Just.

I find it ludicrous that we are being told what our Mother Tongue is. As far as I am concerned, my Mother Tongue is Cantonese.

It would be stupid ignorant of Mr Chee Hong Tat (or anyone else for that matter) to assume that the learning of dialects will automatically be at the expense of our mastery of English and Mandarin. For all the government’s monetary efforts (S$8 million, anyone?) to ‘preserve our heritage’, a move to eradicate our ancestors’ language, culture and customs is painfully contradictory. Gievn the fondness for degree holders and scholars in the government ministries, the lack of understanding and respect for the Chinese culture, heritage and linguistic history is rather unforgivable.

It’s crystal clear that we have been screwed over for political and economic manipulation. So frankly, they should stop screwing with our heritage and do what they do best – losing a couple more billions in portfolios.

And. I am still awed by how a senior civil servant could find no better word than ‘stupid‘ to articulate his arguments.

Foolish to advocate the learning of dialects

I REFER to yesterday’s article by Ms Jalelah Abu Baker (‘One generation – that’s all it takes ‘for a language to die”). It mentioned a quote from Dr Ng Bee Chin, acting head of Nanyang Technological University’s (NTU) Division of Linguistics and Multilingual Studies: ‘Although Singaporeans are still multilingual, 40 years ago, we were even more multilingual. Young children are not speaking some of these languages at all any more.’

To keep a language alive, it has to be used regularly. Using one language more frequently means less time for other languages. Hence, the more languages a person learns, the greater the difficulties of retaining them at a high level of fluency.

There are linguistically gifted individuals who can handle multiple languages, but Singapore’s experience over 50 years of implementing the bilingual education policy has shown that most people find it extremely difficult to cope with two languages when they are as diverse as English and Mandarin.

This is why we have discouraged the use of dialects. It interferes with the learning of Mandarin and English. Singaporeans have to master English. It is our common working language and the language which connects us with the world.

We also emphasised the learning of Mandarin, to make it the mother tongue for all Chinese Singaporeans, regardless of their dialect groups. This is the common language of the 1.3 billion people in China. To engage China, overseas Chinese and foreigners are learning Mandarin and not the dialects of the different Chinese provinces.

We have achieved progress with our bilingual education in the past few decades. Many Singaporeans are now fluent in both English and Mandarin. It would be stupid for any Singapore agency or NTU to advocate the learning of dialects, which must be at the expense of English and Mandarin.

That was the reason the Government stopped all dialect programmes on radio and television after 1979. Not to give conflicting signals, then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew also stopped making speeches in Hokkien, which he had become fluent in after frequent use since 1961.

Chee Hong Tat
Principal Private Secretary
to the Minister Mentor

A pregnant STOMPer says this woman not only did not offer her the Priority Seat in the train, she even cursed her and her unborn child.

Says the STOMPer in an email to STOMP yesterday (Jan 29):

“Today, I (I boarded the train from City Hall) met this inconsiderate and rude woman who did not offer me (who is 26 weeks pregnant) the Priority Seat she was sitting on.

“She did not offer me the seat even after finishing her sms and after one stop.

“However, she realised that I was taking a picture of her and asked me very rudely and with a hostile expression on her face if I wanted the seat.

“I answered yes and she stood up and started hurling vulgarities at me and calling me a ‘b***h’.

“I scolded her back as I thought she should be embarassed of herself!

“She walked away after about 20 seconds of cursing.

“Before she alighted at Novena station, she stopped by my seat and started cursing me and my unborn baby!

“I’m speechless as I’m wondering if she is even ashamed of herself!

“I cannot tolerate actions like this and from someone who is obviously educated.”

In a telephone conversation with STOMP, the STOMPer stood by her story.

She said that she was wearing maternity clothing and was visibly pregnant when she boarded the train and was disappointed that the woman had behaved in such a manner.

What were your thoughts after reading this? Indignation? Anger? Incredulity? This is natural if you had felt the above. After all it is minimal human decency to side with a pregnant woman who not only had been denied a seat, but also had to endure curses to herself and her unborn child. [Though as a disclaimer, I should state that I never expected anyone to offer me a seat during both my pregnancies. That is a story for another day though.]

You might even blog about it and express your displeasure/ disgust/ anger/ shock. That, too is perfectly normal. But what if you were presented with the other side of the story?

A pregnant woman earlier alleged that this woman not only failed to offer her a Priority Seat in the train, she even cursed her and her unborn child.

The woman pictured in the story has since informed STOMP of her side of the story in an email dated Feb 1.

Here’s what she had to say:

“The truth of this incident is I boarded the train before the pregnant lady did. I was tired and trying to sleep as you can see in the photo.

“I had no idea when she boarded or that she was maliciously taking a photo of me sleeping. She never once asked for the seat, nor did anybody around alert me of her presence.

“Nonetheless, I looked up after a while, and when I noticed her, I immediately asked, ‘Do you want to sit?’

“To my shock and horror, she said ‘Yes’ really rudely, glaring at me, and rushed to the seat without a word of thanks!

“I then asked her, ‘Hey I offered you the seat, why are you being so hostile?’

“She said, ‘Of course! Couldn’t you see the sign?’

“Certainly I knew I was sitting on the Priority Seat. But am I expected to be constantly on the lookout for pregnant women? I was asleep for Christ’s sake, and the minute I noticed her, I offered it to her!

“There was NO ‘20 seconds of cursing’, ’she stood up and started hurling vulgarities at me’, nor did I curse her and her unborn baby.

“‘A pregnant STOMPer says this woman not only did not offer her the Priority Seat in the train, she even cursed her and her unborn child’ – this vicious statement is totally untrue.

“If there were SMRT cameras, I would most certainly like the public to see how ungrateful this pregnant lady really was, and worse, trying to malign me on STOMP!

“I do not deny that I called her a b***h. She certainly is the epitome of the word ‘b***h’.

“The truth is, she called me one too! After I graciously offered her the seat, she called me a b***h because I said there was no need for hostility simply because I had not noticed her earlier.

“As for ‘cursing her and her unborn baby’? All i said before I alighted was that it would be terribly sad if she brought up another person just like herself.

“I am not ashamed to say this because this is the true story, and I am sure everyone would agree with me that it is a great shame that a lady of her age cannot even conduct herself graciously, and is thinking of bringing up a child.”

Ah.. feeling differently now? My point is, regardless of who you might think is telling the truth, get both sides of the story.

Yes, I am so sick of this government I have to remind myself what I love about Singapore.

1. Food – good and relatively cheap hawker food
2. Healthcare – at least there is an A&E when I need it
3. Libraries – everytime I go to a library, I almost forgive the incompetence of the government. Almost.
4. Parks – I wanted to say parks but I remembered that I could be fined for dozing off if I get too relaxed.

I tried to think of more but seriously, I am too peeved by two incidents to think of more.

Free lunch – but just not for the Singaporeans

2 China scholars from Anderson Junior College were found absent from class for several days. When school staff checked their hostel, they found that the students had packed up and gone to USA!

Apparently these ’smart’ students found out that they don’t need A level results to gain entry into US universities. They secretly applied for an American University. When they got accepted by one, bought their air-tickets and then run!

What can the Singapore Government do? Sue them? Recover our money? They were not bonded wor.

While locals hanker and bleed their brains out for a place in the ’space constrained’ education institutions here, the government is giving out places to foreigners on a platter and basically whoring out for a hope that these people will stay. Well, here’s a reality check. These people don’t owe you anything and they won’t hesitate to kick you in the face if need be.

Our government should know better. After all they are champions at advocating the dog-eat-dog system where welfare is the most vulgar word possible.

Town Councils sink S$12 million in structured products

I wonder what our dear MM Lee will say about town councils who have also ‘went in with their eyes open’ when he had previously commented the same about ‘educated and young investors’. Town councils who are trigger happy with lawsuits when people fail to make their conservancy payments – just look at the queues at the Night Court every Tuesday. Town councils which are apparently cash rich with their massive sinking funds and what nots. Town councils which have made staggering losses in these investments which they have ‘went in with their eyes open’. So how now brown cow?

Time for someone to come out and say, “It’s an honest mistake, let’s move on”.

So yes, the two party system won’t work in this case – the incumbent might be too easily toppled, what with such an impressive array of red marks in the report card.

Change must come to PAP

By Li Xueying

PM Lee said it not PAP’s job to build up the opposition or to split the party into two because ‘it’s hard enough to find one team’ to take charge of the country. — ST PHOTOS: LIM WUI LIANG

CHANGE must come to Singapore – but within the ruling People’s Action Party rather than in the form of having a two-party system.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Sunday stressed that the PAP must constantly evolve to keep up with the times. This means renewing its membership and leadership ranks, and coming up with fresh ways to engage Singaporeans.

Mr Lee, who is secretary-general of the PAP, said: ‘Change has to take place in Singapore but change must take place not (between parties) but within the PAP.

‘As long as the PAP changes itself, and continues to provide clean and good government, and the lives of Singaporeans improve, the country is much better off with one dominant, strong, clean, good party.’

Addressing over 1,000 cadres at the annual PAP Conference at the Toa Payoh sports hub, Mr Lee acknowledged the desire for change among electorates across the world.

‘It has happened in Australia, it’s happened in New Zealand recently,’ he noted. And most notably, in the United States too, where Democratic candidate Barack Obama swept to victory on his campaign platform of change.

Observed Mr Lee: ‘So the country is set on a new direction. And if Obama succeeds, that’s good.

‘If he doesn’t succeed after four years or eight years, the Americans will try again with a new President, change party, the Republicans set a new direction.’

But while the US is a big country with a big pool from which to find political talent, there is no such guarantee in smaller countries, he said.

‘In Asia, it very seldom works because having two or more parties has not guaranteed good governance or progress,’ he added, citing Taiwan as an example.

In the last decade, its unhappy voters had swung from the Kuomintang (KMT), to the Democratic Progressive Party, and back to KMT again.

‘By Western definitions of democracy, Taiwan qualifies because it’s got two changes of government – in, out, in.

‘But it is not a political system which is working properly. And I don’t think you want that kind of political system in Singapore,’ he said.

He added however that this doesn’t mean that the PAP has a blank cheque: It has to account to voters at the polls every five years. New parties will emerge quickly to take it on if ’something goes wrong with the PAP’, he said.

Neither did it mean it was the job of the PAP to build up the opposition, he added. ‘It’s hard enough to find one team to look after the country. How can you find two? As a small country, we must have a first division team, an outstanding group of people who can make up for our many limitations,’ he said.

The PAP has managed to survive more than 50 years because it kept itself ‘vigorous, lean, relevant, able to win elections’, and adjusting its leadership styles to ’suit new generations of Singaporeans,’ he noted.

He cited initiatives such as the PAP Policy Forum in which younger party members discuss policy making issues, intra-party elections to district committees, and establishing a presence in the new media.

It is difficult for political parties to stay vigorous, he allowed.

In Japan for instance, the Liberal Democratic Party has been in power for half a century, but ‘has not sustained its vigour’. With no nurturing of younger talent, there is a loss of energy and fresh ideas, observed Mr Lee. ‘So for more than a decade Japan has had a series of weak governments.’

China’s Communist Party, on the other hand, is trying to keep itself strong, vigorous and tied to the ground. This was why it was very interested in Singapore’s political experience, and sent many study teams here.

Mr Lee cautioned however that this did not mean the PAP had found the magic formula to keep itself strong. ‘It is always difficult to carry out self-renewal, to respond creatively to new challenges, to reinvent ourselves. But it is vital for the PAP to make every attempt,’ he said.

The recent media coverage on Generation Y set me thinking. Is there much difference in the values and urban culture between the Generation Y and Generation X (like myself)?

I have been independent since 16. I will shamefully admit that I experimented with Sonia Rykiel, Thomas Chantal and Jean Paul Gaultier in secondary school (ah lian!) but I never had the cheek to ask my parents to fund my frivolousities. After I moved out and rented my own pad, I was flying solo all the way. Whenever I hear of people in their 30s still reaching out their hands to their parents to pay for loan instalments or credit card bills, I’d get very bemused. I also cannot reconcile with the fact that some youngsters are being totally spoonfed by their parents – nurtured to be soft spoilt individuals.

Ms Agnes Lin seems to fit the profile of the soft spoilt Gen Y very well.

She thinks a friend of hers, who is left with $20 to last until the end of the month, is silly to consider taking up a part-time job to earn some extra cash.

‘I don’t understand why she cannot just ask her parents for money,’ sighed Miss Lin.

I thank my parents for bringing me up in a sensible ‘tough love’ manner. They provided us children with the necessities like food, clothing, education etc and we have never lacked. When I demonstrated a gift at music and playing the piano, my parents bought a piano for me and started me on lessons. My brother trained in martial arts because that was his interest. My point is, my parents never ever stinged on us but they also never spoilt us in the ridiculous manner some parents are guilty of. Most importantly, we grew up to be independent and tough adults who can survive on our own without handouts from anyone.

So what happens if her monetary source from her parents should get unexpectedly cut off one day? Would she turn to easy money, given her propensity for materialistic indulgence?

With her first pay packet, she will buy a $4,000 Chanel bag. ‘After that, I will probably get more bags and watches,’ she added.

There is nothing wrong with spending your own money. However, there is no mention of contributing towards the household expenses or any gestures to her parents. As a student, she is already wrapped up in materialism and shows much potential for credit debt (which her parents will no doubt pay for). Congratulations to her parents for raising a spoilt brat seemingly detached from the reality of the real world. I know my own mother would have given me two tight slaps (and rightfully so) if I had demonstrated such idiotic behaviour. Hell, I would give my daughter two tight slaps if she ever pulled such a stunt.

**

*Update* : This is Agnes Lin’s blog – where she stated that she was misquoted. If that is so, there is grounds for legal action because it is defamation, and not a simple case of mistake by omission.

I would like to reiterate that I do not know Ms Lin and do not dislike her per se. I dislike the behaviour as alleged in the report.

*Further update* : If this is true, ST would have stooped to a new low. I am very appalled. Makes me question if we can trust what we read these days.

Let’s see if Agnes Lin is going to sue. I would if I were in her shoes.

ST PHOTO: CHEW SENG KIM

For 20-year-old undergraduate Agnes Lin, the recession could just be academic.

The Nanyang Technological University first-year student has never been in need: She carries a $2,000 Louis Vuitton handbag to school and uses only Shiseido cosmetic and skincare products.

She carries around the latest mobile phone and goes on overseas vacations with her friends where she would bust $1,000 on shopping alone.

Twice monthly, she shops at her favourite stores – Topshop, Zara and Forever21.

Mum, a private tutor, and Dad, a businessman selling polythene bags, pay for her expenses.

Miss Lin is aware that Singapore faces a recession but the news does not bother her.

She said: ‘I think it is okay for me to maintain my current lifestyle. I may be spending a little bit more than my friends but I don’t think I’m overspending.’

At the moment, she has her eyes on the latest mobile phone in the market, the HTC Touch Pro, which costs about $700.

Although her mother has said ‘no’ to her buying yet another mobile phone, Ms Lin has an inkling she will still get it.

‘I think my mum will still buy it for me. My birthday is coming up!’ she said with a giggle. She confessed that since young, she has never run out of cash. Her parents give her money whenever she asks.

Since she was 16, her monthly pocket money has been $500.

She has an older brother, also an undergraduate. The family live in a four-room flat in Marine Parade.

She thinks a friend of hers, who is left with $20 to last until the end of the month, is silly to consider taking up a part-time job to earn some extra cash.

‘I don’t understand why she cannot just ask her parents for money,’ sighed Miss Lin.

She will enter the working world only after three years but she is already planning ahead.

With her first pay packet, she will buy a $4,000 Chanel bag. ‘After that, I will probably get more bags and watches,’ she added.

I had written here about Chua Li Hoong’s article in the Straits Times about JB Jeyaretnam.

And now, her sister, Chua Mui Hoong has written an article on Friday about how the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) was not negligent in the Lehman saga, but that Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE) is.

How wonderful.

Now let’s see how it is never the government’s fault, but always someone else’s fault.

Again, like her sister’s article, the title of the article seems innocuous enough. ‘Lehman saga shows need for consumer body’ – how sinister can that be?

‘Since the issue was reported on Sept 16, the state regulator MAS has been active on this issue, ordering banks involved to appoint a thrid party to investigate claims of mis-selling – although anxious investors dub its response tardy and subdued.

The truth is that there is a limit to what MAS can do, beyond using its moral authority.’

Look, I know they may not have taught this in Journalism 101, but surely after years in the workforce, Ms Chua would know that even if you are busting your ass and pulling out all the stops to get stuff done, but if your boss or client doesn’t know that, everything else is moot. So even if MAS had been active, the point is moot if the investors are not informed. If there was one thing MAS should have done, it was to stand out and assure the people that something will be done – right from the start. Don’t try to lay it on the people.

‘The main consumers’ group, the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE), was active in pushing for financial services and products to be included under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act enacted in 2004. The law was revised just two months ago to cover precisely this…Case’s silence on the Lehman saga, given its active interest in the financial industry, is thus deafening.’

Now, everything is clear. It is all Case’s fault for not addressing an issue in government jurisdiction . Thank you Ms Chua for the illumination!

It gets even better.

‘The Securities Investors Association of Singapore has spoken on the issue, but not played a leading role. It could justifiably say it represents securities investors, not purchasers of structured products. But then again, its stated objective includes educating investors on all types of investors.’

OK it’s not all Case’s fault now. SIAS and Case can share the blame.

‘Instead, the leaders in trying to resolve the issue have been the state – in the form of MAS – and individuals.’

Wow, once again the technique of weaving truth into something questionable to make it look credible! I swear they have it down pat.

What I really cannot stomach is the despicable pretense of praising Mr Tan Kin Lian as a ‘champion of investors seeking redress’ while taking a cheap shot under the cloak of ‘humour’ in a cartoon.

I guess it is hard to hide derisive scorn after all. In any case, it is in poor taste and definitely not what I expect from a state journalist.

Bank’s effort to address investors

I received this from one of my readers – L (thanks!). It’s a questionnaire given to the affected investors by one of the banks as an investigative effort.

Now is not the time to do a freaking survey. They should not put people through hoops and circles when they had just been through a difficult time, which was brought on by the greed of banks and the absence of fiduciary duty.

It is painful even for me to look at it, much less fill up the whole freaking questionnaire.

**

1. Please provide a brief description of your complaint/feedback

2. How did you find out about the product? Please tick all that are relevant.

• Newspaper/print advertisements
• Recommendations from family or friends
• Financial institution’s (FI) representative / relationship manager told me about the product (please also describe how the product was introduced to you):
• Others :

3. How did you come to know the FI representative / RM that you bought the product from?

• He/she is my RM / regular representative
• He/she was recommended by family/friends
• He/she contacted me
• He/she was introduced to me when I walked in to the FI

4. Before you spoke to the FI representative / RM, were you planning to place your funds in another product? If so, what product did you have in mind? Why did you change your mind about buying that product?

5. During your meeting with the FI representative / RM, did you:

• Seek additional information / explanation about the product
• Complete a questionnaire to assess how much risk you can take
• Seek advice on whether the product is suitable for you
• None of the above. Please indicate why:
• I already knew about the product and intended to purchase it.
• I was not comfortable divulging information about my income & financial situation
• Others (please specify).

Please tick all that are relevant.

6. How long was your meeting with the FI representative / RM before you agreed to purchase the product? Approximately how much time did the FI representative / RM spend to explain the product to you?

7. How long did it take you to decide to purchase the product? Was it during the same visit or a subsequent visit to the FI?

8. What was the source of the funds invested in the product?

• Recently withdrawn CPF funds
• Transfer from savings / fixed deposits
• Switch from unit trust / other investment products
• New funds
• Others (please specify):

9. Did the FI representative / RM explain the product to you? If so, what did he/she say? If you have any records of written correspondences, please attach a copy for our reference.

• Characteristics of the product such as sources of returns, and the mechanics of the products
• Risks that you may receive nothing or significantly less than your original principal amount invested due to the default of any one of the reference entities, the swap counterparty, the default of the underlying collateral and other risk factors.
• Benefits / returns: The amount you stand to receive, including the computation methods and whether that amount is guaranteed or non-guaranteed
• Type of consumer the product is suited for [e.g. aggressive/moderate/low risk appetite]
• Fees and charges
• Right to cancel your purchase
• Warnings, exclusions and disclaimers
• Reports that you will receive

10. What made you decide to purchase the product?

• Higher returns (e.g. returns are better than savings or deposit rates)
• Low risk (e.g. principal is guaranteed or protected, there is a low risk of default)
• Regular income in the form of interest payments
• Product was available only for a limited promotion period
• To diversity my investment portfolio
• Others (please specify)

11. Please indicate which documents were given to you when you purchased the product.

Please tick all that are relevant.

• Base prospectus (this is xx-page comprehensive formal legal document that provides details of the product offering, including a description of the product and the risk factors.)
• Pricing statement (this is xx-page document that sets out a brief description of the product.)
• Marketing materials (e.g. brochure, fact-sheet)
• Others (please specify):

12. Please indicate when the following documents were given to you.

· Base prospectus

Before or at the point of sale/ After the sale had been concluded

· Pricing statement

Before or at the point of sale/ After the sale had been concluded

· Marketing materials

Before or at the point of sale/ After the sale had been concluded

13. Please indicate the documents that you signed when you purchased the product.

Please tick all that are relevant.

• Application form
• Fact-find/Needs Analysis forms
• Risk disclosure statement
• Others (please specify):

14. If you were not given a Prospectus and Pricing Statement, were you told where you could get one? Did you proceed to get a copy before you applied for the product? Did you read the Prospectus and Pricing statement?

15. Are you aware whether you signed any statement that states that you are aware of and understood the risks associated with this product? Did the FI representative / RM explain what this means to you?

16. Are you aware whether you signed any document that states that you are not relying on advice provided by the FI representative / RM or FI in purchasing the product? Did the FI representative / RM explain the document to you?

I did not want to write about this issue earlier because I did not want to pre judge how MAS and the government will handle this issue. But as it is, the silence, the position to distance itself, the local media blackout on HKMA decision and the eventual “breaking news speed” of the local media coverage had once again spoken louder than words could.

Media Coverage

I am disgusted with how sensational journalism is being lent to invoke cheap emotions when there was very real sorrow involved. These photos are splashed across the front page of ST just to show Mrs Ling “looking visibly less upset than last week..welcomed the Government’s move to help”.

‘Looking visibly less upset than last week (pictured below), Mrs Ling, who with her husband sank $100,000 into Minibonds, welcomed the Government’s move to help.’

– ST PHOTOS: CHEW SENG KIM, DESMOND FOO

I am also disgusted at how the government is depicted as a “hero” again. Well, get this straight. MAS only stepped out and issued a statement after Tan Kin Lian’s event to help the affected folks drew thousands. It took a citizen to do the duty of what government people should do. The alarm bells must have gone off in a few government sectors. The government only issued a guarantee of deposits after HKMA pressured their banks to buy back minibonds products.

This is to ensure Singapore’s competitive advantage in the banking and finance sector and I believe, not out of any real sympathy for the people. And have the ministers or MAS ever stopped to ponder about why the banks in Hong Kong would agree to buy back the products? Why did their government or HKMA not pander to the banks?

And please. The ST headline on 18 Oct 08 made me want to vomit. “MAS to Banks: Do the Right Thing”. It was Tan Kin Lian who first blogged and told MAS to do the right thing!

The accountability of MAS

A financial dodo like me might not know how to read a financial product sheet but any qualified and probably overpaid snazzy economist or finance expert in MAS should know and should have known that the product sheets for Minibonds were dodgy. Time for the blame game soon.

The government likes to proclaim that it has no power or control over Temasek Holdings – would it be another skit about how MAS has no jurisdiction or power over banks? In the bid to whore out to banks making their global presence here, are we prepared to screw our people over offending them?

Difference between Hong Kong and Singapore

While Chief Executive of Hong Kong, Donald Tsang “pledged to help those caught up in the Lehman Brothers minibond row get justice if any criminal or civil liability is identified“, our MAS chairman, Mr Goh Chok Tong says that “that’s life, if you want good rewards, you have to take risks. Otherwise, leave your money with the CPF.” and that “MAS is a very professional, rational institution” Oh yes, that I have no doubts about. The MAS is indeed extremely professional and rational towards banks. What is the stance of MAS towards the people?

MAS managing director, Mr Heng Swee Keat, says “We expect them to do the right thing” … “to be accessed on a case-by-case basis“. Am I the only person who feels that such a statement is not straightforward and can be interpreted in creative ways?

While Mr Joseph Yam, Chief Executive of the HKMA, said that the role of the HKMA is to investigate complaints of mis-selling against banks - “The HKMA is dealing with the complaints as quickly as possible.  It is, of course, very important that we do this objectively and without pre-judging the issue.  If, after investigation, we find cases of mis-selling, we will treat them very seriously“; our MAS says that it has “asked the chief executive officer of these [financial] institutions to personally chair internal review panels to look into these complaints.” I am sure these CEOs will be totally impartial and there will be no conflict of interest to consider.

Scorn versus sympathy

The feedback we have been getting is that mis-selling is rife. I have been getting calls from investors who say that their relationship managers told them it’s like a fixed deposit and that at the end of 5.5 years, they are getting 5% returns. Tell me that is not mis-selling.

Those people who are all smug and arrogant about how they “would not be cheated” or “would not buy something they do not understand” seem to have missed the point that the product was angled to be deceptive or dodgy in the place. Yes, at this point of time, we are all so interested to know your wisdom of diversified investments and how you are not so dumb like some old uneducated folks. Haven’t heard of saying the right thing at the right time?

Yes, I run the risk of sounding stupidly sentimental for objecting to such callousness, but look – gloat privately if you have to instead of rubbing salt in others’ wounds.

**************************************

Media Articles to archive for record

Oct 19, 2008
Look beyond retirees: SM
By Kor Kian Beng , Francis Chan

WHILE financial institutions (FIs) ought to focus on the vulnerable group of retiree investors who sank money into Lehman-linked products, they should also look at less clear-cut cases, said Mr Goh Chok Tong yesterday.

The Senior Minister said these cases might involve heavily invested professionals or people who have invested only a part and not their entire savings.

‘For other, less clear-cut cases, the financial institutions may also want to think of ways to retain their customers’ trust and confidence,’ he said at a grassroots event.

‘Such gestures will go a long way to maintaining customer loyalty, and pay off in the long term.’

He noted how some 10,000 Singaporeans had invested over $500million in structured products linked to the collapsed US investment bank Lehman Brothers.

He said that at the time, investors of these products would not have thought the bank would collapse. ‘But this is no consolation. Those who have invested in these products stand to lose a large part of their investment.’

To help them, he said the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) had been actively and quietly working with the FIs which sold these products to ensure that any complaints by investors are given a fair and independent hearing.

‘MAS is a very professional, rational institution,’ said Mr Goh, who is MAS chairman.

He reiterated what the authority said last Friday: that FIs ought to pay particular attention to those from the vulnerable group of investors, such as retirees with poor knowledge of investments in financial products, and who were investing significant sums in them for the first time.

If the investors had been mis-sold the product or where the product was clearly inappropriate to their circumstances, ‘MAS expects the FIs to take full responsibility and reach a fair settlement with them. This has to be assessed on a case-by-case basis’. If an investor is still not satisfied, he can take the matter to the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre.

But he also said everyone must see the losses in perspective. ‘The global financial crisis came without warning, like a tsunami,’ he said. ‘Banks have collapsed. Stock prices have plunged. Millions of people in the world, not just in Singapore, have lost money. So we must be realistic in our expectation of recovering all our losses.’

At a second gathering of investors at Speakers’ Corner yesterday, Mrs Ling Ah Moi, who is in her 70s, said in Teochew that she welcomed the Government’s latest move to help ‘older people’.

But her husband, retired shop owner Ling Jun Zhi, 78, felt it was important for the Government to be more proactive in its help, as it was difficult for retirees to know who to turn to.

The couple sank $100,000 into Minibonds in July when they visited a Hong Leong Finance branch. They were featured in The Straits Times when they showed up at a meeting between DBS High Notes5 investors and the bank last week.

Visibly less upset than last week, Mrs Ling added: ‘It’s good that the Government can help.’
**

Oct 18, 2008
Ready to help in bad times
By Kor Kian Beng

BAD times may lie ahead but the Government is ready to help, said Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong on Saturday night.

He sent out this message of hope even while he gave a realistic sense of the possible fallout from the global financial crisis.

He named three reasons Singapore, as it prepares for a global downturn, can be confident of emerging from the crisis stronger than ever.

First, the Government is ready to provide help if bad times come, he said at a Marine Parade GRC celebration of Hari Raya Aidilfitri.

In fact, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has asked Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam to start thinking of ways to help Singaporeans and companies in the Budget next year, he said.

‘We must do this in a way that not only eases the pain, but also positions ourselves to take advantage of the recovery later on,’ Mr Goh said.

Second, he reminded Singaporeans of past crises they had overcome – the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the 2003 Sars attack.

‘Those were the days when it seemed like the crisis would never end, but it did, and we bounced back,’ he said, and urged the nation to ’stick together’ to tackle the financial upheaval if it is prolonged.

And third, Singaporeans can take heart that economic fundamentals are strong. The nation will still draw ‘a healthy pipeline’ of investments through the Economic Development Board.

He cited a recent report by OCBC Bank that rated Singapore as the best-equipped among 50 global economies to overcome a serious economic crisis.

The Singapore economy is also more diversified compared to 10 years ago, he said, adding that the heavy national investment in education will help Singaporeans survive the downturn.

‘With education, skills, and a determination to work hard and succeed, we need never fear the future,’ he said.

‘We can survive the temporary difficulties.’

The bigger worry for the Government is whether there will be a global recession, he said. There are signs that this is impending, with the plunge in stock prices worldwide as one indication.
**

Oct 18, 2008
Do the right thing
MAS says priority will be given to lowly-educated retirees who lost money in its probe into mis-selling.
By Ignatius Low & Francis Chan

LOWLY-EDUCATED retiree investors who put their savings in structured products linked to the collapsed Lehman Brothers have been singled out by the Government for special attention.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) wants banks and financial institutions to give this group top priority when investigating complaints of mis-selling.

It also added that banks should not take an ‘overly legalistic’ approach in dealing with such cases.

And in situations where the product was mis-sold or was clearly inappropriate given the investor’s profile and circumstances, MAS wants the financial institutions to take full responsibility.

‘We expect them to do the right thing,’ declared MAS managing director Heng Swee Keat at a press conference yesterday.

Asked what he means by this, Mr Heng later told The Straits Times in an e-mail reply that ‘the financial institution should reach a fair settlement in full or in part’.

‘This has to be assessed on a case-by-case basis,’ he added.

Calling them ‘vulnerable customers’, Mr Heng said at the press conference that this group of retirees would be typically be above 55 years of age and have minimal education.

They may also be blue-collar workers or unemployed. Some may not be proficient in English and may be unable to read the structured product’s prospectus, where the risks and mechanics of the investment are spelt out.

But he also added that not all investors fitting this profile would necessarily be inexperienced.

‘We are focusing on cases of mis-selling to vulnerable customers and on cases where the products were clearly inappropriate for them given the circumstances,’ said Mr Heng.

According to MAS, about 10,000 retail investors had pumped over $500 million into structured products linked to the US investment bank Lehman Brothers.

Lehman’s bankruptcy last month has meant that investors holding products such as Lehman Minibonds, DBS High Notes 5 and Merrill Lynch Jubilee Series 3 Linkearner Notes could lose most of their money.

On Wednesday, The Straits Times highlighted the plight of retiree investors who have stopped work and therefore have little hope of recouping their nest-eggs in their lifetime.

Yesterday, MAS reiterated that it will come down hard on anyone who has been found to have mis-sold these products to them. Many retirees say they did not fully understand the products and claim to have been wrongly assured that they would not lose their principal sums.

‘MAS confirms that we have been conducting formal inquiries into allegation of breaches of the law, inadequate internal controls by the financial institutions, or poor sales practices by their representatives,’ said Mr Heng.

‘We will make an announcement on any actions we are taking when our inquiries are completed.’

MAS also said that a ‘number of possible cases’ have already been found by independent parties overseeing the complaints process at each of the financial institutions that had sold the Lehman-linked products.

It added that it is following up on these cases, but gave no further details.

In the meantime, it is urging those affected who have a genuine claim that they were mis-sold their investments, to lodge their complaints with the financial institution they dealt with.

MAS said that it has asked the chief executive officers of these institutions to personally chair internal review panels to look into these complaints.

In each case, MAS wants the panel to decide what to do within four weeks and communicate its decision to the customer.

If investors are still not satisfied with the decision, they can take their case to the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (Fidrec).

Mr Heng emphasised that the Fidrec mediation process is free of charge and if the case goes to arbitration, the cost to the customer is just $50.

Fidrec normally deals with claims not exceeding $50,000. But in the case of structured products, the centre has agreed to hear all ‘deserving cases’.

Responding to the MAS’ statements yesterday, DBS Bank said it is ‘now reviewing all concerns raised on High Notes 5 in a prompt and comprehensive manner, and will not hesitate to take responsibility in instances where evidence of mis-selling is established’. The Straits Times understands that the bank has already given special attention to retirees.

Hong Leong Finance, which distributed Lehman Minibonds, said it ‘will focus special attention on those above 55 years old, less educated and first time investors in structured products’.

Maybank said that it has to date, contacted 50 per cent of customers with complaints to schedule interviews. It told The Straits Times that it is also dealing with ‘vulnerable customers’ first.

Investors and investor advocates applauded the MAS move, with Mr Leong Sze Hian, president of the Society of Financial Service Professionals, saying that it is ‘obvious that this group needs more help’.

But Aljunied GRC MP Cynthia Phua also added that while it is a ‘good step forward’, MAS still needs to address deficiencies at the bank level in selling these products.

**

THE Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has decided against following Hong Kong’s lead in requiring banks to buy back Lehman Brothers-linked Minibonds at market price from investors.

MAS managing director, Mr Heng Swee Keat, told reporters at a media conference yesterday that one of its key priorities now was to ensure that HSBC Trustee, the trustee for the Minibond programme, carefully considers all options and acts in the interests of investors.

He said that the trustee, which is now working on finding a new swap counterparty to replace collapsed Lehman in the programme, was already acting on the requests of investors who had submitted a petition to the MAS on Sept 24.

If a new swap counterparty is found, investors will be given the opportunity to vote on this option, he said.

Such an option raises the possibility that investors might eventually get some of their money back.

In the meantime, the MAS will also appoint an independent financial adviser to assist investors in making an ‘informed decision’.

‘Many individuals who purchased structured products linked to Lehman Brothers are worried about their investments,’ said Mr Heng.

‘MAS has been actively working to ensure a fair resolution for these investors…Our first priority has always been to help affected investors.’

Last week MAS disclosed that 8,000 retail investors had spent a total of $375 million on the Minibond programme.

Yesterday, Hong Kong Association of Banks chairman He Guangbei said that banks said they will buy back Minibonds from investors in the territory at ‘market value’ as proposed by the Hong Kong government.

An independent financial adviser was also appointed to handle the buyback process, including the valuation of toxic structured products that have been the bane of many disgruntled retail investors both in Hong Kong and Singapore where nine banks and financial institutions had distributed Minibonds.

Investors in the product in both markets have protested in recent weeks demanding compensation.

Many claimed they were told that Minibonds were a low-risk product when they were in fact complex derivatives which many did not fully understand.

Last week, the MAS had also announced that HSBC Trustee had informed the central bank that that ‘a few financial institutions are currently considering taking on (the) role’ of the swap counterparty and should there be a firm offer from an appropriate party, the trustee would seek the necessary approval from investors.

Mr Heng said the MAS expects the trustee to know whether options will be available to Minibond investors by the end of next week.

**

WHAT IS EXPECTED OF BANKS

‘Where a customer has been mis-sold the product or where the product was clearly inappropriate to his circumstances, the financial institution should reach a fair settlement in full or in part. This has to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.’

MAS managing director Heng Swee Keat in an e-mail reply to The Straits Times

A GOOD MOVE, BUT WILL IT BE ENOUGH?

‘This group obviously needs more help…as far as I know, during last Saturday’s rally, this was the group of people that came shouting or crying. I do not think it’s the right approach to deal with this on a case-by-case basis… But I like what MAS is saying that they are asking the banks and FIs to do the right thing.’

Mr Leong Sze Hian, president of the Society of Financial Service Professionals

‘I think it is a good sign that the MAS is finally putting more emphasis on this particular group of investors, but I am 54 now and still working – so it is a grey area for me. Let’s hope they will examine each case by its merit.’

Mr L. Tan a DBS High Notes 5 investor. Yesterday, he lodged a case of mis-selling to DBS Bank

‘If you look at the words ?do the right thing’, I actually put in my blog to appeal to the MAS to do exactly that. Now that we all know that this issue is so serious – something we didn’t know before – we should now come in and say: ?Hey, we made a mistake, let’s all come together to solve this.’…I think this is a good step and of course we should help the vulnerable [investors] first. But the other people are also equally misled… although they too should have been more careful – so it’s a matter of the extent of compensation.’

Mr Tan Kin Lian, 60, the former chief executive officer of insurer NTUC Income

**
Oct 18, 2008
Swap counterparty for Minibonds programme?
By Francis Chan

THERE is good news for investors of Minibonds, a structured product linked to bankrupt US investment bank Lehman Brothers – A bank based in Hong Kong has expressed an interest to replace Lehman as the swap counterparty for all series of the Minibond programme.

Former chief executive officer of insurer NTUC Income, Mr Tan Kin Lian, shared the good news with about 600 investors who turned up at Speakers’ Corner again on Saturday to hear him speak.

Although he declined to reveal further details of the arrangement, he said the bank had approached him after learning about him from his blog.

He also said that he had already referred the Hong Kong bank to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and HSBC Trustee, which is the trustee for Minibonds.

Last week, the MAS announced that HSBC Trustee had informed the central bank that ‘a few financial institutions are currently considering taking on (the) role’ of the swap counterparty and should there be a firm offer from an appropriate party, the trustee would seek the necessary approval from investors.

On Friday, managing director of MAS, Mr Heng Swee Keat also said that the MAS expects the trustee to know whether options will be available to Minibond investors by the end of next week.

I will admit that I was rather outraged when I first read the report. Being pregnant or even having a hard time of it is no excuse for abusing a helpless child entrusted in your help. From a mother’s point of view, I am horrified that a fellow mother can do this to another young child. From one who had experienced a difficult pregnancy, I cannot condone the excuse of one’s action under the guise of a difficult pregnancy.

I have never had a miscarriage so I won’t purport to speak from experience. However I really don’t see how miscarriages can cause one to abuse another child. Makes any sense to you? Not to me.

To punish another child in an unnecessarily harsh manner when she perceived the boy to have “bullied” her son, makes her exactly that. A bully. An adult bully armed with authority.

Is she sorry for what she had done? Or does she feel that she is being unfairly judged? The reporter had observed her to be sullen and there was no mention of remorse.

“Hasanah sat sullenly in the dock while Mr Gill pleaded with District Judge May Mesenas for a light sentence.”

See now, it is the patient’s fault for not describing in detail how the injury happened – she also should have told the doctor that there might be a twig in her foot. The referral letter which said she was cut by a twig was evidently not clear enough. It’s also her fault for not going back to the very same doctor who was unable to diagnose her condition when the same foot condition worsened.

At some point, Associate Professor Eillyne Seow might want to take her foot out of her mouth when she’s done with the blame game.

I also question why she was only cited as the “Divisional Chair of Ambulatory Medicine and Diagnostic Radiology” and not the HOD of the Emergency Department, a position which she also held. After all, commenting as the HOD might seem like it was a biased attempt to cover up for the Emergency Department. Positioning herself in the media as an expert in that medical field also somewhat gives her opinion “credibility”. Interesting.

The New Paper – Ho Lian Yi (12 October 08)

TTSH: Hard to detect wood in X-rays

TAN Tock Seng hospital said Mrs Jacqueline Huang visited its Emergency Department with a referral letter indicating that she had a cut on her foot by a wooden splinter.

‘We conducted an X-ray to check for foreign objects, fracture and dislocation. As the X-ray did not show presence of any material, her wound was cleaned and dressed,’ it said.

The hospital’s Divisional Chair of Ambulatory Medicine and Diagnostic Radiology, Associate Professor Seow, said: ‘A month later when Mrs Huang returned to our emergency department with a swollen foot, we learnt that she had a wooden splinter which was not detected by the initial X-ray.

‘The detection of wood or plastic in X-rays is often limited as both materials can be hidden by overlying bones in our bodies. The rate of detection of these materials is poor especially in cases of minor injuries.

‘It would have been easier for the doctor to treat Mrs Huang if she had described in detail how her injury happened. We would have also performed a minor surgery to remove the splinter if she had come back to us when her foot condition worsened.’

It is important that patients go back to the same doctor or hospital when their condition deteriorates. This will allow doctors who are aware of their history to recommend the subsequent treatment. (more…)

????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????? – ???????????????????????????????

????2006?5??????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????

?????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“???????”????????????AFP, CNN, Reuters ?????????????????????????????????“??”???????????????

?????????????????????????????????????Chua Lee Hoong??????“??????”?

???????????????????????????????????

“????????????????”???“???????????????????????????????????????”

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? – ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

“????????????????????????????????????????????????????????”

???Ms Chua????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“??????”????????????????????“????”??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????”????”????“????”?

?????????????????????????????????????????????“????”?“????”???????????????

“????????????????????? – ????????????????????????????????”

?????????????????????????- “?????????????????????????????????????????????????????”?

?????????????????????“??”?????????

????????????????????????

“?2001????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????”

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

***

This article is translated by passingsights.liquidblade.com from my original article which was written in English. I edited it in Chinese.

Please give me your inputs and opinions, thanks everybody!

Their job is to make life miserable for me, so that I screw up and they can come in…

Instead of spending my time thinking of what is the right policy for Singapore, I will spend all my time – I have to spend my time thinking of what is the right way to fix them, what is the right way to buy my supporters over…

Remember the lunchtime rally at Raffles Place in May 2006? The very speech where our PM Lee Hsien Loong made the above comments with regards to the opposition in that speech?

Well two years later, I still do.

Not because I have such a bionic memory. The fixing is still very much in place.

David Marshall once called ST journalists poor prostitutes and running dogs of the PAP. Harsh words perhaps. Netizens have always speculated about how the Straits Times is a national instrument with which the government yield to disseminate information “appropriate” for the masses. Those of us who read AFP, CNN, Reuters etc know how skewed ST can be in reporting “sensitive” news, especially those with relations to politics, bread and butter news, government investments etc.

I refer to the recent ST coverage on JBJ, with particular reference to Ms Chua Lee Hoong’s article, “A stayer to the end”.

On the surface, the title of the article bodes well. Upon reading, the insidious insinuations could not be ignored.

“His death dashed the hopes of many”…”what died with him were the spoken and unspoken dreams of those who had hoped to see a strengthening of the opposition in Singapore”

How and why? If anything, the spirit of JBJ will continue to inspire those who continue to forge on stoically in the rocky path of opposition politics. To imply that the demise of opposition politics would have followed with JBJ’s death is a weak attempt to strike at the confidence and morale of those who remain fighting. On the contrary, opposition politicians said at JBJ’s wake and vigil that they will remember JBJ’s spirit, principles and passion and will fight on for the people.

“With the benefit of hindsight, it could even be said that it was Mr Jeyaretnam’s highly combative style that led the PAP government to develop an aversion to confrontational politics, Westminster-style”

I find it highly offensive that Ms Chua takes it upon herself to assume and presume about a man who is no longer around to defend his good name. She assumes that it could be said that it is JBJ who had caused the PAP party to be aversive towards opposition and presumes Mr JBJ’s political style to be “highly combative”. His conviction in the Westminster political style is used against him as being “confrontational”. By that determination, I wonder what is to be said about politicians in democratic countries who are just as- if not more than- assertive and vocal as JBJ. What is expected of a politician in another democratic society is termed as “highly combative” in our democratic society.

Is it not the duty of an opposition politician to question the government on what he sees as inadequate? When that duty is being fulfilled and the incumbent termed “confrontational” and “highly combative”, something is very wrong in the local political climate.

“Had Singapore’s first opposition MP been of a more peaceable temperament – like Mr Chiam See Tong or Mr Low Thia Kiang – it is possible that Singapore’s political landscape might be very different today.”

Is it? I remember reading in LKY’s memoir – “in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac”.

It is the ruling party’s attitude that there is no need for checks and balance. The underlying resentment of any “interference” marks the real hostility against any dissenting voice.

To lay the blame conveniently on a dead man is simply despicable.

“In the years between 2001 and now, Mr Low became the de facto leader of the opposition here. He was also the man whom many Singaporeans pointed to as the kind of opposition MP they wanted to see: someone swift to pounce on governmental misdemeanours, who raised issues pertinent to the heartlanders, but – unlike Mr Jeyaretnam – could not be accused of not being constructive”

Again, weaving truth into something questionable to make it look credible. Agreeing that Mr Low has delivered (something which many of us would agree with) and riding on that sentiment of agreement to quickly deliver a dubious point speaks of masterful manipulation. You can take the woman out of ISD, but you can’t take the ISD out of the woman.

There is simply no excuse for abandoning your children alone at home while you go partying. No excuse at all.

Partying mom gets 6-year sentence
THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

2008/9/4

SAITAMA–A mother who abandoned her children so she could party with her boyfriend was sentenced Wednesday to six years in prison for neglect resulting in the death of one of her 2-year-old twins.

She left the twins in the care of their 6-year-old brother.

Megumi Shimamura, 30, of Misato, Saitama Prefecture, had even blamed her son for the death of his younger brother during her 11-day absence, according to the ruling at the Saitama District Court.

Presiding Judge Yujiro Nakatani told Shimamura, “Such a heartless and inhumane crime makes one doubt (your) self-awareness, affection and humanity as a parent.”

Prosecutors had sought an eight-year sentence for negligence as a guardian.

According to the ruling, Shimamura, who is unemployed, left her house on March 3 because she wanted a break from child-rearing and to hang out with her boyfriend.

She reportedly told her 6-year-old son, “I will not return so take care of things.”

She also ordered him not to allow her grandmother, who was living in the same three-story house, to enter the quarters where the three children were living.

The son called the mother’s cellphone several dozen times a day but was largely ignored.

Shimamura’s grandmother tried to enter the rooms after hearing the children crying. But the eldest boy stopped her, saying, “Mom will scold me.”

Shimamura left hamburgers, bread, cookies and other food at the entrance of the house once or twice a day. But the food was not enough for the three children, the ruling said.

The twins’ diapers were never changed and the rooms soon became covered in filth.

On the evening of March 12, the 6-year-old called Shimamura to say that his younger brother would not wake up.

Shimamura returned to the house but did not have the courage to enter the rooms. So she went to a pub and got drunk, according the ruling.

The next day, the son called her again, saying, “He still won’t wake up.”

Before dawn on March 14, Shimamura returned home and found the 2-year-old boy dead with his mouth half-open in a playpen covered in garbage and feces.

She slapped the eldest boy’s face and said: “You are disqualified as my child. Though mama’s to blame, you’re to blame, too. You shouldn’t have eaten all the food by yourself.”

The 2-year-old boy had starved to death on March 12, according to the ruling. His twin sister was found seriously dehydrated.

Shimamura’s defense team said she could not get her family members to help out with the children, which created a situation that made her abandon her child-rearing duties.

The 6-year-old had told prosecutors: “Mom told me I was fired because I didn’t take care of the twins. It’s all my fault.”(IHT/Asahi: September 4,2008)

Credit: Chua Chin Hon of ST

Singapore Table Tennis Association (STTA) president Lee Bee Wah told The Sunday Times yesterday that the services of team manager Antony Lee are not needed anymore.

The shock move, which some view as not only too rash but also harsh, is sure to put a dampener on the team’s scheduled celebrations when they arrive back in Singapore tomorrow. Mr Lee will return to the Singapore Sports Council, where he was seconded from.

Ms Lee, who took over as STTA president last month, her first foray into sports, said: ‘I have a new team and will have a new CEO and technical director. It is best that the manager is chosen by them. Antony is welcome to apply for the position when we ask for applications.’

But a clearly upset Mr Lee, 39, did not take kindly to the news.

‘I find it funny that after we achieved the greatest success in 48 years, I am no longer needed. It is baffling,’ he said, close to tears, yesterday.

The silver – won by the women’s team of Li Jiawei, Wang Yuegu and Feng Tianwei – was Singapore’s first since 1960.

‘I’m surprised she did not tell me directly. That would be the courteous thing to do. I have to hear this from third parties. After doing so much for Singapore, I deserve a little respect,’ he said.

Ms Lee, an engineer who is also an MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, had said last Thursday that Mr Lee and the team’s head coach Liu Guodong should be responsible for the ‘Gao Ning incident’ at the Games.

Gao, Singapore’s top men’s table tennis player ranked 12th in the world, had to play without a coach on courtside. He crashed 0-4 to unheralded Tan Ruiwu of Croatia in the first round.

More here.

**

Someone screwed up and Gao Ning didn’t win. That is not acceptable, seeing how much we spent on buying bringing Gao Ning over. Of course, “someone will have to be accountable for this”. Of course. Otherwise, how does PAP account for all that money down the drain? Of course, there has to be a fall guy and you can be sure it is not the one who said that “our ministers are only drawing S$1.2 million.”

Who dares to say it is an honest mistake – let’s move on?!

No, of course not.

Accountability

As an MP and as the newly elected president of STTA, did she handle this matter well?

The lack of social grace and the PR gaffe is so appalling that Project 0812 chairman Ng Ser Miang said he was ‘shocked at the timing as well as the manner in which this decision had been made‘.

1. She didn’t even know how many accredited coaches were brought to the Olympics. It was 4 and she claimed there were 5. This is unacceptable. Someone has been sleeping on her job. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
2. The Olympics Games are not over yet and to make such a huge PR gaffe in the face of the world is unacceptable. We have set ourselves up as a laughing stock. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
3. Why the choice for such an unfortunate timing? Can’t it wait till the team is back and for a decision to be made after proper and fair investigations? I can’t help but feel that it is a play for the eye of international media attention. Well, not all publicity is good publicity. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
4. Gao Ning is a Olympic competitor and one of the top Table Tennis Men’s players. Does a player of such calibre need hand holding from a coach? Does he need to be babysit by a coach to win? Is it crucial? Should he himself not bear some responsibility and “accountability” for his own poor performance?
   
5. Sportsmanship – a basic trait that should be proudly worn on the sleeve of every STTA official and member, is being mocked and trampled upon. The president herself made a mockery of the spirit of sportsmanship. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
6. The manager was not extended the basic courtesy of being informed of such a grave decision. He had to know from third party sources. Is this the best that a MP and president and committee member on various committees could do in a matter of international impact and exposure? Where is the social grace?
7. Last but not least, if there were not enough accredited coaches sent to the Olympics – such a huge event in the eyes of the government, that we have to spend millions to buy a medal – it is poor planning at its epitome. Shouldn’t it then be the responsibility of the president herself to ensure such a slip should not have happened? Who then “have to be accountable for this?”

Mr Ng said, ‘I’m quite puzzled as to how a decision like that can be made by the STTA president, who has been in office for just over a month.’

Well, I am sure the whole of Singapore is equally puzzled, if not disturbed. ???? – is this in the spirit of Singapore?

Just a few days ago, our PM urged us to be more gracious as a nation and to improve on our social graces. It seems that his directive might have missed Ms Lee.

**

Additional reading:

Andrew touches on courtesy and professionalism.

Yaw Shin Leong (WP) recommends STTA to review the future of its current president

A few days ago, people were positively outraged that this Foreign Talent (and you can imagine them saying it in a very contemptuous and derisive tone) dragged the National flag on the floor during the opening ceremony, and now people are positively proud that she is one of us, she won a silver medal for us! Excuse moi while I go to that corner and roll my eyes silly.

*Goes to corner and rolls eyes silly* *Comes back prim and proper again*

Where is our pride and dignity, that we forsake it so readily for a bit of gain?

The BBC pens its article. starting off with

Feng Tianwei, who, like the rest of the Singapore team, is an import from China, won both her singles matches to help them clinch a tense 3-2 victory.

You feel proud? You feel that Singapore has won a Silver medal?

I don’t. And I am not the only one it seems.

And this doesn’t sit well with me too.

Their table tennis coach Liu Guodong said: “I feel very honoured. I’ve been in Singapore for just over two years and can help it get an Olympic medal, at least a silver, for the first time in 48 years.”

???????

I am going to be scathing here and say – that you are only here in Singapore because you know you cannot make it in China.

And it shames me greatly to say that.

And since we are into such capitalism and buying of National pride, why go for the second best? They should have bought Wang Nan and Zhang Yining over! Then, we would have won our first gold metal in 48 years, or ever.

**

I have nothing against people choosing to immigrate to this country. I shake my head at the whole Foreign Talent nationwide propaganda because I think most of them are a big joke, including the now very famous Mr Amit Nagpal. I used to think that Foreign Talent belong in the category of private bankers who specialize in certain niches, highly specialized industry experts and so forth. Apparently our government disagrees. These days, even a foreigner with average qualification and professional experience is considered as a “Foreign Talent”. Thankfully I don’t need to write an entire diatribe to express how appalled I am and how ridiculous this whole ruckus is. Endoh has done it very nicely.

With that kind of direction from the government, I wonder how much stronghold the citizens have in this landscape of rapidly increasing foreign talent. There are many of these foreign talent in the estate I live in now. They are rude, aggressive and have no common sense of living in Singapore. I wonder if they can truly assimilate in the lifestyle and culture of Singapore, or are we merely a stepping stone for them to move on to US or Canada?

As for the Foreign Talent playing in the Singapore team, I do not blame them for coming here for the money. Anyone would. I blame the government for yet again, choosing the short term solution route. You may say that with the Sports School changes everything. We are now nurturing our own, encouraging our young – no expenses spared. Really??

Yet another foreign talent.

And you think she is one of us? That she thinks she is one of us?

In January 2008, Tao became embroiled in controversy after the Singapore Swimming Association (SSA) introduced a 15% levy on the cash awards given to swimmers, with about 6% set aside for youth development. As part of the government’s Multi-Million Dollar Award Programme (MAP), she received S$23,750 for winning three individual titles and one team gold at the 2007 SEA Games.

She was therefore “taxed” S$3,562.50, with S$1,425 going to youth development. Unhappy with this, Tao said: “If they [the SSA] want to cultivate youth, they should find their own money, not pay using our awards. It’s through our hard work that we got the money. So, I don’t see the point that we should give the money to the youths.” She also said it had been her school and not the SSA which had borne the expense of her overseas training. The SSA said it was “very disappointed” with her comments, and pointed out that the association had spent “easily in excess of $20,000″ in sending her for competitions abroad such as the World Championships, Hong Kong Open and Japan International, and a stint at the Australian Institute of Sport. SSA Vice-President Oon Jin Gee told the press, “Even with the Sports School funding it, it’s our taxpayers’ dollars going into her development. It doesn’t matter which avenue it comes from, it’s still Singapore’s support for her.

And now they are using the taxpayers’ money to fund her million dollar makeover.

I am so sick of the level of stupidity of this government.

Can we entice Obama Barack and Hillary Clinton in as Foreign Talent to replace this lot of grossly overpaid and highly complacent peacocks?

Oh. I don’t think so. It slipped my mind that Mr Barack and Ms Clinton are in politics for totally different reasons than our local chosen ones. Silly me.

and there are parents. I thought I have seen the worst of child abuse cases in the form of neglect or violence but this … is appalling.

Why give birth to a child if you are not prepared to give him or her the best you can? And what if your “best” is hardly acceptable?

Would the child have been more “fortunate” if she was aborted from the beginning? Would this make a classic case for a pro choice argument?

The many grey shades in life. They sadden me.

Knowing how senile I am, I am starting a Friday weekly summary to sum up the events of the week – things that make me happy and not so happy.

Happys

1. Relaxation of mind and body
I’ve been swimming about twice a week – leisurely laps to relax the mind and body.

See under the bridge? The narrow “tunnel” reminds me of the first scene from the game Tomb Raider where Lara Croft has to fight a shark underwater to get onshore. Over imaginative mind alert!

It helps that our pool seldom gets very packed like the public pools – even during the weekends. Looking at the girls having fun always put a little smile on my face.

2. Praise and Appreciation

I have been working at my new office for three months now. They have confirmed me earlier and sponsored my studies fully, for this I am very thankful. Today, the office manager had a quarterly review with me to discuss my progress and goals. It pleases me to no end that a) yes, everyone likes me and think I am an asset to the company; b) The general consensus is that I am independent and capable and gets things done not only well, but also fast. This is music on the ears to every PA, and heck, any other person in another field too. Skills and competence are not doubt important, but EQ and people management are essential too. I am pleased that I have managed to strike a healthy balance.

The one little gripe I had was that I always finished my work too fast and would end up surfing or plurking. I would be getting the chance to get to work on company policies too and to draft them from scratch. This is good for my portfolio and also a good learning ground for my business. Oh, golly.

3. The children are golden as usual. Ger is learning ballet! You can pick your jaw up from the ground now. Wait till I post the picture of her in tutu. THAT would be a scream.

And no, I didn’t even suggest for her to take it up – I have long given up on the notion of her being girly-like, and I even pooh poohed the idea when she brought up the suggestion. But she convinced me that yes, this time is for real, and the semester fee will not go down the drain – like the time it did when she refused to go after one lesson at the age of 5.

The term fees are no joke. But like I said before, if I spend on myself in the name of vanity, it is not fair that I stinge on the kids. I don’t care what others may say about me spoiling them but I will let them learn and experience new things that they show interest in – to the best of my ability.

4. Baking

After the first cheesecake where I tried the ready made crust, I was not pleased with the taste of the crust. I made a second one yesterday, using crushed oreos and butter as the base, and tweaked the cheese filling a little. It was good.

I met Cakie for lunch and I passed some to her. She is going to UK to further her studies and I won’t get to see her for some time when she leaves in September. I like her as she has no pretensions about her and is totally sensible, down to earth and not to mention, a very clever girl . I guess I secretly hope that the girls will grow up to be someone like her. Am so glad she liked it!

5. Independence

As always, I am happy and proud that I am independent. I can roar out loud that I am an independent woman who earn her own keeps, spend her own money and am empowered with the knowledge that I am stand on my own two feet without depending on a man.

I am also proud that everywhere I go, with every job that I take on, I perform well and my bosses like me (even until after I leave, they will still help me if I ask). I have a strong resume and reputation. I am proud that a executive search firm headhunted me for this position. I am proud I can do a job well.

6. Plurk – talking to friends after finishing work so quickly

7. Nadnut plugging me!! Go take part in her contest and win a bag sponsored by my shop

Not so Happys

1. Technicalshits

My boss is a very IT and tech saavy person. He can sprout stuff like VPN client and bluewave technology to me – stuff of which I understand as much as I speak Parseltongue. I also dislike tech and IT stuff immensely – for that I am grateful that I have Big, my Minister of all Scary Tech and IT things, to assist me. But it is no joke when your boss is mighty good at it and expects you to understand the Parseltongue he is speaking and assist him in further Parseltongue. This is a constant struggle and an area that my star doesn’t shine quite so bright. Sigh.

2. Shoulder pain

My right shoulder seems to be locking up more often and it is giving me chronic pain throughout the day. I am not sure if it is the typing posture. On the infrastructure end, my office chair is a $2,000 Herman Miller model and I cannot gripe much about that. I am quite sure it’s the pain that makes me a bitch at times. You all know I am peach and roses.

3. Toxic rubbish

It has come to my ears that she has started insulting my family now. There are people who have decided to take sides without listening to both sides of the story. That’s fine with me. You can’t win them all and my heart and conscience is clear. I object though if your purpose of reading my blog comes with malicious intents.

Sidenote: to the people who came and tell me about her antics – I appreciate it but honestly I want nothing to do with this person and even though she clearly does not understand that, I would prefer not to know about the toxic things she is so free to write about. The only worse thing than a vindictive person is a stupid and vindictive person. Clearly time that is supposed to be spent on being a stay home mum is squandered on shopping and writing garbage. I appreciate your care and concern but really, it angers me that there is scum that I have wasted time and genuine friendship on.

As for those people who come here with malicious intentions of carrying tales and fueling discord, it is on your karma. I have no words for you, except, watch it. What goes around comes around.

I wasted some twenty minutes of my life yesterday. I had made the wrong decision of dropping by a toxic “friend’s” blog, which I had not done so for the longest time, reason being that the said blog is mostly updated with constant meaningless whining and negativity. There is a certain limit to the amount of negative energy one can stomach.

To my surprise, her recent few posts are positive to say the least.  But keeping in line with her character, the “positivity” is meant to put others down.

By insisting that no others are as fortunate as you are, and by insisting that others don’t get more love than you have, you not only look sad and desperate for validation – the whole diatribe reeks of narrow mindedness and low self esteem.

In wanting to insult one particular person, you ended insulting everyone you know. What kind of toxic person are you?

One can be very fortunate. One can be very loved. Is there a need to declare that NO ONE is as fortunate as you are and NO ONE is as loved as you are? Stating one’s happiness on the childish insistence of absence in others – ugly and toxic. Says a lot about you as a person.

I pondered for a while on dedicating a whole blog post to point-by-point address the petty accusations thrown forth but in doing so, I would stoop to that kind of low level that I despise so much. The whole post is crass, vulgar and low class – and says pretty much about the writer herself. In fact, there are a few posts dedicated to such venom. And I shall leave it to the readers to see and judge for themselves.

In being ridiculously accused of being envious, I don’t like to be envious or jealous of others, as you have opt confessed to be. I will work towards what I want, unlike the meaningless habit of whining about it. I have the least reason to be envious of you. If the truth be known and at the risk of sounding mean, I have always felt sorry, if not pity, for you. For all your professions of being high class and “atas”, you don’t have what it takes and you won’t work for it. What gives? The result is constant whining and more whining.

For all your professions of being so loved and all, what we all see is still more constant whining and “emo” nonsense and imposing on a hospitalized patient in her room till 5 am in the morning – refusing to let your sick friend rest. Not everything is about you and you still have not learned that.

In everything that I have done for you, you have felt neither appreciation or gratitude. Not that I need these but to be “rewarded” with such venomous ingratitude is not something I would have expected. There are so many other things that you have been toxic about but since we have come to this stage, I see no need to address those issues anymore. You know what you did and I hope you can live with it.

Your problem is that you cannot accept other’s happiness and moving upwards in life. You can’t embrace a friend doing better than you are. Otherwise you will not feel the need to trample so desperately and proclaim yourself top dog. I don’t feel anger. I only feel sadness.

The tone of this post is not positioned in the manner of the “damsel in distress, I am so piteous” angle and neither is it positioned in the aggressive, vulgar and crass manner you are so fond of.

I am matter of factly and very calmly telling you that you are officially out of my life. I will not be dropping by your blog anymore, the msn and gchat have been duly deactivated, I will no longer feel angry or sorry for you and I hope to move forward in my life, just as I hope you will move forward in yours. I feel no malice or grudge towards you in doing so, just that we are two very different people and I no longer wish to keep up appearances.

Perhaps Posh had unknowingly hit the nail on the head when she plurked this earlier on:

“you could have all the love in the world and yet you feel empty inside.”

I am glad that I don’t need to have all the love in the world and I feel very happy and contented with what I have.

The only thing that I am sorry about this whole ugly saga is that I don’t want our mutual friends to feel awkwardness. This is not primary school where I don’t friend her you also cannot friend her kinda nonsense. My friendship with you and your friendship with her are mutually exclusive matters.

Moreover I don’t hate her. I don’t feel anything towards her. I don’t know which is sadder though.

That’s a nice poof of smoke! A good healthy dose of toxic second hand smoke for your child!

Look at how intently the kid is, looking at the mother smoking merrily away.

Starting young, thanks to mama.

I hate it when parents smoke in front or near their children. I hate it even more when mothers do it ala Britney, or worse, smoke when they are pregnant (some “warped” idea that a mother is the caregiver or nurturer and therefore should know better)

My dad was a smoker too, but he will go out of the house or go to the balcony, close the sliding door and smoke. I can’t even imagine my MUM smoking.

I find it strange when people believe that they are being good parents  – spend a bomb on tuition or whatnots BUT treat their kids to second hand smoke.

Seriously, cut the crap about stopping being too hard, withdrawal symptoms (do they last forever?), this ah that ah.  All crap.

There are some things I have zilch tolerance for and one of them would be crappy excuses for crappy things.

If you want to do something, you will find the ways and means to do it. My uncle smoked for thirty freaking years and was the most hardcore smoker I ever knew – he smoked Camel cigarettes with no filter, ok. Guess what? He quit last year.

Just to share – I was smoking for five years – at least one to two big packs a day. When I found out I was preggers with Ger, I stopped smoking pronto cold turkey. No lesser sticks per day, no nicotine patch, no acupuncture lalala, nothing. Just came out from gynae, threw away the cigarette box (still had 17 sticks! I remember!) and that’s it.

Of course it’s tough. I would be lying if I said it was a breeze. Headaches, crankiness, tempers, running nose, cough, sore throats as my body purged the toxins accumulated over five years.

Yeah it’s tough. So?

**

As for Britney, I think she is damn messed up and would be better cleaning up her act. AND PLEASE stop interviews on how great a mother she thinks she is. I know I sound mean but it’s better for her kids (for now) that she lost custody to Federline.  It’s amazing how a mum like that can think she’s a “good mum“. Delusion is a dangerous thing.

I don’t dare to proclaim myself as a good mum, but I try my best and I definitely don’t and can’t pull fantastic stunts like that.

As above. Like, really.

Pardon my slight irritation as I grapple with why I had to reassure about 438 people as to “Am I the fat cow you are talking about?”

If you think you are, you are. I mean, you should question why in the first place you think you might be the fat cow, instead of being concerned if I think you are the fat cow.. Not sure if you know what I mean, but. In the words of Vicky Pollard of Little Britain, yeah but no but yeah.

And please enlighten me as to why I have to protect your fragile little ego because you cannot accept the fact that I exalt the aesthetics of beauty and the process of morphing an ugly duck to a gorgeous swan?

Sometimes I feel that I can say certain things and cannot say certain things because certain people are reading my blog and if I say certain things, they might take it a certain way and to that, I say BOLLOCKS.

This is my freaking blog and short of seditious rubbish that jars with my capitalist lifestyle (the last I heard, prison is not the place for earning any big bucks) – I think it is my right to toot, throw a hissy fit or sprout some bimbotic crap here, just as it is your right to sod off.

In any case, the %^*&#$$* fat cow in question is a private joke between me and naeboo.

So if I just get one more freaking query along the lines of “Am I the fat cow?”, I will throw a freaking cow at you.

Via Diane in M4M

This time, it is a display of ugly prejudice and ostracism of Singaporean parents against a child. A CHILD! A bunch of ADULTS jeering at and insulting a CHILD.

Bravo. Just when I thought I have seen it all, these Singaporean kiasu parents have again proven me wrong.

What a Class A narrow minded pompous idiot.

Thank God there are still intelligent reasonable parents like Mr William Wong around:

I am embarrassed that there are parents like these amidst us. Deeply ashamed, even.

And I am bristling with indignation and anger that a child, A CHILD(!!), is subjected to such appalling abuse.