swarmed to the field, and one by one, certain assumptions of science began to falter.

"When I first heard this [butterfly effect] idea, I thought it very clever but it couldn't be literally true," said James Gleick, a science writer and author of "Chaos: Making a New Science" (1987), which explored Dr. Lorenz's work. "But it is literally true. . . . Complex dynamical systems, if they are chaotic, never repeat themselves. They are capable of an infinite variety of behavior."
This means that simple systems can result in complex behavior and that the slightest change in underlying causes can make the result unpredictable.

Chaos theory -- also known as the science of nonlinearity, the science of complexity, the science of random recurrent behavior or the science of turbulence and discord -- has thus been called the third great scientific revolution of the 20th century, along with relativity and quantum physics.

Edward Norton Lorenz was born May 23, 1917, in West Hartford, Conn., and graduated from Dartmouth College. He received a master's degree in mathematics in 1940 from Harvard University and served as a weather forecaster for the Army Air Forces during World War II.
In 1948, he received a doctorate in meteorology from MIT and joined its faculty. He remained there the rest of his career.

In 1961, he was using a primitive computer to model weather forecasts, which led to his most renowned work.

Using 12 equations, such as the relationship between air pressure and wind speed, he ran the model and found exactly what he sought. But taking a shortcut on the next run, he found that a tiny decimal point change led to a significant error.

Rather than ignore the response, which peers had considered an anomaly, Dr. Lorenz realized measurement is not perfect. If temperature, pressure or humidity measurements were off by a hundredth of a percent, the rainfall he expected in Las Vegas on Thursday could show up as a snowstorm in Beijing a week later. A computerized model of how the "butterfly effect" works can be found at the Exploratorium's Web site.

"He had the ability to make important connections between atmospheric phenomena and simple theoretical models," said Isaac Held, senior research scientist in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. "He taught us that complexity can follow from very simple underlying rules. His study of the limits to the predictability of weather initiated an entire new field of chaotic dynamics."

Dr. Lorenz was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1975, and in 1983, he and oceanographer Henry Stommel were jointly awarded the $50,000 Crafoord Prize by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, an honor established to recognize fields not eligible for Nobel Prizes.

Dr. Lorenz was known as shy and humble. He enjoyed hiking and cross-country skiing and sought out mountain trails near every scientific meeting he attended, one of his daughters said.
His wife, Jane Logan Lorenz, died in 2001.

Survivors include three children, Nancy Lorenz of Roslindale, Mass., Edward Lorenz of Grasse, France, and Cheryl Lorenz of Eugene, Ore.; and four grandchildren.Chaos theory helped shape Dr. Lorenz's conclusions as he worked to calculate long-term forecasts. Given the problems of input, the meteorologist determined that it's impossible to accurately predict weather beyond two or three weeks with a reasonable degree of accuracy

My comments:

Hi friends,

Let me first confess that I was a poor student of Physics.

I was so poor in Physics that I asked to downgrade my Physics from A Levels to AO levels whilst in junior college many moons ago. I found that I had very little clue what the A levels physics lecturer was talking about and the textbook (Nelkon, I think it was) was too heavy to lug around!

Anyway, I was already too busy with the Student Council ( for which I was in charge of students’ lockers) ,being secretary of the photographic club ( which allowed me to move around pretending to take pictures whilst the rest of the college was standing in formation) , and being in the track & field team ( and you know how poor NJC was then and we had to go across to Hwa Chong to borrow their track!). I had no time to do four A levels (and of course I gave the S-papers the miss too)!

As it turned out, it seems that I made the right decision as having less than four A levels was no impediment to my being admitted into the university. My extracurricular activities probably impressed the interview board! Or maybe they just wanted to give this poor boy a chance in life ( and I am grateful for that).

Enough about myself.

I cannot remember why I was fascinated about Lorenz’s Chaos theory and its related Butterfly effect, but I was. I guess it is always intriguing to think that an action as insignificant as a butterfly’s flapping can lead to catastrophic earth-shattering events the other side of the world.

How one sees the world will affect one’s daily behaviour. If one is a fatalist ( or what Rotter classifies as External locus of control), then don’t bother. Just do what you have been doing and as everything has been pre-determined already, you should just let the powers that be ( eg Providence/ Political leaders etc) run your lives. (Read my post on Locus of control-Are you ready for change?).

But if you are like me who feel that one’s destiny lies in our own hands and that we are the only ones who should decide what kind of life we want (Rotter’s Internal Locus of control), then perhaps we should be more pro-active. When each of us makes an effort to speak up for injustices around us or remind the establishment that not everyone is happy as they are, then each small action will lead to other perhaps larger reactions which eventually lead to the Tornado Lorenz referred to.

So are you prepared to flap your wings, my little butterflies?

Cheers

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

References:

1. Chaos Theory

2. Butterfly Effect

I almost stopped writing… but then came a phone call

Hi Friends,

The music stopped

I stopped writing to the newspapers’ forum pages for just about a year.

Many reasons accounted for the hiatus- primary one being constraint of time. I was just finishing a course and I needed more than 24 hours a day. But a more important reason was that my creative juices sort of just dried up.

I was also feeling the futility of ranting and shouting like a madman in the wilderness. I felt that if no one else cared whether this place went to the pigs, why should I? “They deserve what they get” I said to myself.

In the past, I had opinions about many facets of Singapore’s society. These ranged from the overbearing arrogance of the ruling elite to other more mundane topics like the neglect of our forgotten poor as well as the inhumane working contracts of maids.

In fact, it seemed like I had opinions just about everything and for a time, I was shooting letters like Billy the Kid shot his guns- from the hips. There were occasions when the Straits Times and Today printing two different edited versions of the same letter on the same day!

However unbeknownst to all, I was burdened with doubts. Doubts that perhaps I was writing too much. Perhaps no one was interested in what I had to say. Perhaps I was the weird discontented one and everyone else was happy and gay ( in a non-sexual sense).

My gloom was compounded by the forum editors rejecting what I felt were several legitimate and balanced accounts of topics of the day. The standard replies such as “ we regret that we are unable to publish…. because we get more than 70 letters a day… blah blah” do sound disingenuous when one reads sycophantic letters from obsequious and ingratiating writers that more or less say, “ When the wind blows ...Praise be to the rulers”.( Creative license- exaggeration used here to prove a point)

The phone call

But there was a phone call that stopped this rut!

Someone that I respected greatly and who is a giant in my profession called me in the office. He said that he always looked for my letters in the forum page. He encouraged me to write on as my views closely represented his opinions and those of his friends.

Truth be told- the sentiment expressed by this gentleman was not the first. I will sound conceited here if I go on in this vein. Suffice it to say that I am often self-deprecating and do not take others’ tributes easily. When someone stepped up to me to say, “ Hey, I read your letter the other day and …” I would quickly change the subject.

On thinking back, I now realize that by having this false sense of modesty and dismissing well-intended encouragements from readers, I am actually not respecting their right to an opinion.

Perhaps in my small way I am articulating the views of some who feel helpless and without a voice. Notwithstanding the editorial policies of the forum pages, a fraction of our common sense of frustration and indignation do get expressed. Perhaps that is better than not saying anything at all. ( I may be wrong- some may say that participation with them gives them undeserved legitimacy).

So readers, thank you for reading. Whether you like it or not, I will be here- right in their face!

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Singapore’s investments in UBS; Merrill Lynch; Citigroup (aka triple whammy rotten eggs ).

Hi Friends,

When Singapore’s Government Investments Corporation (GIC) and Temasek Holdings bought substantial stakes in the above three financial titans, I was genuinely proud and excited.

Wow! I believed (as did GIC and Temasek’s advisors) that such opportunities were once in a lifetime and not to be missed. This little red dot of ours would surely prove the whole world wrong!

Buy when everyone else sells; Who dares wins! ( SAS motto- I think)

However, the initial trickle of gloomy financial reports are fast becoming a flood. Jim Roger grieved “to see what Singapore is doing” and now UBS is writing down another US $19 billion! I suspect Roger’s grief may not be altogether sincere as he actually shorted investment banks in Wall Street. Hence he will benefit when these banks’ share prices went south!

Notwithstanding Roger’s true emotions, I have a sinking feeling and am beginning to think that these investments are lemons and that it will take more than my lifetime before we see any positive returns from them.

I am usually a positive-thinking kinda guy who always “looks on the bright side of life”.
But there is very little positive I can get out of this unless you consider telling those smart alecks at GIC and Temasek “I TOLD YOU SO!” as positive.

Honestly I would have preferred that that they proved the pessimists wrong. This possibility is becoming more remote by the day.

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

1.UBS reveals another US$19b sub-prime drama 1 April 2008

ZURICH : Swiss bank UBS revealed a second round of subprime-related write-downs of about 19 billion dollars on Tuesday, becoming the world's worst-hit bank in the US mortgage crisis.

The latest write-down was the biggest single sub-prime hit so far worldwide, and came on top of 18.4 billion dollars (11.7 billion euros) the bank wrote down in 2007.

It will also plunge UBS, the biggest Swiss bank, into a net loss of 12 billion Swiss francs (7.6 billion euros) for the first quarter this year after loss of 4.4 billion Swiss francs in 2007, its first-ever such loss.

The bank also said it wanted to raise 15 billion Swiss francs of new capital, and that it was changing its chairman.

The last write-downs for 2007 had already forced the bank into a controversial rescue recapitalisation by a Singapore sovereign wealth fund and by an unnamed investor in the Middle East.

The overall write-downs by UBS so far of 37.4 billion dollars are far greater than those of American banks Citigroup (21.1 billion dollars in 2007) and Merrill Lynch which has booked 19.4 billion dollars in write-downs. ( read more...)


2.Investor Jim Rogers Says Singapore to Lose Money on U.S. Banks
Reuters 5 Mar 2008

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Investment guru Jim Rogers believes that U.S. bank stocks could fall further and predicts that Singapore's state investors will lose money on their multi-billion dollar investments in Citigroup and Merrill Lynch.

"I'm shorting investment banks on Wall Street," the long-time commodities bull told reporters on Wednesday at a launch event for ABN AMRO certificates linked to commodities.

"It grieves me to see what Singapore is doing. They are going to lose money," he added, referring to investments by Government of Singapore Investment Corp and Temasek [TEM.UL] in Citigroup (C.N: Quote, Profile, Research), Switzerland's UBS (UBSN.VX: Quote, Profile, Research) and Merrill Lynch (MER.N: Quote, Profile, Research).

Rogers, an American who co-founded the Quantum Fund with billionaire George Soros in the 1970s, now lives in Singapore as he wants to raise his four-year-old daughter in an environment where she can learn Mandarin Chinese.

Rogers, who also writes investment books, said Wall Street had to work off 10 years of excesses and predicted that losses linked to risky mortgages will eventually spread to credit card bills, student loans and other debt.

(Reporting by Kevin Lim; Editing by Jan Dahinten)

David Saul Marshall: What Singapore’s mass media will not tell you

Hi Friends,

Way back in October 2006, I posted an entry entitled “Lessons from Beyond the Grave- What 2 Singaporeans teach us”.

This was in two instalments.

Part One was the tragic tale of a certain Mr.Tan Jee Suan who was so poor and financially distressed that he felt that the only way out of his monetary troubles was to end his life in front of an MRT train. His parting gift to his children was $10. This was all that he had and it was for them to buy chicken rice.

In the one and half years since then, do we still have our Mr. Tan’s in our midst?

Part two was about Singapore’s first Chief Minister Mr.Marshall. I was very moved by what he said about "Noblesse oblige" in public service during an interview he gave to Dharmendra Yadav entitled “Meeting David Marshall In 1994”.

Noblesse olige literally means nobility is an obligation. It is defined as:
1. Benevolent, honorable behavior considered to be the responsibility of persons of high birth or rank.
2. the obligation of those of high rank to be honorable and generous (often used ironically)

Thanks again to Mr. Yadav. Without his publishing this conversation into the public domain, we would never have known what Marshall felt about Singapore’s move away from idealism etc.

Marshall is an idealist and humanist that I greatly admire. What was said in 1994 is just as relevant to us today.

As expected the Straits Times just glossed over the feature on Marshall on this his 100th birthday. I did not expect them to mention any of the points brought out in that 1994 interview and I did not get it!

Cheers

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Malaysia’s GE Tsunami and implications for Singapore

Hi Friends,

Malaysia’s rakyat has spoken

Malaysia’s rakyat (people) has spoken in no uncertain terms.

In one fell swoop, Malaysian political’s landscape was unimaginably changed. Barisan Nasional (BN), the national coalition which consisted of racially-based component parties which until yesterday was supposed to give the different races a representative voice in the higher echelons of political power is no more.

Malaysia’s politics reached the “Tipping Point” yesterday.

BN has lost its 2/3 majority and is now holding on to power ever so tenuously. It does not have the mandate to amend any articles of its constitution. MIC, the Indian party is decimated as is Gerakan (Chinese-based party with origin in Penang). The MCA (Chinese party) is close to being mortally wounded.

In the states’ legislatures, BN’s collapse was equally dramatic. Besides Kelatan ( which was expected), BN lost Penang (PM Abdullah Badawi homestate) , Kedah (Ex-PM Mahathir’s homestate), Perak, Selangor and just held on to Trengganu with the skin of their teeth! The BN now only rules 8 of the 13 states!

The Perfect Storm

Malaysia’s opposition had a Perfect Storm with the following players and circumstances all in some sort of heavenly alignment:

1.Mercurial Anwar hitting his zenith with Princess reformasi “Nurul” mesmerising the crowds.
2.Indian and Hindu disenchantment with alleged marginalisation. Hindraf riots.
3.DAP getting their act together with many credible personalities willing to come forward to be counted. Tony Pua worked in Singapore and Dr.Ramasamy who slayed Penang's Chief Minister Dr.Koh Tsu Koon was working in a think-tank in Singapore. Men with guts and principles!
4.MCA’s Dr.Chua ( no need to say more).
5.MIC’s Samy Vellu and his fake hair ( also no need to say more)
6.Mahathir ( whose side was he on?)
7.Rise of alternative media esply internet.

As a Singaporean, I observe all these happenings over the TV and Malaysiakini.com’s website with concern and interest. The website has come a long way and was quoted extensively by Mediacorp’s Channelnewsasia last night!

We are thankful that there was no untoward public disorder or riots.

Hats off to the Election Commission and the police as it was a free and fair election and it looked like there were no major allegations of cheating or vote-rigging!

There is no doubt to me that the Malaysian BN would not be the only people doing a post-mortem.

Singapore’s PAP would be looking at the situation with concern and would definitely prefer not to get a surprise at our own GE in a few years’ time.

Not being connected at all to the PAP nor having any relations ( carnal or otherwise) with any PAP’s leaders, I can only guess at what the PAP would do next to prevent such a Tsunami from happening.

Likely Implications for Singapore

1.More and larger GRC’s. (Less single seat wards)
2. Heavy control of internet nearer the GE
3.PAP will fine-tune its feedback mechanisms to get more accurate messages from the grassroots.
4.Tighter control of MSM (Mainstream Media)
5. The disenfranchised and poor would be closely monitored to ensure that their unhappiness do not reach boiling point. Grass-root organs (PAP-aligned) would act as eyes and ears and will be the main channel for helping the poor. They will not look favourably towards any non-PAP group which wants to act as champions of the poor.
6.Internal Security ACT will remain in place. This would be handy for potential trouble-makers.
7. Opposition parties would not be considered partners but as necessary inconveniences.

Having said that, the idealistic side in me was hoping that someone with conscience within the PAP would feel that more should be done to allow greater voice from the people and the true feelings of the people should be made known- but the pragmatic side simply laughed and asked him to shut up!

Let us keep our fingers crossed and hope that Malaysia would emerge stronger after this and that calm and peace will prevail! Maybe Malaysia can also show the world that it is possible to have peaceful political transitions and that democracy is not something to be afraid of. You win some and lose some?

Cheers

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Link: Malaysiakini.com report

Suharto: .."if he had any faults, please forgive them"

Hi Friends,

'Father has returned to God.

'We ask that if he had any faults, please forgive them...may he be absolved of all his mistakes.'

These words by Siti Hardianti Rukmana, the eldest daughter of the late President Suharto are poignant indeed.

Great are Suharto’s excesses but so are his achievements. I will leave it to the Great Weighing Scale in the Sky to conclude if the balancing scale tipped in Suharto’s favor.

It is perhaps too easy for us to speak of forgiveness if we were but bystanders looking from a distance. Forgiveness would be most meaningful if it came from those whose loved ones’ lives were snuffed out in Acheh or East Timor during the many military conflicts of Suharto’s reign.

I hope that all who suffered find peace and solace and let bygones be bygones. The alternative would be to let hatred gnaw inwards until little remains of the human soul.

Many giants of history had endured unmentionable torture and brutality only to forgive their tormenters later.

Nelson Mandela forgave FW deKlerk.

Kim Dae Jung forgave Chun Doo-Hwan and Roh Tae-Woo .

I look to the day when on our own sunny Singapore shores, the players of both sides of our political scene learn to live and let live. Let there be more debate about ideas and less on destroying the messengers.

Are there many still banished from our borders because youthful idealism led them to join liberation armies that were not to be? Are they still languishing in south of Thailand? How ironic that those who were most passionate are punished whilst the apathetic gets rewarded.

All of us have a lot to learn from two twenty-year olds last weekend in Melbourne. Looking at the photographs of Novak Djokovic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga with arms on each others' shoulders and matched by wide smiles. Can you tell who won the Australian Open?

To Indonesians out there, Cheers!

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Singapore's inflation rate- Worse to come?

Hi Friends,

Of late, we have had a slew of shocking news about inflation rates hitting 16-year highs and even political leaders confirming that this would peak at 5 per cent early 2008.

This comes as no surprise to any of us. External factors like the US $100 oil barrels coupled with recent GST hikes to 7% and increased ERP rates of up to $5 (third hike in 2007,no less), must inevitably translate to higher costs of doing business and hence higher prices.

The mismatch in the supply and demand of residential and commercial properties certainly did not help to keep rentals down!

What is worrying is that most of us see this as only the beginning of an unhealthy upward trend and are not as confident as our leaders that this can be managed as planned.

In the recent parliamentary debate, the people were advised to choose cheaper alternatives to minimise the impact of rising prices. That is almost like Marie Antoinette, the Queen of France during the French Revolution saying,” Let them eat cake” when told that the peasants did not have any more bread!

Uncontrolled inflation arouses the spectre of hyperinflation like that of inter-war Germany ( see here & here) in the 1920’s. A loaf of bread that cost 2 marks in 1920, cost 430,000,000,000 (ten zeroes) marks in 1923. In pubs, Germans found that their second beer cost twice as much as their first, as prices rose hourly. When paid three times a day, workers hurried with their wheelbarrows of ever-depreciating currency to spend at the grocery before prices rose further. Those social upheavals were just what Hitler needed to get elected into power.

I admit that my anxiety is slightly exaggerated, but it is real. As are the concerns of our lower income citizens, who must once bear the brunt of yet another financial burden.

Dr. Huang Shoou Chyuan

Burma’s despotic regime has crossed the line

Hi Friends,

Henceforth, I will refer to the nation of Myanmar in its original name of Burma as a sign of protest.

In my mind, I had drawn a line in the sand and this line is when the military regime uses brutal and lethal force to resolve this impasse.

The line has been crossed.

The news from Burma’s cities is that hundreds of monks have been arrested overnight, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been moved to a notorious prison, and many have been maimed or killed.

It is clear that this military dictatorship does not seek reconciliation through negotiations or dialogue.

Even economic sanctions do not work with the military leaders because they will always have the first bite of the country’s treasury’s “cherry” as they pass the resultant economic hardship to the people. This makes the people more disenfranchised and bitter. The people then rise up again only to be beaten into submission for another 20 years. The unending circle of life?

Is this the Burmese people’s karma? Although we are not the ones to wield the rods that beat the monks and nuns, we are just as culpable if we do not do our utmost to help them or bring attention to their plight!

What can we do? Or as one anonymous blogger commented on my blog (rather insultingly) that “talk is cheap” and that as Burma is but 3 hours flight away I should perhaps go there to provide medical cover for the protesters ( ? to show that I am more than just talk).

I take his point that we are helpless and what we can do now seem so futile. Perhaps he is the typical risk-averse Singaporean who cannot be counted on to support any cause unless the outcome is 100% certain. The risk-averse “rational” Singaporean?

Our politicians ( Singapore’s and ASEAN’s ) have already stated their views.

Foreign Minister and current Chairman of ASEAN said that Asean had to take a "very realistic position to keep Myanmar within the Asean family because it is in everybody's interest" to do so, including neighbouring China and India.

When asked what Asean would do if the junta became increasingly repressive, he said: "If national reconciliation is not possible and there is repression and violence where many people die, then it is a new situation all over again. Asean can issue statements and Asean can shed tears.

"But at that point in time, it will be a fight within Myanmar itself." Translated to street English- " You are on your own, babe"

Unlike our politicians, we can speak the truth and call a despot a despot- not worrying whether we will have sand when Indonesia starts the embargo of sand exports again nor worry that supporting peaceful protest in Burma will mean that we can no longer tell others to “mind their own business “ when they express support for Singapore’s own nascent pro-democracy forces.

All of us ordinary citizens of Singapore can speak the truth and we should.

Hear this ,Burma’s despots- "Please go back to your barracks. Let your people live peaceful, normal lives. Let them choose their own leaders by universal suffrage!"

Peace,

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

NB: Link to singaporepatriot.blogspot.com's posts on the Suppression in Burma and why ASEAN and Singapore should take immediate action now!

Ngiam Tong Dow and danger of Group Think

Hi Friends,

Ngiam Tong Dow is yet again trying to get the ruling class to listen to his opinions about where the system needs tweaking.

His mind is a treasure trove that the government would do well to take advantage of.

I have already written about this here ( yes, I know it was also a well-disguised shameless plug for my alma mater, ACS!).

The argument can be succinctly summarised in one sentence:

If all our future leaders , who are today’s smart kids, are schooled in only 1 or 2 schools, it is highly likely that they will see the world through the same set of lenses- and that is not ideal.

I agree with Ngiam that a diversity of opinions and solutions for Singapore’s complex problems is preferable to the situation now where scholars who will likely be senior civil servants or politicians pass through the same well-trodden path which their seniors had trodden upon. The risk-free path.

The talking is the easy part.

The gargantuan task is this (warning-Long sentence) –

Since Singapore’s educational system is purportedly meritocratic, and “risk-averse” parents being “risk-averse” Singaporeans would naturally take the path most well-trodden and prod their kids onto this self-same well trodden path, how do we tell these parents that for the sake of diversity of ideas and for the good of the nation, their kids should not go to the “R” schools even though they got A* for all subjects at the Primary School Leaving Exams and are already representing the state in Wushu/Youth Orchestra/Five Stones by virtue of attending enrichment classes since the time they popped out of the womb, but should attend secondary school and Junior College in the Best of the Rest instead?

Tough sell!

Only diehard ACSians ( and others from St Joseph/ Chinese High) will contemplate such folly!

For the records, I have nothing against the R schools. I even have many friends from these fine schools! (haha)

Cheers and have great weekend!

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Addendum (9 Sept 07 8.55pm): I just remember that I wrote about Mr. Ngiam some time ago and here it was about "Singapore the Nation is Bigger than Singapore the Country" Enjoy

S'pore in need of a talent spread?

Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam

Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg (Today 7th Sept 07)

EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.

Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam

Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg

EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam

Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg

EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam

Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg

EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
http://nofearsingapore.blogspot.com/2007/03/about-anglo-chinese-school-and-why.html

The National Day Parade could have been even better…

Hi Friends,

I actually watched the parade today. It was interesting, heart-warming even.

The military hardware was reassuring and the heartware represented by personnels in all the different wings of the military were as usual faultless and put in a credible showing.

However, a certain marching contingent seemed out of place.

All other contingents were unifiers of Singapore’s citizens

All the other contingents were a public show of Singapore’s unity- that creed and culture need not be an impediment to Singapore’s aspiration to be a city of possibilities, and that diversity would not be a hindrance but a strength. Hence Singaporeans of all hue and colour and of both sexes marched side by side proudly and the whole nation’s heart beat as one with them.

One partisan contingent reminds of our "dividedness".

This other contingent was a show of partisanship- as if to say that only those that wore the all-white uniform on their bodies and the lightning flash on their sleeves deserved a place in Singapore’s political arena. A sort of winner’s justice?

How else can we explain that only the ruling People’s Action Party had a marching contingent on this our National Day? Do not the Worker’s Party activists want to celebrate Singapore’s 42nd birthday too? Are not Chiam’s Singapore People’s Party’s and the National Solidarity Party’s members patriots as well?

My suggestion:

1.All political parties should be invited for national parades. Granted, not all will jump at the opportunity to participate ( and you know which party I am alluding to – you don’t need to be a “rocket”-scientist to read my kind …clue in the “rocket”).

2.If possible, they should all march in an integrated contingent perhaps with alternating flags of different parties.Though some marchers may not take kindly to having to hoist other party’s flags, these are just minor logistical details to be sorted out later.

3.If the idea of inviting other political parties is so repugnant to the organisers, then no political parties should march and only grassroot activists will march under the People’s Association’s banners. After all, the PA is “supposed” to be non-partisan ( snigger snigger)

Conclusion

The entity and concept of Singapore is only slowly emerging and the nation’s identity is beginning to become separated from the ruling party that rules it – and it is a good thing. ( And that is one reason I displayed the Singapore flag together with fellow Singaporeans)

Hence, let not PAP’s sole participation in what should be a non-partisan event set back our development as a united and cohesive nation.

Cheers

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

In support of Li Hongyi

Hi Friends,

After reading the complete account about Li Hongyi’s email (thanks to takchek.blogspot.com), I must say that I am in support of Li’s actions.

If we ignore the fact that he is PM’s son, what he had done was very idealistic though it may not be in line with established MINDEF procedure. About Mindef procedures... have we forgotten nebulous SAF laws such as “… conduct unbecoming of a SAF personnel.. etc” .

Anyone from a general to the recruit can be charged for having "conduct unbecoming of SAF... " and how many men had been thrown into the guard room on those charges? Uncountable! and no one can even tell us what "unbecoming conduct" actually meant ! How convenient.

(Dr.Huang (14.7.07 8pm)- I just remember the convenient catch-all law that the SAF uses to charge servicemen when more specific charges are not available. It is "conduct prejudicial to the SAF.. blah blah blah" Anyway, you get the idea.)

My personal opinion is that as we are already short of idealism, one more idealist is better than one less. ( Call me naïve or any other name you want).

I know I have my work cut out for me and will spend the next few days taking my foot out of my mouth as I get flames from fellow netizens, ... but that’s life.

Oh yes, I also sent another Dear Editor letter to the forum pages.

Cheers,

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan


Letter to the editors of ST & Today

July 13, 2007

Dear Editor,

Re: About 2Lt Li’s whistle blowing

I disagree with Mindef’s reprimanding 2Lt Li Hongyi.

Li brought the matter of a derelict fellow officer up through the proper channels but was met with typical bureaucratic red tape and inaction.

Instead of tossing his hands up in defeat and become cynical like most, Li did what only an idealistic person would do. He doggedly pursued the matter further and now suffers the consequences for this.

I know a reprimand sounds like a tap on the knuckle but it is an official black mark nonetheless.

This official reprimand sends an erroneous signal to the citizens that if even the PM’s son cannot beat the system, it would be folly for lesser mortals to try.

It is only idealists who dare challenge age-old traditions and who will most likely be the ones to slaughter the venerated sacred cows.

This reminds me of a similar incident in my old reservist unit.

A fellow officer bypassed the proper channels and wrote a letter of complaint directly to the Defence Minister. As expected, the matter was looked into and resolved expeditiously, but not before many feathers were ruffled and boats rocked.

That whistle blower was unexpectedly and summarily promoted to the next higher rank and he is still the only instance in the Army Medical Corp’s recent history in which an officer had been promoted without attending an advanced officers’ course (a sort of battlefield promotion)!

2Lt Li deserves no less and not because he is the PM’s son, but because he did the right thing!

If there are more idealistic young people like Li, there is hope yet!

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Landed properties should not be priced out of Singaporeans' reach

Hi Friends,
Another "Dear Editor" letter:

Dear Editor,

There has been disturbing talk in the media recently that the restrictions on foreigners buying landed homes in Singapore could be relaxed.

I hope the authorities would quickly nip this rumour in the bud before there is too much public disquiet.

Goldman Sachs (Singapore) is lobbying for the rescindment of the Residential Property Act, which has since 1973, restricted foreigners and permanent residents from owning landed residential property without prior official approval.

Goldman Sachs argues that this change would serve as a catalyst for further foreign buying of private homes and boost the current residential property up-cycle. To further support this argument, it implies that Singaporeans already have a stake in the country by virtue of the public housing catering to 80% of us.

I doubt anyone in Singapore really feel that the property market would require any more encouragement. If anything, the reverse is probably true and the authorities are probably contemplating measures to cool the red-hot market to a more sustainable level. Goldman Sach’s part about public housing also sounds a tad condescending to me!

Hence I agree firmly with the industry’s opinion leaders who are quoted to be mostly against this proposal.

Charles Chong, chairman Government Parliamentary Committee (National Development and Environment) was quoted as saying, "Landed properties should not be priced out of Singaporean's reach (or) it could lead to disgruntled Singaporeans”.

Others had said that the existing Act has the positive effect of "encourage(ing) foreigners to commit to Singapore, to sink their roots here" and that landed property ownership is one of the “privilege(s) of being Singaporean”.

In Pearl S Buck’s “The Good Earth” the protagonist Wang Lung chided his sons when he overheard them talking about selling the land which he had loved so much. He said “…if you sell the land, it is the end”

Can the relevant authorities please comment?

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Addendum (5th July 07):

The above letter was printed in both the Straits Times and Today. The "gahmen" has also replied thus:

Landed homes: No plans to ease foreign ownership (30 June 07)

I REFER to the letter by Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan ('Landed homes: Don't ease curbs on foreigners'; ST, June 28) on the recent report by Goldman Sachs suggesting a review of the Residential Property Act to relax restrictions on foreigners buying landed property.

On June 28, the Ministry of Law spokesperson announced that there are no plans to liberalise the existing system. In land- scarce Singapore, landed properties have to be treated as a special category where purchases by foreigners are subject to special approval.

Radha S. Khoo (Ms) Head (Corporate Communications) Ministry of Law

Please read the related article below:

Time to open the gates?
(Today 26.6.07)

Lift curbs on sale of landed properties to foreigners, says Goldman Sachs

Joseph Yadao
joseph.yadao@mediacorp.com.sg

.
IN THE eyes of some, at least, there may never be a better time to slaughter one of the sacred cows of the landed home market.
.
The idea of owning a nest in Singapore is becoming increasingly attractive to foreigners. The Government, too, has been effusive in its efforts to draw foreign talent here to build the economy.
.
So why not relax restrictions on the sale of landed property to foreigners — and satisfy both needs at one go?
.
Making this controversial proposal in a report released on Sunday, Goldman Sachs — one of the world's largest investment banks — cited suggestive figures.
.
The proportion of foreigners buying private homes here climbed to 26 per cent in the first quarter of the year, up from 21 per cent in 2005. But as of May, foreigners were involved in only 8 per cent of landed property transactions this year — compared with 29 per cent of apartment transactions. The average price of a top-end bungalow falls short of that of a luxury condominium unit by about 35 per cent.
.
"We think this price gap could narrow to parity, or very close to it, should restrictions on foreign ownership be relaxed," said the report, adding that "foreigners would like the flexibility of greater housing choice and the positive signal of Singapore's open door policy emanating from such a move".
.
But the argument will be a thorny one for the Republic to swallow, given the socio-political barbs of such a move. And going by industry players' reactions, the debate is likely to remain an academic one.
.
Since 1973, the Residential Property Act has restricted foreigners and permanent residents from owning private residential property without prior official approval — and for good reason.
.
"The restrictions on foreign ownership of landed property is unlikely to be eased because it is an emotional issue. It involves (putting) a tangible, physical part of Singapore in foreign hands," said Mr Colin Tan, director for research and development at Chesterton International.
.
"Landed properties should not be priced out of Singaporean's reach (or) it could lead to disgruntled Singaporeans, which would be a cause of concern for the Government," said Mr Charles Chong, chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for National Development and Environment.
.
Even so, a concession was made in 2004 for Sentosa Cove (picture), where potential foreign buyers were given fast-track approval. Of the 36 landed transactions at Sentosa Cove, 44 per cent involved foreigners. A seaview bungalow plot within the luxury enclave set the record at $1,308 per square foot.
.
But that is most unlikely to herald any universal lifting of control over landed property ownership in Singapore, say property analysts.
.
Goldman Sachs argues in its report that removing such restrictions would not hurt the national objective "of giving Singaporeans a stake in the country"; neither would it price them out of the market.
.
It reasoned that the public housing market met the needs of 80 per cent of Singaporeans by making affordable homes available. The report also conceded that any policy change could be limited to selected types of landed property, such as good-class bungalows.
.
But Mr Ku Swee Yong, director of marketing and business development at Savills Singapore, argued that the influx of buyers would give landed property owners the upper hand in this land-scarce environment. "It would be a sellers' market. This will definitely have an immediate impact on prices," he said.
.
According to forecasts released by property firm CB Richard Ellis yesterday, home prices are estimated to have risen by 4 to 6 per cent between April and June, and they are expected to climb by another 3 to 5 per cent. One driving factor: The limited supply of new homes in the $600 to $800 psf price range.
.
Mr Nicholas Mak, Knight Frank's director of research and consultancy, said: "Prior to the Residential Property Act, rich Indonesians snapped up properties, pricing Singaporeans out of the market. Today, high-end property prices are up. That is starting to filter down to the mid-tier properties."
.
He added that keeping certain privileges of home ownership for citizens only "encourages foreigners to commit to Singapore, to sink their roots here".
.
Chesterton's Mr Tan added: "Some things have to be preserved for Singaporeans. Landed property ownership is one of them. It is the privilege of being Singaporean."

Everyone was looking ….. and nobody was helping

Hi Friends,

Apathy is endemic in Singapore.

Recent examples of people who turn sleuth to trail hit-and-run drivers to record their license plates are but exceptions to the rule.

By and large, Singaporeans are notorious for being self-centered and uncaring. Most do not know ( or care to know) their neighbours, even if they have lived side by side with them for years.

Try saying “Hello” in the lifts and you may be lucky to just get blank stares.

I do not have to mention the bus or MRT…we already know what happens on a daily basis. The prevailing attitude is, if you are pregnant or old or young, do not expect any kindness ( or a seat) and you won’t be disappointed.

I risk being labeled an “angmoh-phile” if I mention that more likely than not, the ones who will spontaneously lend a helping hand to those in trouble might turn out not to be Singaporeans. Hands up those of us who have witnessed Ang-moh's treading where locals dared not?

Of course, this generalization is unfair to those Singaporeans who are civic-minded, but I am sure even this group of Singaporeans will readily admit that they are a tiny minority.

A tiny drop in the ocean amongst people who generally do not care.

I know some amongst us will blame our politicians for being negative role models and for setting the tone that materialism is all that matters in Singapore. I am of course alluding to the ministers’ astronomical salaries.

I do not think that this argument gives validity to our being uncaring towards our fellow human beings. Whether our leaders set good examples or not, bad behaviour is still just that.

And… how many more maids must die from cleaning the windows of “Sir” and “Madam”?

Can someone check … Is Singapore the “Maids dying from window-cleaning” capital of the world yet?

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

Read the related account below:

Man saves maid who fell from third floor apartment
Ng Wei Keng / Julia Ng Channelnewsasia 18.6.07

SINGAPORE: It was a lucky escape for a maid on Monday, when she fell out of an apartment in Henry Park while cleaning the windows.

The owner of a bicycle shop on the ground floor heard her screams, and caught her on time.

Witness Abdul Rahman, an assistant at the Holland Grove Road shop, was reporting for work when he was greeted by what he thought was a familiar sight.

An Indonesian maid, believed to be new to the family on the third floor, was stretching from inside the private apartment, to clean the French windows.

"It's very dangerous. Because the ledge here is so low and she's standing on a stool. At first I saw she was cleaning the window and then I walked into the shop and I thought ok, nothing happened. And then a few seconds [later] I heard a scream," said Abdul Rahman.

He ran out and saw the screaming maid hanging on for dear life. She had toppled over the apartment window.

Her employers and another maid had held on to both her arms and one leg from inside the apartment.

And from below, another person was standing by to catch her.

"I ran out and saw my boss standing under the maid. Everyone was looking at the maid and nobody was helping, and my boss was alone there. So I ran down to help him. Before I reached [there], the maid fell off," said Abdul Rahman.

But thanks to his gallant efforts, 43-year-old bike shop owner Haresh Balani - who declined to be interviewed on camera - managed to catch the falling maid.

The catch helped break her fall and she landed next to the drain.

But in the process, the maid, who was of a heavy build, bumped Haresh into the drain.

Haresh suffered shoulder injuries, while the maid hit her head.

"I said, "Don't move around, just relax, don't try to force yourself to get up". She just [lay] on the floor, and kept saying pain, pain, here and there," said Abdul Rahman.

The maid was sent to the hospital.

Haresh too had to see a doctor for his shoulder injury.

Police are investigating the incident. - CNA/yy

Ex-NKF Director's Escape- A Parody of Justice

Dear Friends,

I have written the following letter to the MSM's forum pages. Let's see if it sees the light of day.

Author's note (7.6.07): It has been printed by TODAY. Let's see if the ST will print it too.

Dear Editor,

Ex-NKF director’s escape from justice

The public must surely be justified in being extremely disappointed at how a high profile person like the ex-NKF director, Richard Yong, was allowed to escape the grasp of justice.

Did the Official Assignees’ (OA) Office not smell a “fish” when Mr. Yong sold his three properties in February?

Selling houses, even in Singapore’s red-hot property market, is unlike selling a pair of shoes, it takes time and various government bodies are involved. It is difficult to imagine how no red flags were raised during the process.

Or perhaps the Office thought he was merely liquidating his assets in order to pay his creditors in the impending bankruptcy and hence a nonchalant approach was called for?

Whatever reasons the relevant authorities have to offer, may seem a moot point now as the horse has already bolted. But nevertheless, we would still like to hear them and we would also insist on assurances that our civil servants take their jobs and obligations to the people seriously.

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
(end of letter)

Of course the subject matter is the infamous Richard Yong who was the director/chairman and erstwhile pal of Mr. T.T. Durai of the now unforgettable NKF Saga.

The Saga that is the mother of all Sagas, the one that takes the cake, the one that was supposed to teach lessons how not to kick your own b#lls bacause it can HURT! Unfortunately the NKF saga has become a recurring nightmare- a deja vu experience.

The only difference is that the nightmares come with different names- UNSW/World Bank-IMF meeting/Suzhou/Shin Corp/Virgin Atlantic etc.

All of us willingly or otherwise are caught up in this complicated web in which our tax dollars are used not just to pay expensive cabinet ministers' salaries but also squandered away by government agencies who do not admit responsibility after each and every screw-up!

Sigh!

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan


Read the episode of the "Scarlet Pimpernel" below!

Tuesday June 5, 4:17 PM Channelnewsasia

Ex-NKF chairman fled just before ICA could blacklist him



It was only a matter of hours, but it was enough for Richard Yong to slip out of the grasp of the authorities and the National Kidney Foundation.

Three weeks after, the missing blanks in the former NKF chairman’s apparent escape from the country are now being filled in.

The Official Assignee’s (OA) office, which is responsible for the affairs of bankrupts, told TODAY it had “immediately informed” the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) to blacklist Yong on the morning of May 17, the day after he was declared a bankrupt.

But the OA learnt the next day that it was too late. The ICA confirmed that Yong had left Singapore “just after midnight, in the early hours of May 17”. Investigations are now underway.
The getaway was a culmination of a series of events.

First, Yong had begun to cash in on his three properties in February, when he admitted liability for damages in the NKF’s civil suit. When he moved house, he did not report his new address to the authorities.

When news of these developments surfaced, the bankruptcy application against Yong was brought forward a month. Filed on April 27, a copy went to the OA, as did a copy of the May 16 date for the hearing, and a copy of the court’s declaration of bankruptcy — as per the usual process. A Mareva injunction to freeze Yong’s assets was filed on May 9.

The OA’s office told TODAY it was first informed by the NKF’s lawyers that Yong had been made a bankrupt and could be “a flight risk” on the morning of May 17. “The passports of new bankrupts are generally not impounded or confiscated by the OA. However, if there is hard evidence that the bankrupt has previously travelled or has attempted to travel without permission, his passport may be confiscated,” said a spokesman.

Attempts were made on May 17 and the next morning to personally serve the First Notice on Yong at his residence. But with Yong already gone, the OA launched investigations into offences he may have committed, such as unauthorised travel and disposal of assets.

Yong now has until June 12 to submit his Statement of Affairs. If not, the OA may apply for a warrant of arrest.

TODAY understands that Yong’s two daughters are in the United Kingdom. He was last seen on May 21 in Kuala Lumpur. “We do not have precise information on Mr Yong’s current whereabouts. To date he remains uncontactable,” said the OA spokesman. - /fa

UNSW finally starting to do the right thing?

Hi Friends,

From the Australian media, UNSW has apparently come out with a substantially improved package for those UNSW Asia campus students who had fallen victim due to UNSW's poor management decision and its subsequent flip-flop.

UNSW may finally be taking the correct steps to right a wrong.

I do not think my comments to UNSW ( which I wrote to UNSW or someone close to it) had anything to do with this turnaround?

I said ( in comments in my blog),

“It is a moot point but this wouldn’t have been necessary if UNSW had not pulled the plug.

I am sure famous case studies like the "New Coke" market failure and how Johnson & Johnson dealt with the aftermath of the Tylenol poisoning episode showed all of us how to behave in a damage control situation.

Those students are victims- overwhelm them with “goodies” so that UNSW would come out of this smelling of roses. How many students are there?- 143 plus foundation students and UNSW seems tardy and reluctant to assist them unreservedly. Why split hairs about non-Singaporeans and Singaporeans? Think about the goodwill gained if they get more than they asked for! Anyway it is a once off and UNSW is unlikely to do any silly things like this in Prof's lifetime right?”
End of quote

Now UNSW would not be labeled as being “Penny Wise-Pound Foolish” and these latest steps may go some way in repairing its damaged reputation.

So, is the EDB going to come clean too? Damage control lessons like the J&J case also applies for Singapore Government agencies.

Cheers

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

The article

UNSW to assist Singapore campus students
The Age June 2

The University of NSW will pay students up to $85,000 to study in Sydney after the collapse of its Singapore campus.

Up to 148 students who enrolled at the campus will have their travel, visa and accommodation costs in Sydney covered by the university until the end of their degrees, with students to receive as much as $85,000 each.

The university will compensate a further 126 students with return airfares to Australia and a year's housing after the collapse of the Tanglin campus, which may end up costing the university more than $40 million in lost revenue, compensation and redundancies, Fairfax reports on Saturday.

The university had anticipated first semester enrolments of 300 and the shortfall was expected to cost $15 million in revenue.

UNSW Vice-Chancellor Fred Hilmer said the university had spent $17.5 million on the campus before it opened.

An Australian academic, who wanted to remain anonymous, told Fairfax many professors had given up senior positions to move to Singapore.

He said the reputation of UNSW and other Australian universities had been damaged by the collapse.

"UNSW has killed off any hope of ever marketing itself as an international university, certainly in our lifetime," he said.

"It has been a monumental mismanagement."

UNSW student representative council president Jesse Young said it was a disappointing waste of taxpayers money that could have been spent on the Sydney campus.

A team of people from the university have flown to Singapore to help students with visas.
© 2007 AAP

Did EDB give too much to lure UNSW here? or "Ang Mo Tuah Liap"

Hi Friends,

The article below from Channelnewsasia.com represents what I think is a balanced view of the whole UNSW saga.

It seems to many that UNSW had been allowed to come and go as it pleases without a thought for responsibility of its actions.

It apparently decided that it had a good deal going and after signing some MOU’s amidst great fanfare embarked on UNSW Asia.

However, just as quickly, it decided to pull the plug after a new Vice-Chancellor had come on board.

Just like that. No different from going to the store and then changing one’s mind and returning home.

But the fallout is much more complex than that. Unlike flip-flopping about going to the store, there are real people who are hurt by UNSW's change of heart.

Who does UNSW think it is? What kind of institution makes major decisions over a 30 second period ( as mentioned in some news reports) and then at the whims and fancy of some head honcho, just decides to pack up and go as if nothing had happened?

And what kind of institution is EDB to allow UNSW to treat us like dirt?

Before signing on the dotted line, does EDB not have legal teams to pore over the minutiae in the MOU’s/contracts to ensure that this exact situation does not arise? So is someone from EDB going to take responsibility for this fiasco? I do not expect any official to commit Hara-kiri like the Japanese, but an apology would be nice.

Otherwise, what are we telling the whole world about Singapore?- that we will stoop as low as we need to get your business? Have we joined the world’s oldest profession- Whoring?

Is it still “ Ang moh tuah liap” Hokkien for “The white man’s is bigger”?

Suddenly, I feel very inadequate as a Singaporean.

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

The faculty of accountability (Channelnewasia.com 30th May 07)
By Siew Kum Hong- I just found out that the article is by Siew ( no wonder it is SO GOOD!) 31.5.07

Anger, disbelief, fear, shock and tears. Those were just some of the reactions to the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Asia's announcement that it was giving up after just one term.

Even as UNSW, the Economic Development Board (EDB), the Ministry of Education (MOE) and other educational institutions (including the three local universities) continue to try to help UNSW students deal with the aftermath, there are other issues that merit debate on a more macro level.

The first concerns the accountability of government agencies.

The MOE had reportedly played an important role in attracting UNSW to Singapore in the first place. Furthermore, all private schools must register with the MOE.

Yet, when students and parents wanted to meet with the latter after UNSW's decision, the MOE's response was that UNSW had ultimate responsibility.

As for the EDB, it had sealed the deal with UNSW and had invested heavily in the project. Yet, it has declined to reveal the losses resulting from UNSW's pullout.

While disclosing the figures could affect the EDB's bargaining position in future negotiations with other universities, the fact remains that this is taxpayers' money. The Financial Times has reported the amount to be as high as $80 million.

The EDB has also not provided information on how the deal was structured. What sort of guarantees and commitments were extracted from UNSW? How could UNSW simply quit after just one term, when construction work on the new campus was already underway, apparently without having to pay compensation?

Did we give away too much to lure UNSW here?

The onus is on the EDB to explain what had happened and give an indication of our losses, while not compromising its ability to negotiate future deals.

Its continued silence does not sit well with Singaporeans, particularly in light of the Public Accounts Committee's recent findings of significant lapses in the EDB's internal controls and governance.

Singaporeans expect greater accountability from ministers and civil servants, given the recent public service pay hike. The handling of this case may not have met the enhanced standards expected by the public.

A more fundamental question concerns the Singapore model, which relies heavily on foreign investments to drive the economy. UNSW's departure demonstrates the risks inherent in playing this game, especially in an increasingly globalised world where competitors are everywhere and funds come and go easily.

Investors are understandably fickle, coming to seek returns and leaving if there are none. As with UNSW and other multinational corporations, when they pull out, Singaporeans have to pick up the pieces, whether they be lost jobs, missed opportunities or dashed dreams.

This could come without warning, such as when there is a management change and hardnosed businessmen such as UNSW vice-chancellor Professor Fred Hilmer disagree with the previous decisions made.

So long as we persist with this economic model, the risk will remain. I am not saying we should abandon this model — it has served us well in the past, and it could continue to work for the future.

But we have to be aware of the inherent risks, make sure our eyes are open to what could happen if things go wrong, and do our best to mitigate the risks.

Just as foreign investments have a multiplier effect on the economy, the negative repercussions of capital outflows will similarly be amplified.

And that brings us back to the EDB's role in attracting investments. Yes, capital should be able to flow in and out of Singapore freely, and we cannot stop an investor from leaving.

But surely it is not too much to ask that where public funds are spent to entice foreign investments, we also extract some assurances and commitments to stay in Singapore. This not only minimises the wastage of taxpayers' money, but also mitigates the risk of lives being disrupted by premature departures.

Ultimately, our model of foreign investments requires us to keep foreign investors happy, to ensure that the business case presented is realistic and justifiable, and to ensure a long-term binding commitment.

But, at the same time, we must not lose sight of the need to grow indigenous players who can compete internationally while retaining local roots.

Otherwise, we will always remain hostage to the whims of foreign investors.
- /so

UNSW exits before it enters: Shocking!

Hi Friends,

Shocking news!

UNSW is withdrawing from Singapore- even before it had actually started its campus!

It is not surprising to me.

1.The idea of an education in an overseas instutition must surely be the experience of tasting life overseas! Ask yourself, who would pay the same amount as another undergrad in Sydney, yet study in Singapore?

Answer:

i. Singapore Kids still tied to mama’s apron string.

ii Those parents who think that Sydney is so dangerous that only safe sterile Singapore is good enough for their kids

iii Foreigners who fall for the spin about Singapore being the gateway to China.

If one wants a Australian degree in Singapore, there are already so many options now. Many Australian programs are already co-hosted by Singaporean partners eg APMI Kaplan for University of South Australia, and they cost a fraction of UNSW’s deal and their programs are quite well run . I know because I am doing the MBA by U of South Australia at APMI. ( I am assuming their undergrad program is as good as their post-grad one)

Anyway, options for tertiary education are so varied now!

1.Local universities : National University of Singapore; Nanyang Technological University; Singapore Management University. Although I was from NUS, I am really excited about what’s happening at SMU!

2.Singaporean polytechnics followed by local U’s or better still- overseas universities

3.Overseas U’s – either straight after O levels or A levels and for Singapore boys, after National Service.

Anyway, I am a freak for life-long education, so my eyes light up whenever I read anything related to education. Any other such freaks out there?

Regarding the UNSW retreat, University of Warwick must be feeling smug now and saying " I told you so!"

Cheers,

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan

University of New South Wales Singapore campus to shut in June
By Pearl Forss, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 23 May 2007 1715 hrs

SINGAPORE: The University of New South Wales (UNSW) will close its campus in Singapore next month.

The announcement came less than two months after its grand opening.

The school said it was facing a financial shortfall of $15 million a year due to lower-than-anticipated student enrolment numbers. Its target was 300 students in its first semester.

But it only got 148 students, 100 of whom are Singaporeans.

If it were to continue building its campus in Changi, it would have to borrow $140 million.

The school said both factors led to an unsustainable financial burden and it decided to call it quits in Singapore.

Students have already paid their fees, which range between S$26,000 and S$29,000 a year.

UNSW says these students will be offered a place at its home campus in Sydney.

There will also be scholarships to help with the cost of travel and accommodation.

UNSW has already invested over S$22 million (A$17.5 million) in its Singapore campus.

It was invited by Singapore's Economic Development Board in 2004 to establish what would have been the first private comprehensive university in Singapore.

The EDB had said the school was expected to contribute at least $500 million a year to the economy in direct spending. The EDB refuses to reveal how much it invested in the school.

The episode is clearly damaging to Singapore's aim to be a global schoolhouse.

But the EDB, which drives the global schoolhouse initiatives, believes it will still reach its target of attracting 150,000 international students by 2015.

There are currently 80,000 foreign students in Singapore.

Aw Kah Peng, EDB's Assistant Managing Director, said: "The learning point is that we have to continue working very hard. Truly, with every institution, it will be different. With each one, we have to put everything we can to think about all these issues of whether we can make it work, how long it will take for us to make it work, what will it take for us to make it work. We will then have to step forward on that basis."

UNSW says it would have stayed on in Singapore if it has been allowed to scale down its student enrolment numbers to 2,000 students by 2012.

But this would be quite far from the original bargain with the EDB which had set a target of 15,000 UNSW students by 2020.

The UNSW closure does not mean that the EDB will no longer work with the school.

The EDB says there are many areas of cooperation between UNSW and Singapore which are mutually beneficial.

These include foundation schooling for university entry, research collaborations, University of New South Wales school competitions and joint programmes with Singapore institutions.

EDB says it will continue to pursue these areas and strengthen its relationship with UNSW. - CNA/ir