Just.

So. Did you go to the AWARE EGM to stand up for your stolen rights? There were good people who went, wanting to stand up against the fundamentalist tyrants, wanting to do some good. There were of course, those who went just so that they can twitter and blog about it to an audience craving for updates (I heard the no 1 twitter trend for that day was #awaresg). And then you have your lemmings.

Of course I didn’t. Bo eng lor, I spent the whole day kite-flying and cycling with my girls.

Not that I didn’t think that the way the group wriggled themselves into the hot seats were any decent, mind you. Subterfuge behaviour is not any self respecting Christian will endeavour towards, and I believe there were more than a few Christians who took exception to such funky tactics.

OK the thing is this. I never thought AWARE to be any organization to be representative of my rights or my beliefs. They did some good things for some people,  no doubt about it, but even in my moments of literal blue and black inflicted by the ex, AWARE had not one sliver of relevance in my life.

I am aware that this might not win me a popularity award (like that would stop me), but I make no apologies for saying this. How I stood up again and moved on with my life, how my mum carved a niche for herself a male-dominated workplace and the educational opportunities paved for my daughters etc etc. had not a fig to do with AWARE.

I respect the goal of equal rights, choice and opportunities, but the beauty of feminism and standing up for one’s own rights is exactly that – a personal empowerment and an individual responsibility. There is strength in numbers perhaps, but still, it is an individual responsibility. Not the empowerment of an organization to do it on your behalf. And certainly not to support the flawed argument fronting the hidden agenda of the old guard, which is to seize on the anti-gay element of COOS and work it with a frenzy to their advantage.

To sum it up, Josie Lau and group lost primarily because of their subterfuge tactics, the delusionally grandiose Thio Su Mien and most importantly the non action of a people who couldn’t bring themselves to support stealth tactics and who believed that religion had no place in a secular organization that aimed to cater to all women across race and religion. Not that we were all rooting so badly for the old guard.

Iif Josie and gang had not been sneaky from the start, had not been burdened with the Feminist Mentor (snort!) and had padded up on their media savvy, the old guard probably did not stand a chance. Indeed, going by the public sentiment and general comments in blogs, a lot of people seemed to think that the old guard are being a bunch of sore losers and were inclined to give the new (now old) exco a chance to prove themselves. Too bad they shot themselves in the foot with the ’sit down and shut up’ phrase (which the whole world repeated to death thereafter) and the antics demonstrated throughout the whole circus act.

And a circus act it was. Looking at the videos on youtube was painful, to say the least. Ladies who behaved unlike ladies (yes I know they were provoked, but still), tolerance and manners were left outside the locked doors, infantile snatching of microphones, shouting, shoving, threats and other ugliness which should not have seen the day were strangely celebrated in a proclaimed feat of victory for liberation, democracy and human rights.

I wonder.

The few who came out smelling like roses were people like Irene Ang who managed to put forth her argument in a most articulate and thankfully, non hysterical way, Braema Mathi who tried to put some sense into an unruly crowd and Josie Lau – yes, she carried herself in a dignified and collected manner throughout the ruckus despite being heckled and booed at, which is more than I say so for the rest of the fight club.

If you were there, and you remained calm and in control despite the circumstances and the environment, kudos to you too. Drop me a note, won’t you.

What was also interesting was the gay crowd’s response to the whole debacle. Except for a very vocal minority (though by the amount of noise they made, you would have thought they are the majority) who seemed to delight in a victim mentality and for whom ‘pro-family’, ‘Christian’ and ‘fundamentalist’ are dirtier profanities than ‘fuck’, the rest of the gay people seemed to take the view of the majority of the female population who did not attend the EGM – it had neither relevance nor impact and they probably don’t give a damn too.

I also don’t fathom the victim mentality. The last time I asked around, most people have gay and lesbian friends, some of whom we are even tight with. There is not one person in our circles of friends, extending beyond six degrees of separation, of whom we know to be ‘pro-family homophobes‘. Maybe I am moving in the wrong circles. Heck, even my mum who is so conservative that she blushes at the sight of my thongs hanging out to dry has this to say about gays – ‘they are also human, what‘.

And in all honesty, Singaporeans are quite a tolerant and even accepting bunch of people when it comes to gays and gay rights. At least we all co-exist peacefully though sometimes not so comfortably in a social context, which is more than I say for homosexual acceptance in countries like Iran, UAE or even our dear neighbour, Malaysia. So what if you have a few haters in a population of millions?

So, the way I see it, the whole saga had nothing to do with gay or anti-gay agendas (though it was cleverly made use of by the old guard) and religion (those nasty Christians!). It was all but a  painfully grace-less exit grandiosely peppered with different agendas and masterfully orchestrated by some.

So what if Josie and gang won? Do they have any real power to impose their anti-gay agenda? Well, they do if we let them. And that’s what I am saying, people.

Really at the end of the day, it’s a non issue. It doesn’t affect me in any way who controls AWARE. The rest of the female/ gay/ straight population who did not turn up at the EGM probably think so too.

And for those who fought so hard for the Josie Lau group to be removed and for the old guard to be reinstated – your tenacity and commitment in fighting for what you believed in were admirable. But. What now?

**

UPDATE

What do you know, the President of AWARE, Dana Lam has written to the press to protest about the ‘objectification of women’ and the ‘cost suffered by other women’. Again, I understand the unspoken expectation to write in and make some form of official objection given her position, but frankly I think it is more empowering to feel that women don’t need to be stood up for (even by another member of the sex) and to respect other women’s decisions and rights, though you might not agree with them. Unfortunately, despite her best efforts, there is that underlying current of one gender being pitted against the other.

Don’t get me wrong – I think the strength of women who come together for a common goal and purpose should not be underestimated. But as opposed to making a stand against a worldly sexism, how about the amplification of a stand for the healthy respect and appreciation of a woman’s beauty and strengths?

And trust me, men know the very difference between the women who welcome being valued proportionately to the size of their breasts, and those who want to be valued for their character and contribution.

In any case, how do you lose your own self worth, respect and dignity based on another’s behaviour?

To say that the ‘indignity is suffered only by one gender’ was probably stretching it a little. To be brutal, the very existence of women who ‘welcome being valued proportionally to their breasts’ is to make women who ‘want to be valued for their character and contribution’ look that much better.

After all, you must have stupid to showcase clever, non?

I would like to thank all my readers for their support

and wish everyone a

Happy and Prosperous Chinese New Year!

??????????

Image

The gulf is getting wider, that’s why.

I don’t condone the act of violence to another human being, (provocation being another issue), but I think this incident says something about MP Seng Han Thong.

Either he is really very suay (he was punched by a 74 year old taxi driver in 2006) or he has EQ problems.

In both cases, the attackers are elderly men in their 70s. Interesting.

She had to use son’s diapers
Pregnant housewife stuck for almost seven hours on stalled Singapore Flyer
By Teh Jen Lee
December 25, 2008

IT was her first time on the Singapore Flyer and she says it will be her last.
Click to see larger image
STUCK: Passengers trapped in the stalled Singapore Flyer had to wait for up to seven hours before they were rescued. TNP PICTURE: MOHD ISHAK

Madam Yohana Husin, 32, who is six months’ pregnant, went up on the Flyer at 4.30pm with her husband and 4-year-old son.

The Indonesian housewife, who’s a Singapore permanent resident, had enjoyed 20 minutes of the ride when the Flyer stalled around 4.50pm.

‘We were in the 24th capsule with two other visitors from London. The capsule was near the top when the wheel stopped moving.

‘I called through the intercom many times asking how long they would take and they didn’t give me any answers.’

After holding her bladder for four hours, she couldn’t hold it any more and had to use her son’s unused diaper to relieve herself.

‘Luckily, we had packed extra diapers. I couldn’t take it so I went to one corner and slipped one into my underwear.

‘I felt very uncomfortable. It was very hot in the capsule, I was very tired and I also had gastric pains,’ she said.

Around 10pm, climbers delivered bread and Coca-cola to the people trapped in the capsules.

Madam Yohana said: ‘They were like Spider-Man. But my son can’t drink Coke, they should have given us plain water.’

She didn’t know that some people were lowered down with harnesses and ropes.

‘I wouldn’t dare to risk it, I would rather be stuck up there,’ she said.

Her husband, a technician who gave his name only as Mr Loh, 46, said in Mandarin: ‘I hope this never happens again because it’s very bad. When we finally got down, I felt a bit giddy, probably because we had been in there for too long.

‘It was almost seven hours. It would have been worse for kids. My son didn’t cry, but he could hardly walk when we finally got out.’

Worried

He was especially worried about his pregnant wife.

‘My friend who watched the news at home told me that people were abseiling down. There was no way I would have let my family do that and be in danger.

‘From the lower capsules, people’s legs were already shaking, how can they expect to get people down from the higher capsules?’

The family was given a full refund of their ticket price, which was more than $40.

Madam Yohana said: ‘I’ll monitor how I feel tomorrow, I may need to see a doctor. I know I will never want to go up on the Flyer again.’

Lack of foresight or poor planning?

When I first heard of the news, I was stumped that there was no provisions made for such an incident. You mean to tell me that no one in the entire company, the panel of experts and consultants and what nots had ever thought of the possibility of a stall or a technical glitch?

Oh, actually they had?

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) activated in the event of wheel stoppage

There is a set of SOPs in place in the event of wheel stoppage. The SOPs (see below) were carried out when the rotation of the wheel stopped on 23 December, 2008.

• Notify the wheel contractor Mitsubishi Heavy Industries about the wheel stoppage and work to re-start the rotation of the wheel as soon as possible. The top priority is to resume the rotation of the wheel in any incident of stoppage.
• In the event of wheel stoppage, Singapore Flyer staff will notify and communicate with passengers inside the capsules via a 2-way intercom system.
• Inform TÜV SÜD, an international certification organisation, and PELU (Public Entertainments Licensing Unit), Singapore Police Force’s licensing authority.
• TÜV SÜD and PELU will be notified when the wheel starts rotating again. Singapore Flyer will only be able to resume wheel operations to the public when TÜV SÜD and PELU have given their approval that the wheel is safe to carry passengers.

In the event of 23 December 2008,

• Measures were taken to isolate the technical malfunction. The wheel contractor, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, was notified immediately to restore power for the rotation of the wheel.

• Singapore Flyer called in Dive-Marine Services Pte Ltd, and subsequently the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF), was called to assist in the evacuation of passengers.
• The top priority is to resume wheel operations in any event of stoppage. Efforts to restore wheel movement were underway throughout this entire duration.
• At 11.15 pm, the wheel resumed movement and passengers disembarked from the capsules.

I have five questions.

1. Was there any drill held beforehand to familiarize the staff with these procedures in the case of the real emergency? It’s not rocket science, seeing that this was being touted as the world’s biggest wheel and as one of our major tourists’ attractions, right?
2. If the need to ‘notify and communicate with passengers inside the capsules via a 2-way intercom system’ was duly noted in the SOP, why was there no response to the pregnant passenger’s repeated enquiries- ‘I called through the intercom many times asking how long they would take and they didn’t give me any answers.’? I imagine she must have been frantic with anxiety and panic.
3. Were the passengers expected to do their toileting in an extremely exposed and enclosed space? Note that each capsule was not only extremely space constrained, it was also transparent on the six panels on the right and left side of each capsule. Not everyone packs a spare diaper in their handbag, in case they haven’t noticed.
4. Bread and Coca-cola were only delivered to the trapped passengers five hours later. Did no one think that they might need food and water? Was it an after thought (and a rather thoughtless one at that)? Did anyone stop to think that Coca-cola was not so suitable in this instance and water would be a much better option?
5. Do they actually realize that the respond time of seven hours is not a remotely acceptable time frame to a trapped situation crisis? ?????? I am appalled. They need a PR miracle pronto.

So who is to be accountable?

• The architects – Kisho Kurokawa Architect & Associates and DP Architects Pte Ltd?
• The engineers – Arup?
• The builders – Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd and Takenaka Corporation?
• The leading international service organization that certified (and which ‘constantly monitored‘) the flyer – TÜV SÜD?
• PELU (Public Entertainments Licensing Unit), Singapore Police Force’s licensing authority?
• STB (Singapore Tourism Board)?

Well, they did indeed deliver the promise of a  ‘capsule of memories for a lifetime’. What an apt tagline though they could not have imagined in their wildest dreams that it be used in such a situation. Again, who and where on earth is their PR company to salvage this crisis?

Compensation

No, refunding the tickets is hardly the first step of the grand plan. And I don’t think offering them free flights on the Singapore Flyer quite works the trick.

How does one’s time, comfort and dignity be compensated adequately? Let’s wait and see how creative the suits can be.

And for crissakes, remove that embarrassing promotion – All you want for Christmas is at the Singapore Flyer, still unwisely and proudly displayed on the website. Hell, no. All I want for Christmas is to be at home with my family, and not stuck in the air with stale hot air, starved for five hours and then rewarded with bread, no water and having to hold in my bladder and bowel movements in a claustrophobic capsule with other strangers – kids fly free or not.

In fact, I was very glad that our first and last time at the Singapore Flyer was determined by a lack-lustre experience and boredom.  If we had been involved in this whole fiasco – especially if the kids were with us – I will unite all my fellow passengers and perhaps even the ones in the other capsules in a collective suit.

**

Check out Nelson’s video about the Drama at the Singapore Flyer.

A while ago I spoke to A who started a charity drive to help those who have fallen through the cracks of the social net. I am inspired by his act versus whine initiative. Not surprisingly, certain eyeballs have been trained on that little charity since it is independent of ‘official’ assistance. But I digress.

The crux of the matter is – all of us can make a difference. For those who want to start a cause, here’s 4 great tips from A -

1. It starts within: Be the change that you want to see in the world. There needs to be a compelling desire to evoke a change.
2. It extends outwards: Making a difference in the lives that you touch. Find a cause that you can identify with and let your desire and passion to help those in need flow through.
3. Start small. You can’t save the world.
4. How the plans will be executed will come naturally when the above criteria are met.

Judging from the fun we had at Dim Sum Dollies, the family trooped to the WRAP festival also organized by NHB under the Explore Singapore! program.

There were good activities lined out for the kids – crafts, balloon sculpting and body art ‘kiosks’ set up to cater to the kids but the only glitch was probably that there was too much demand and too little supply. The queues were snaking long and tempers flared when a brawl broke out between two mothers in front of us. Now if they are giving out free 2.55s, I’d take apart the hussy who cuts my queue but this is freaking kids’ doodles for crissake. And lady, staging a catfight in front of your daughter is a big uh uh and certainly most unglamourous.

It doesn’t mean that I will take it lying down if my kids get sidelined but I prefer to let kids sort things out on their own – they learn to be independent and street smart. The only time I remember pulling my weight as a mum was when violence got involved. To cut a long story short, another kid hit Gean while trying to shove her off the swing. Gean, being sweetness personified, brushed it aside because the kid was younger. But this mother here was like, HOW DARE YOU, YOU LITTLE PIECE OF TURD. Big told me later that I looked murderous. I did contemplate breaking her little fingers one by one.

KIDDING. Really.

Anyway the ending was an anti climax. When I approached the mother to speak to her, I remained calm. Kids get boisterous when playing together, that’s fine but the line should be drawn at smacking and the likes – and I told her so accordingly. The kids were watching me and very possibly learning from my approach of handling conflict. Of course, there are occasions that call for a suitable meltdown but this is hardly it.

Anyway, I digress. So, if there is any queue cutting, I’d let the kids sort it out, failing which attention should be brought to the service provider as a matter of fact and that’s that.

Besides having more activities for the children so that they don’t kill each other, I think the temperature has to be adjusted lower to accommodate the afternoon sun and increased human traffic. It was rather warm indoors and scorching HOT outdoors – more fans and marquee tents would have been most welcome.

The area indoors was also spacious enough for more seats, something which I found very scarce in commodity. Perhaps I am speaking with prejudice but fat arses like mine need to be parked occasionally while I looked on with Dowager-like indulgence while my offsprings entertained themselves with paint and exploding balloons.

All in all, this mum here is happy when the kids are happy and judging from the photos, the kids don’t give a hoot about fat arses needing seats.

But still.

Must have at carnivals – food stalls! My only lament – not enough

Kweh kweh!! I.must.resist.

MUST.RESIST.

RESIST!

Damned, resistance is futile

Sigh, guess why I am a plus size auntie. *burp*

Jack and Rai of EIC performing! I especially liked Rai singing the hokkien song ‘One Half‘ (one of the songs in 881)

The bouncing cow. Perennial kids’ favourite.

Alamak you see this girl. Macham hantu can.

Body artist doing a flower mural for Gean

Pose also got pattern ok. Tsk.

Posing with her balloon flower (pink of course) and the painted art. *rolls eyes*

Ger getting her body art done

COOKIE MONSTER!!! I was almost tempted to queue and get one done too

Yep she likes dogs (yes, TK, the attraction is your dogs, not you)

Having icecream after all that fun

Happy campers

Medicine is not just a career, but a calling
By Lee Wei Ling

I have always felt keenly the suffering of animals. Since I was a child, I had wanted to be a vet. My parents persuaded me to abandon that idea by using the example of a vet whose university education was funded by the Public Service Commission. When he returned to Singapore, he was posted to serve his bond at the abattoirs. That was enough to persuade me to select my second career choice – a doctor. I have never regretted that decision.

There are still many diseases for which medical science has no cure, and this is especially true of neurological diseases because nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord do not usually regenerate. Hence, a significant percentage of patients seeing neurologists, of which I am one, cannot be cured. But as in all areas of medicine, we still try our best for the patient, ‘to cure, sometimes; to relieve, often; to comfort, always’.

An example is a 70-year-old woman who sees me for her epilepsy. Her husband has taken a China mistress whom he has brought back to his marital home. He wants my patient to sell her 50 per cent ownership of their HDB flat and move out. Her children side with the husband because he is the one with the money and assets to will to them.

When this patient comes, I always greet her with a big smile and compliment her on her cheongsam. She will tell me she sewed it herself, and I will praise her for her skill. Then I ask her whether she has had any seizures since the last time she saw me. She sees me at yearly intervals, and usually, she will have had none.

Next, I ask her how she is coping at home. She would say she just ignores her husband and his mistress. I would give her a thumbs-up in reply, then ask her whether she still goes to watch Chinese operas. She would say yes.

By then, I would have prepared her prescription. I hand it to her, pat her on her back and she would walk out with a smile on her face, back straight and a spring in her step.

It takes me only five minutes to do the above. I can control but not cure her epilepsy. But I have cheered her up for the day.

One very special patient, Jac, has idiopathic severe generalised torsion dystonia. By the age of 11, she was as twisted as a pretzel and barely able to speak intelligibly. She did well in the Primary School Leaving Examination, but was a few points short of the score needed for an external student to be accepted by Methodist Girls’ School (MGS).

I had done fund-raising for MGS prior to this and knew the principal. I phoned her and explained Jac’s disease as well as her determination and diligence.

I told the principal that the nurturing environment of MGS would be good for Jac, and that it would be a good lesson for the other students in MGS to learn to interact with a peer with disability.

At the end of Secondary 2, Jac mailed me a book and a typed letter. The book was a collection of Chinese essays by students in MGS.

There were two essays by Jac. In addition, she had topped the entire Secondary 1 and, subsequently, Secondary 2 in Chinese. She was second in the entire Secondary 2 for Chemistry. She was happy at MGS, and her peers accepted her and helped wheel her around in her wheelchair.

Medication merely gave Jac some degree of pain relief from her dystonia. Being admitted to MGS gave her the opportunity to enjoy school and thrive in it.

I was walking on clouds for the next few hours after I received the book and letter. Jac showed that an indomitable human spirit can triumph over a severe physical disability. As a doctor, I am not just handling a medical problem but the entire patient, including her education and social life.

I have been practising medicine for 30 years now. Over this period, medical science has advanced tremendously, but the values held by the medical community seem to have changed for the worse.

Yearning and working for money is more widely and openly practised; and sometimes this is perceived as acceptable behaviour, though our moral instinct tells us otherwise.

Most normal humans have a moral instinct that can clearly distinguish between right and wrong. But we are more likely to excuse our own wrongdoing if there are others who are doing the same and getting away with it.

These doctors who profit unfairly from their patients know they are doing wrong. But if A, B and C are doing wrong – and X, Y and Z too – then I need not be ashamed of doing the same. Medical students who see this behaviour being tacitly condoned will tend to lower their own moral standards. Instead of putting patients’ welfare first, they will enrich themselves first.

The most important trait a doctor needs is empathy. If we can feel our patient’s pain and suffering, we would certainly do our best by our patients and their welfare would override everything else.

Medicine is not just a prestigious, profitable career – it is a calling. Being a doctor will guarantee almost anyone a decent standard of living. How much money we need for a decent standard of living varies from individual to individual.

My needs are simple and I live a spartan life. I choose to practise in the public sector because I want to serve all patients without needing to consider whether they can pay my fees.

I try not to judge others who demand an expensive lifestyle and treat patients mainly as a source of income. But when the greed is too overwhelming, I cannot help but point out that such behaviour is unethical.

The biggest challenge facing medicine in Singapore today is the struggle between two incentives that drive doctors in opposite directions: the humanitarian, ethical, compassionate drive to do the best by all patients versus the cold, calculating attitude that seeks to profit from as many patients as possible. Hopefully, the first will triumph.

Doctors do have families to support. Needing and wanting money is not wrong. But doctors must never allow greed to determine their actions.

I think if a fair system of pricing medical fees – such that doctors can earn what they deserve but not profit too much from patients – can be implemented, this problem will be much reduced. The Guideline of Fees, which previously was in effect, was dropped last year. I am trying to revive it as soon as possible.

The writer is director of the National Neuroscience Institute.

Doing what’s right without fear or favour
Lee Wei Ling
30 July 2008?Straits Times

I WAS born and bred in Singapore. This is my home, to which I am tied by family and friends. Yet many Singaporeans find me eccentric, though most are too polite to verbalise it. I only realised how eccentric I am when one friend pointed out to me why I could not use my own yardstick to judge others.

I dislike intensely the elitist attitude of some in our upper socio-economic class. I have been accused of reverse snobbery because I tend to avoid the wealthy who flaunt their wealth ostentatiously or do not help the less fortunate members of our society.

I appraise people not by their usefulness to me but by their character. I favour those with integrity, compassion and courage. I feel too many among us place inordinate emphasis on academic performance, job status, appearance and presentation.

I am a doctor and director of the smallest public sector hospital in Singapore, the National Neuroscience Institute (NNI). I have 300 staff, of whom 100 are doctors. I emphasise to my doctors that they must do their best for every patient regardless of paying status. I also appraise my doctors on how well they care for our patients, not by how much money they bring in for NNI.

My doctors know I have friends who are likely to come in as subsidised patients. I warn them that if I find them not treating any subsidised patient well, their appraisal – and hence bonus and annual salary increments – would be negatively affected. My doctors know I will do as I say.

I remind them that the purpose of our existence and the measure of our success is how well we care for all our patients – and that this is the morally correct way to behave and should be the reason why we are doctors. In NNI, almost all patients are given the best possible treatment regardless of their paying status.

My preference for egalitarianism extends to how I interact with my staff. I am director because the organisation needs a reporting structure. But my staff are encouraged to speak out when they disagree with me. This tends to be a rarity in several institutions in Singapore. The fear that one’s career path may be negatively affected is what prevents many people from speaking out.

This reflects poorly on leadership. In many organisations, superiors do not like to be contradicted by those who work under them. Intellectual arrogance is a deplorable attitude.

Listen to others, even the dull and ignorant; they too have their story,’ the Desiderata tells us. It is advice we should all heed – especially leaders, especially doctors.

I speak out when I see something wrong that no one appears to be trying to correct. Not infrequently, I try to right the wrong. In doing so, I have stepped on the sensitive toes of quite a few members of the establishment. As a result, I have been labelled ‘anti-establishment’. Less kind comments include: ‘She dares to do so because she has a godfather’.

I am indifferent to these untrue criticisms; I report to my conscience; and I would not be able to face myself if I knew that there was a wrong that I could have righted but failed to do so.

I have no protective godfather. My father, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, would not interfere with any disciplinary measures that might be meted out to me.

And I am not anti-establishment. I am proud of what Singapore has achieved. But I am not a mouthpiece of the government. I am capable of independent thought and I can view problems or issues from a perspective that others may have overlooked.

A few months ago, I gave a talk on medical ethics to students of our Graduate Medical School. They sent me a thank-you card with a message written by each student. One wrote: ‘You are a maverick, yet you are certainly not anti-establishment. You obey the moral law.’ Another wrote: ‘Thank you for sharing your perspective with us and being the voice that not many dare to take.’

It would be better for Singapore’s medical fraternity if the young can feel this way about all of us in positions of authority.

After the Sars epidemic in 2003, the Government began to transform Singapore into a vibrant city with arts and cultural festivals, and soon, integrated resorts and night F1. But can we claim to be a civilised first world country if we do not treat all members of our society with equal care and dignity?

There are other first world countries where the disparity between the different socio- economic classes is much more extreme and social snobbery is even worse than in Singapore. But that is no excuse for Singaporeans not to try harder to treat each other with dignity and care.

After all, both the Bible and Confucius tell us not to treat others in a way that we ourselves would not want to be treated. That is a moral precept that many societies accept in theory, but do not carry out in practice.

I wish Singapore could be an exception in this as it has been in many other areas where we have surprised others with our success.

The writer is director of the National Neuroscience Institute. Think-Tank is a weekly column rotated among eight heads of research and tertiary institutions.

It is probably because she is too much of a maverick (howdy, Sarah Palin!) and has a mind of her own. Such a character trait must be most inconvenient to a cavalry of yes men.

We brought the kids to catch the Dim Sum Dollies show last Saturday at the National Museum with Serendipity and TK.

The delectable Dim Sum Dollies! I absolutely adore these ladies for their comic talent. They can sing a mean tune too.

The turnout for the show. We were standing at the back to get a ‘bird’s eye view’. I think judging from the reaction from the audience, they enjoyed the show as much as, if not more than we did.

Emma plucked this dude from the audience and posed a question to him, “What is the name of the museum – the National Museum of __________?” He was stumped, much to the amusement of the audience. We cracked up even more when Pamela offered ‘multiple choices‘ – “Is it Malaysia? Singapore?” LOL. I think he had stage fright lah.

My kids enjoying the show with much gusto. Don’t ask me why Gean was doing the lips thing.

This segment about the Singapore Girl (SQ girl) was hilarious. I especially am amused by the humorous sly digs at how atrocious their spoken English can be sometimes, the competitive bitchiness and their strange Pinkerton affliction.

Selena being a good sport and striking a pose for our camera

Emma and Pamela gamely posing for us too.

Serendipity feeling tempted to jab my butt? Tsk! LOL.

**

I think NHB has done a great job in thinking out of the box in its innovative outreach programs. In tying in with the popular and well received Dim Sum Dollies, and marketing it at an extremely affordable price at $10 per adult, it’s a clever and interesting way to draw people in. Sure enough, we wanted to carry on exploring the museum after the show ended.

The only minor grouse my kids had was that the skit, at 30 minutes, was too short! These kids know a good thing when they see it. Heh. Also, don’t forget that the influence of children and the impact of good will during childhood (think MacDonalds, people) is a very real and powerful marketing factor. The kids are already asking when they can ‘go to the museum’ again. Heh.

I would say that the Explore Singapore! program (70+ events in 27 museums!) is a success because we will be going again for the WRAP festival tomorrow with the kids. With a good itinerary for both adults and kids, I think NHB has it down pat.

**
More photos

Hair style pattern book – so nostalgic!!

Old school toiletries – the powder is still available these days, not sure about the rest.

Antique Singer sewing machine! Big’s mum has one too.

Silk cheongsam – the workmanship looks so exquisite and impeccable. I was swooning away.

Antique wedding gown – check out the OMG puff sleeves!

This sounds so wrong. LOL.

See the audiophones that we are plugged in to? The different exhibits in the museum are tagged with numbers – when you key in the number, you can listen to information about the exhibit. With audio and visual guidance, we explored Singapore history and the Japanese Occupation with ease. PS – also note that I am double the size of Serendipity. Hiak hiak hiak!!

**

BIG thanks to Blog2u.sg and NHB for the kind invitation extended to me, Big, the kids AND my friends.

I hope my throat recovers in time for me to go for the event this Saturday. Having attended one of the Dim Sum Dollies performances, I think it would be interesting.

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.

I read the recent articles (appended below) on maid abuse with much sadness and disgust. A policeman, a mother and a family of maid abusers – truly the other spectrum of the human race. Makes me wonder what the world is coming to.

I personally never had a maid – am too much of a perfectionist anal retentive privacy fanatic Ms Gotta do it all herself to have a maid. Come on, it is a matter of common sense after all. If you know you are the fussy or intolerant type, then spare yourself the grief. Don’t employ a maid and then bitch about it endlessly. I had a full time job and took care of the kids myself just fine. We got a part time helper to come in 2-3 times a week after I had my slipped disc problem. She doesn’t clean as well as I would like to, but I tell myself to lighten up.

My family had employed maids to care for my grandmother while she was alive and to take care of the house and garden. We never bought into the nonsense that our helpers cannot eat at the same table as us, or cannot eat the same foods as us. And we never had a ‘list of rules’ for our maids. Before you splutter and go “a list of rules?!” I kid you not. I append a sample list, which was posted in an online forum, below. The ones in bold are those that I deem very interesting. And yes, the ‘Kids’ was really written with a capital K.

• Do not steal anything. Stealing is an offence, punishable by law.
• Do not use/consume any items that do not belong to you like perfume, creams, chocolates, chicken of essence, tonics, etc.
• Honesty is the best policy. Else it would eliminate your credibility and our trust in you.
• Respect everyone in the family. This will show good examples to children
• Be courteous to everybody, no talking back and smile!
• Say please, thank you, sorry, good morning.
• Before you eat/use anything, think about whether Sir, M’am, Kids, have eaten/have enough.
• Ensure everyone has a portion of the food/snacks/drinks. M’am does grocery shopping during weekend.
• Do not open/read any letter that is not addressed to you.
• Do not touch or use family members’ personal items. Check with M’am if unsure.
• Do not show temper or pull a “long face” to M’am/Sir/children. If you have any concerns that disturb you, please raise promptly to M’am’s attention.
• Do not open any cupboards, drawers or cabinets unless instructed.
• Do not go into any bedroom when a male family member is in there.
• Do not interfere when M’am/Sir is disciplining / talking to Kids.
• Do not befriend strangers.
• Do not open the door to strangers unless advised by M’am/Sir beforehand.
• Even if visitors claim to be from the government/company, or claim to know anybody from the family.
• If they continue to disturb you by making noise outside like banging on the door, etc, call M’am immediately.
• Strictly no visitors when M’am/Sir is not in.
• Do not give home telephone number or address to outsiders.
• Do not gossip with people in the neighbourhood.
• Do not go out of the house without permission except going downstairs for school bus. Do not bring Kids to pool.
• Always lock main door and remove key.
• If there is an emergency at home, call M’am/Sir immediately.
• Do not use the telephone for your private use without M’am/Sir’s permission.
• Do not waste water, electricity and gas
• Switch off the water heater, lights and fan when not required.
• Use only the amount of water required.
• Do not turn on air conditioner without M’am/Sir’s permission.
• Keep room clean.
• No moonlighting on your off-days as it is illegal
• Off-day is only given from 7th month onwards.
• It is set to be the last Sunday of the month. If M’am needs to change, M’am will inform you in advance.
• 10am – 8pm. Do not be late as the children need to be asleep by 9pm and you are sharing room with them.
• No going to doctor/hairdresser/etc without M’am’s permission
• M’am will not top up the difference in S$ if you go to a more expensive place than what M’am recommends
• Eat whatever M’am gives you. Do not skip meals or be choosy with food
• Take 3 meals a day (Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner).
• The same goes for sundry items, e.g. shampoo, soap, toothbrush/paste etc.
• If you do not like what M’am buys for you to eat/use, you may use your own money to buy.
• Have sufficient rest – sleep around 10 pm. You can do some light reading / write mails but you cannot do this in expense of your sleep time.
• Always stay close to M’am when going out.
• Be polite to guests. Say hello and serve drinks.
• No offensive materials like drug, cigarettes, etc. Check with M’am if unsure. Do not keep food in bed room.
• Love, protect and be patient to Kids
• Example of love – Always give them the fleshiest part of the fish as there are no bones that could hurt them.
• Example of protect – Do not let them go near fire, iron, fan, etc. Do not allow them to draw curtains.
• Example of patience – Be patient when feeding Kids , reading to Kids , supervising them in their homework.
• Take care of their cleanliness
• Wash their hands with soap before eating. Bathe them twice a day.
• Wash kids’ and your hands after you bring her to the toilet.
• Call M’am immediately if Kids are sick, falls down or is injured.
• Inform M’am when child misbehaves or is disobedient. Do not take discipline (e.g. scolding or beating) into your own hands
• Speak good English to Kids
• Be neat, tidy and clean at all times
• Wash your hair every night.
• Hair length no longer than shoulder.
• Finger and toe nails to be short. No nail polish.
• Bathe at least twice a day. Wear clean clothes after bath.
• Wash your hands thoroughly with soap after using toilet, cleaning house and before handing food/drinks.
• No putting on of make-up, perfume/fragrance or jewellery.
• Be appropriately dressed at all times.
• No wearing of revealing, body hugging clothes/pyjamas.
• No wearing of very short shorts.
• No wrapping of towel after bath and walking to room to change clothes.
• Taking care of children is the NUMBER 1 priority. Safety comes first!
• You are required to do housework and take care of Kids.
• When both tasks require your attention at the same time, you should attend to the children’s need first.
• Do all tasks properly and quickly by following work schedule that M’am had prepared
• Take initiative. Do not need to be told what is next.
• Do not take short cuts in housework.
• Keep the house neat and clean at all times.
• Ask when in doubt to prevent misunderstanding.
• Prepare all ingredients before you start cooking to reduce cooking time.
• If Kid is alone at home, ensure she is doing something useful and safe before you start cooking.
• Close kitchen door before you cook only if someone is in the house looking after Kids.
• Turn off fire and cooker switch immediately once cooking is completed.
• Always ensure gas knobs are in the correct position after cooking. Do not just check for fire as M’am’s house is very windy.
• Do not take anything from the house without permission.
• Handle all items with care. Inform M’am of any breakage, spoilage.
• Do not throw away anything without asking M’am.
• Inform M’am when groceries/toiletries/washing aids are running low. E.g. rice, salt, coffee, toilet rolls, dish washing liquid, etc.
• Ensure all doors stick to door magnet as M’am’s house is very windy.
• Be careful with clothes during hand-wash/ironing. Check with M’am if unsure. Eg how long to soak before hand-wash, the setting on the iron for ironing.
• Check with M’am before you throw away leftover food / anything.
• Be careful not to scratch the car when washing the car.
• Send mails only to your family members within reasonable timeframe
• No sending of mails to pen pals.
• Reasonably, there should be no more than 1 mail per week.
• Only letters. Do not send other things without M’am’s permission (e.g. Photo, small items, money, etc).
• You can ask to purchase a phone card – cost will be deducted from the pay
• Ask permission for the use of phone from M’am/Sir before using the phone.
• Use of phone should not affect your attention to the children or work.
• You should also advise your family members to not call you after 10.00 pm.
• Reasonably, there should be no more than 2 calls per month.
• No buying or owning of mobile phone. Mobile phone will be confiscated by M’am and only returned to you upon completion of contract.
• Incoming calls to you should only be from your immediate family members in hometown.
• Greet the caller – Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening.
• If M’am/Sir is not in, inform caller “M’am/Sir is not in” and hang up phone IMMEDIATELY.
• Do not answer any questions over the phone from any callers except questions from M’am/Sir/Kids

Damn, I think the job of this maid is tougher than mine, and definitely way underpaid.

**

While I poo poo the unrealistic idea of providing maternity benefits to maids, I think we need to have a basic understanding to treat our helpers with basic decency – a trait, like common sense, seem sadly deficient. I see and hear things like maids not getting to eat at restaurants, carrying countless bags while the sluggish employer saunters empty handed, having to wake at 6am in the morning and getting to sleep only at midnight – the list goes on. The stupidest has got to be the one who treats her maid who takes care of her very young children in a shabby manner. Hey look, I don’t need to tell you how stupid that is right?

By Elena Chong, Courts Correspondent

Maselly Abdul Aziz (right) is on trial for using heated substance to hurt Ms Badingah, 29, at her rented flat at Jalan Minyak between June 2 and July 26 last year. — ST PHOTO

A HOUSEWIFE allegedly poured boiling water on the private parts of an Indonesian maid after the maid had used hot water to bathe her four-year-old daughter, a district court heard.

Maselly Abdul Aziz, 38, is on trial for using heated substance to hurt Ms Badingah, 29, at her rented flat at Jalan Minyak between June 2 and July 26 last year.

Maselly, who is defending herself, is also accused of using an iron rod to hit the maid and instigating her daughter, Nur Rizan Mohamed Sazali to extract two of her front teeth.

Nur Rizan, 18, is serving 26 months’ jail for abusing the maid, whose employer, Elsa Elyana Said, 25, was given 17 months’ jail recently for helping to extract her teeth and punching her.

Maselly’s son, Mr Muhammad Iz’aan, 20, has since served five weeks’ jail for using a cane to hit the maid on the back.

Ms Badingah testified that she jumped out of the second-storey flat off Chin Swee Road on July 26 last year after Maselly had threatened her with two knives.

Maselly is said to have told her in a mixture of Bahasa Melayu and Bahasa Indonesia that she would kill her if she did not return $60 to her.

Ms Badingah testified that Maselly had instructed Nur Rizan to pull out her teeth after blaming her for stealing.

‘Maselly often lost her money and handphone, and that applies to her family members. Maselly then accused me of stealing her handphone and money. So she told me that if she loses an item, she would extract one of my teeth,’ she said.

She said Elsa held her head while Nur Rizan pulled out her tooth with a pair of pliers.

Several hours later, her second tooth was forcibly pulled out by Nur Rizan with Elsa’s help.

The trial continues.

Detective jailed for maid abuse
By Selina Lum

Lawrence Lim Hwang Ngin (left) was sentenced to a year’s jail for abusing his Indonesian maid. — ST PHOTO: SHAHRIYA YAHAYA

A DETECTIVE from the Criminal Investigation Department was sentenced to a year’s jail by the High Court for abusing his Indonesian maid.

Justice Kan Ting Chiu, in sentencing Lawrence Lim Hwang Ngin, 35, noted that he had abused his position as a police officer and caused fear in the maid.

The judge found Lim guilty of kicking and hitting the maid on five occasions.

He pointed out that the circumstances leading to the assaults were ‘minor domestic matters’.

Lim was convicted in August of kicking and hitting his maid on five occasions.

However, he was acquitted of seven charges of sexual abuse, including one count of rape.

Lim has appealed against his conviction for maid abuse and is out on bail of $70,000.

Woman jailed for maid abuse By Elena Chong, Courts Correspondent

Tay Wan Leng, 41, pleaded guilty to pinching the right arm of Indonesian Istikomah, pulling her shirt and slapping her face, back and head several times at her home in Woodlands on Jan 22. — ST PHOTO: WONG KWAI CHOW

A WOMAN administrator was jailed for five weeks on Monday for maid abuse.

Tay Wan Leng, 41, pleaded guilty to pinching the right arm of Indonesian Istikomah, pulling her shirt and slapping her face, back and head several times at her home in Woodlands on Jan 22.

A court heard that Tay lashed out at the maid after discovering that the 27-year-old had not followed her instructions to soak her husband’s and her clothes.

That was the second day in a row she had abused the maid.

A day earlier on Jan 21, she punched the maid on her chest and stomach and pulled her hair but this charge was considered during her sentencing.

Ms Istikomah, who started working for the family last November, ran to the maid agency on Jan 23.

She was taken to hospital and warded for a day.

Defence lawyer Tang Gee Ni said Tay was under emotional and mental stress and strain when she committed the offence.

He said she had compensated $700 to the maid and would pay for her airfare home.

Tay could have been jailed for up to 18 months and fined up to $1,500.

This article was first published in The Online Citizen.

In order to make a difference in the climate of socio-political awareness, we do have to question ourselves too – are we opposing for the sake of opposing?

Recently, two incidents made me think about how much our average Singaporean cares about his or her country and fellow citizens. Is it the sense of superiority that makes one shy away from his less fortunate fellow men? Is it the comfort zone that we are cocooned in that makes one turn a blind eye to the plight of another? Or is it the relentless pursuit of materialism in our society?

Perceived Superiority

I met a young man in one of the recent events I attended. He had taken the initiative to introduce himself to me. He struck me as confident and well spoken. In the course of our conversation, the topic of the structured investments saga came up.

His take was that “you make your bed, you lie in it.” I agree with him – to an extent. Savvy investors who knew what they were buying into – mid to high risk structured investments – should bear the responsibility of their calculated risks and if I may say so, greed. However, I mentioned that there is a group of investors with whom my sympathies lie – these are the retirees who had invested most, if not all, of their life savings and folks who are lowly or not educated. These people had been reassured that the structured products were ‘just like fixed deposits’ and that they are “principle-guaranteed”. What did he think about that?

He smirked and uttered, “Darwinism“. Basically, he had little or no sympathy for uneducated or poor people. He said that there is a reason why some people will always be poor and that he identified with the wisdom of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s ‘eugenic beliefs’. I also got the feeling that he really doesn’t care about the ‘unglamourous’ things in life and that he was keener to talk about my previous experience in the fashion industry. ‘For the good of Singapore, there should really be only people just like you and I, young educated professionals who are sophisticated and intelligent’ and ‘it’s people like us who will shape the nation and make it competitive.’ He went on to say, “Anyway, the government will take care of people like that,” referring to the less fortunate, “That’s what we pay taxes for.”

I managed a polite smile and excused myself.

Does the problem lie in our education system, or in our urban culture that encourages the pursuit of materialism and creature comforts?

The Cocoon of the Comfort Zone

The second incident happened when I attended a wine tasting session. There were people from all walks of life – professionals, business people, engineers, housewives etc. Perhaps the wine did a good job of loosening some tongues, so I had people talking to me about everything under the sun – from business to the economy and even blogging and bloggers. As usual, I did not talk much as I preferred to hear what others had to say. I would offer words of agreement and encouragement to keep the conversation going.

I was surprised to learn that the general consensus towards socio-political bloggers was that they are a bunch of government-hating, flag-burning ‘activists’. When queried, a few names tossed up were a few of the “extremist anti-establishment blogs”. One of the ladies even said that the purpose of these blogs seemed to be ‘opposing for the sake of opposing’. Some were prejudiced to the extent that anyone who remotely questions what the government does are automatically branded government-haters.

These people have comfortable lives, are used to their comfortable lives and do not want anything to disrupt their comfortable lives. I can understand that. After all, humans are inherently selfish. But to deny that there is a group of people who has a very real need for government help ,is at best, ignorant. To sneer at others who are trying to reclaim the rights of their citizenship and who are consciously civic-minded is, at best, short-sighted.

However to play the devil’s advocate, they cannot be faulted for being aversive to extremist opposition or anti-establishment individuals or entities. A different point of view, the propaganda in the mainstream media, the behaviour of some activists and the precedent success of the ruling party – all contribute in varying degrees to the current ennui of the people.

In the course of that conversation, it was mentioned that the opposition is ‘good at pointing out where the PAP is lacking, but when I ask them what they can do for us, they have no concrete plans or abilities.”

Is this an indication that people are not necessarily pro-establishment but are left with no choice because of the calibre of the opposition? Are people apathetic because the ruling party is the ‘lesser of the evils’?

Perhaps the ruling party has also succeeded exceedingly well in this area – so much so that in keeping us well-fed and clothed, the need to question other intangibles ceased to be so important.

In order to make a difference in the climate of socio-political awareness, we do have to question ourselves too – are we opposing for the sake of opposing? Are we being moderate, reasonable and temperate in our criticism of government policies, or are we blindly criticizing the government for the sake of taking an anti-establishment stance?

Talk the talk or walk the walk?

Very often, socio-political bloggers are seen as armchair critics – in that we criticize but ‘fail to provide any real solutions’. Incidentally, the prevalent mood is that there is no point being socially or politically aware – that ‘there is nothing we can do anyway’.

I beg to differ. Here are some examples which would prove such assumptions wrong:

• Bloggers took to speaking at Speakers’ Corner when the hike on public transport was announced. In their speeches, they addressed different points of concern. A comprehensive paper was also developed and submitted to the Public Transport Council.
• In addressing some very pertinent concerns about the deregulation of internet controls, 13 bloggers submitted a paper to Dr Lee Boon Yang, Minister of Information, Communication and the Arts.
• When the enhanced Marriage and Parenthood (M&P) Package was announced in the National Day rally by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong this year, it sparked robust feedback from some expectant mothers and fathers because the starting date was slated to kick off in January 2009. Apparently the collective voice was heeded as the government then decided to backdate the starting date to 17 August this year.
• Tan Kin Lian took the lead to address concerns of affected investors in the Lehman Brothers financial saga, assisted by volunteers like Andrew Loh, Goh Meng Seng, myself and other bloggers and non bloggers.

The reality is, all of us can do something in our own little ways. The question is whether there is enough perceived importance to warrant a reaction. Personally I find it better to be aware than to be ‘blissfully kept in the dark’.

After all, do we want a society where people who are socially or politically aware are branded as “radicals”, and people like Tan Kin Lian who step out to help (without monetary compensation) are sarcastically mocked as “heroes”?

I hope not.

CNA reports that ‘on a lighter note, the Minister Mentor touched on what he calls assortative mating, that is, finding a spouse at your level – something he strongly believes in.

He said: “I have explained this. I think I lost votes after I explained the awful truth. Nobody believed it, but slowly it dawned on them, especially the graduates, that yes, you marry a non-graduate, then you worry about whether or not your son or daughter is going to make it to the university.’

Our Minister Mentor is at it again. He had concerns about breeding a society of ‘the physically, intellectually and culturally anaemic’ in 1967. He proclaimed ‘without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervene on very personal matters’ and that ‘we decide what is right. Never mind what people think’ in 1987.

Well, that supreme, almost egoistical confidence and absolute belief that he is never wrong seemed to be unjustified on at least two matters – eugenics/ assortative mating and population control.

He initiated the ‘Stop-at-Two’ population control campaign in the 60s. Couples were urged to undergo sterilisation after their second child. Children born after the second child were given lower priorities in education and such families received less economic rebates.

In 1983, his eugenic belief showed up when he encouraged Singapore men to choose women with high education as wives – sparking the ‘Great Marriage Debate’. He was concerned that a large number of graduate women were unmarried and thus not giving birth to babies. Incentives, such as tax rebates, schooling, and housing priorities, were reserved for graduate mothers who had three or four children, in a reversal of the over-successful ‘Stop-at-Two’ family planning campaign in the 1960s and 1970s. By the late-1990s, birth rates had become so low that Goh Chok Tong (then Prime Minister) extended these incentives to all married women, and gave even more incentives, such as the ‘baby bonus’ scheme.

We now have the benefit of hindsight. The ‘Stop at Two’ campaign and the ‘Great Marriage Debate’ were major flops. They have us clamouring madly to correct the population ratio by waving more monetary incentives and encouraging the influx of ‘foreign talent’. To bring up the idea of eugenics, social darwinism and selective breeding again is so surreal that it is anachronistic.

There also seems to be a dissonance between his stance on ‘assortative mating’ and education. In his recent speech at the Human Capital Summit, he said that talent and aptitude, and not grades should be the measuring yardstick in education systems. And yet this strange fascination with a degree, a form of certified grades, seem to have taken grip in him. A case of cognitive bias?

**

Elsewhere:

Benjamin wrote an excellent article from the socio-economic angle and Nelson asked aptly, “Is not the ability to effectively and efficiently use one’s available knowledge and resources, a better measure of success than academic achievements?”

It took quite a while for our Prime Minister to share his thoughts about the Lehman saga but finally – a month after the news broke, he granted an interview to who else but ST.

At this point in time, many of the concerns have already been addressed and not by the people who should, so really, any pertinent points raised are at best supplementary. The motivation to read, for some of us, is really the entertainment of chuckling while enjoying a hot cuppa coffee.

And so, our PM says

‘First of all, Government should not be making decisions for individuals; individuals should have the right to decide for themselves according to their circumstances, their preferences, their needs.

‘For example, last year we tightened up the CPFIS rules, so that the first $20,000 from your CPF Ordinary Account cannot be used for CPFIS investments. I know that some Singaporeans, particularly some better-educated younger people, felt unhappy at this restriction. They said: ‘I am a responsible adult, I know what I am doing, let me manage my savings myself.’

Mr Lee, you are very right and I fully agree with you. However it should always be a two way street. You are absolutely right that we should have the right to decide for ourselves according to our circumstances, preferences and needs. So why is the government needlessly and endlessly butting into issues where we do not welcome ‘decisions’ – internet regulation, media policing, film censorship, CPF investing interference, telling us two is enough and then a change of mind when the birth rate is falling, and oh so many more ‘decisions’ I can’t remember now. .To my readers, please comment here if you can remember any other unwelcome ‘decisions’ where the government fancies itself a feudal lord. My point is – make up your mind and stick to it. Be an authoritarian nanny state or a state where the individuals have the right to choose and bear the responsibility of those choices? Stop trying to take the good without the bad. This wishy washiness is irritating.

Given its propensity to stick its nose where it is not needed or wanted, it fails to deliver when it comes to the crunch – basic infrastructure of the country, in this case, the financial pillar. In a dubious product like the minibond product (should it be allowed to be named as such as it is nothing like a bond), one questions if MAS should have allowed its listing and distribution in Singapore. I am not ashamed to admit this, but I have read this, this, the prospectus and the Pricing Statement (thanks Adrian!) a few times and I am still clueless as to the financial mechanism it runs on.

Some might think that I am being so vocal because I have been burnt by the Lehman products. On the contrary, I did not invest in any structured products. My investment philosophy is that I will not invest in anything I do not understand and being rather old fashioned, I believe in tangibles like property and gold etc. So why am I (and so many other netizens) being so kaypoh and troublesome about this whole Lehman saga?

But ultimately, each person has to take responsibility for his or her own financial decisions. If you do not understand a product, do not invest in it. If it looks too good to be true, it probably is. You may not be able to become an expert, but you still have to look after your own money.

In this case, the Lehman Minibond Notes or DBS High Notes or ML Jubilee Notes were clearly not low-risk products. I think the prospectus says ‘you could lose all or a substantial part of your investment in the Notes’ in bold print, on page 1 or 2.

This is why. Because, our leaders, our esteemed leaders who are so elite that they have been disconnected from the people, are being deliberately obtuse. Do we not know this? That each person has to take responsibility for his or her own financial decisions? We know this. What we do not know, is why we have such products being sold in the first place, why they are being sold as fixed deposits and even as government endorsed bonds to old people, retirees, lowly or even uneducated people. And you are still talking about bold print in prospectuses.

We know about prospectuses. What we want to know now is the responsibility of MAS towards appreciating the complexities of such a product and and financial institutions/ staff in its unethical marketing. Till now, there is no real answer.

Q: Would the two different approaches you mentioned earlier explain the difference in the way the Hong Kong and Singapore authorities handled the situation?

A: I would not like to comment on what other jurisdictions do. We do what is necessary in our circumstances. In Singapore, while dealing with specific complaints of individuals who feel that they were mis-sold the Lehman Minibonds Notes, High Notes or ML Jubilee Notes, we must also have in mind the right overall policy on the sale of financial products to retail investors.

While I have wrote here on the key differences in how Hong Kong and Singapore authorities handled this matter, the primary concern is in the response time and the manner in which the government reacted. On one hand, I detest it when people go “America (or insert name of 1st world or successful country) is doing this and so we should” and argue not on merits but by blind comparison. We are Singapore, a uniquely different country in terms of size, location, people, resources etc. So I agree that ‘we do what is necessary in our circumstances’. It makes sense and there is nothing to argue about that.

On the other hand, the lack of response when the news broke, the speed with which the government reacted, difference between the callous insensitive remark of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong and the pledge by Chief Executive Donald Tsang – these are facts that cannot be ignored. They speak volumes about the passion and social responsibility of a leader and the disaffection of the government.

We are a major financial centre. In regulating and supervising financial institutions and activities, we must be fair, consistent and transparent. Set the right rules, and work by those rules. We should not act arbitrarily. If a bank breaches the rules, we will not hesitate to take action against it. But if a bank has acted properly within the right rules, the Government cannot, just because it is under political pressure, lean hard on it to do something convenient and get ourselves out of a jam.

This country is run like a tight ship – a corporation of which the bottomline is profits and branding. The leaders have lost sight of the line that separates the country in its social aspects and the country in its economic aspects. They have been dehumanized by the worship of the golden calf.

One approach is to say: Government knows best. You are consumers, you are not informed; you do not know how to judge for yourself, you should not be allowed to buy things that are risky. I, the Government, decide what is risky and what is not risky. If I allow you to buy, and I allow the banks to sell, that means it is safe, so if you buy, it is all right. You are protected by the Government. We decide for you, and you do not have to worry about it. Some people would say this is being paternalistic.

That is one way to manage. But in the long run, this is not sustainable.

The second approach is for the Government to adopt a freer, more flexible stance. We allow individuals to have choices, to make their own decisions, take responsibility for them, and accept the consequences. Whether it turns out well or badly, you have made the choice yourself, and you are prepared for the outcome, psychologically and financially.

I think this is the better approach. Let people make their own choices and decisions, but within a proper system, and with appropriate safeguards. We have progressively shifted towards this over the last decade.

I hope the day will come where we are truly free to make our own choices and decisions – in the things that matter. For that to happen, the government should stop all partisan meddling and manipulations, and focus on issues that really matter – like the building of a robust and sound system that have protocols in place to reach out to the citizens in times of crisis.

***

A practical and fair way to deal with the issue
ST
29 Oct 08

Taken from Singapore Law Watch

Q: Could you comment on MAS’ approach to the issue of structured products linked to Lehman Brothers?

A: This is a most unfortunate event. When you invest in financial instruments, whether it is stocks, bonds, unit trusts, or in this case, structured products, there is always a risk. There is an upside and a downside. You hope for the upside, and also hope that the downside does not happen to you. If you know the downside can happen, and go in with your eyes open, that is alright. The problem comes when you did not know what you were going into and it catches you unawares, and you have taken out your life savings for retirement and put it into Lehman Minibond Notes or like products. Then you are in trouble because if something goes wrong, this is money that you cannot afford to lose.

We have to look at the circumstances of the people who have lost money, whether on Lehman Minibond Notes or DBS High Notes or ML Jubilee Notes. Where there has been mis-selling, it has to be put right. Where there has been less than professional behaviour by the relationship managers, or it does not measure up to the standards expected by MAS when they promote financial products or advise someone what to buy, then the banks have to do the right thing. Where there have been breaches of the law, MAS will take action.

MAS has worked with the banks to set up the mechanism to deal with these cases expeditiously. If you went to court one by one, it would cost you a lot of money and take a long time. The banks have appointed three very experienced, fair- minded and well-respected persons who will oversee the process – Gerard Ee, Law Song Keng and Hwang Soo Jin. They will help to resolve this problem, without the people affected having to pay a lot of money to hire a lawyer and go through a complicated process.

I hope that those affected will go through the process and try and sort it out this way. If it still cannot be resolved, there is still the Fidrec, (Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre), which MAS set up back in 2005.

Beyond Fidrec, if you still do not feel that the matter has been adequately settled, then you still have your legal rights, which are not compromised.

This is a practical and fair way to deal with the problem. The banks know it is in their interest to deal with the customers fairly, because there is ‘reputational risk’. In other words, if the banks do the right thing, their customers will remember them for a long time. If they do the wrong thing, customers and potential customers will also remember them for a long time. The banks know this and have every interest in sorting this out expeditiously and fairly.

Q. Why could the Government not take more responsibility for vetting products?

A: I think this is a very difficult and unsatisfactory approach in the long run. First of all, Government should not be making decisions for individuals; individuals should have the right to decide for themselves according to their circumstances, their preferences, their needs.

Secondly, the Government is not in a position to guarantee what is safe and what is not safe, because there is nothing which is 100 per cent safe. It is impossible. The higher the return, inevitably the higher the risk, because there is no free lunch in this world.

What is the safest? Singapore Government Securities – that means Government debt, followed by the deposits guaranteed by the Government, like CPF deposits. These are 100 per cent safe as long as the Singapore Government is safe. Make sure that there is a good Singapore Government, then the dollar is stable, and one Singapore dollar is really worth one dollar, and your money is safe.

Other than that, nobody can say. If you had put money into Lehman Brothers three years ago, which had a credit rating of ‘A’ then, it may have looked alright, but now it is a totally different situation. Even safe products have the possibility of going wrong and if something does go wrong, it is not possible for Government to say: I guaranteed that this would not happen, so I am taking responsibility.

Q. Surely with consumers deciding for themselves, the Government must set up safeguards?

A: Yes. The Government’s job is to make sure things progress fairly and properly, not to guarantee that you make money, but to ensure that investors know what they are doing. So if a bank wants to sell you something, first there must be a prospectus explaining what it is, and in as simple language as possible. In this case, the Lehman Minibond Notes or DBS High Notes or ML Jubilee Notes were clearly not low-risk products. I think the prospectus says ‘you could lose all or a substantial part of your investment in the Notes’ in bold print, on page 1 or 2.

Secondly, there must be a fact-finding process about you, unless you opt out. The bank must find out about your circumstances – what you need, what your risk tolerance is, whether you are a young man planning for 30 years of investment, or you are a middle-aged person with family responsibilities, or you are a retiree needing a steady stream of pension. Each person’s needs are different. What risk people can tolerate will be different. You may own a house and be looking to invest $10,000 of spare cash, or this may be your life savings taken out from CPF which you can ill afford to take risk with.

Then there must be advice from the financial advisers. Their duty is to look at it from your point of view, and not from the bank’s point of view or from the adviser’s own point of view hoping to earn a commission, to advise you what is the prudent way. If you do this, these are the risks. These are the options and the trade-offs, you make up your own mind.

So there is a proper process which if followed properly, should help people to make better financial decisions for themselves.

Then we have to educate the people. They may know how to follow rumours to buy and sell in stock market, and find it very exciting to see the prices of their shares going up and down. But they may not understand more complicated financial products, or the risks, or the consequences.

Financial education is important for you to have a sense of what the risk is and what your own limits should be; so that you can appreciate the advice you are given. So we have all sorts of programmes – Moneywise, Dollars and Sense, etc. The Community Clubs and Residents’ Committees organise financial education talks. The Sunday Times has lots of pages advising people how to manage their money. These are very basic, but at least people can begin to understand. Even if they do not know everything, they know what they do not know. And that is the most important, because when you think you know everything which you do not, you can get into trouble.

Even then, from time to time, things will go wrong and investors will feel aggrieved. Hence we need a process to deal with this when it happens. The process can investigate this properly, and not cause every aggrieved investor to go through a full court trial. It must be a fair and quick resolution. It cannot be that if I invested and it turned out well, then I am happy, but if I invested and it turned out badly, then I am entitled to compensation.

So these are all the pieces we have to put in, in order to have a system with more flexibility, to let people make their own choices.

Q. Can we somehow make sure that people do not lose their last dollar on risky investments?

A: We try to do this through HDB home ownership, and the CPF system. For example, last year we tightened up the CPFIS rules, so that the first $20,000 from your CPF Ordinary Account cannot be used for CPFIS investments. I know that some Singaporeans, particularly some better-educated younger people, felt unhappy at this restriction. They said: ‘I am a responsible adult, I know what I am doing, let me manage my savings myself.’ I know that some Singaporeans will be more than capable of looking after themselves, but as a national savings scheme, I think it is wiser that we keep this basic amount safe. If you have more savings beyond that, you can make freer choices, but do not take any chances with this base level.

But ultimately, each person has to take responsibility for his or her own financial decisions. If you do not understand a product, do not invest in it. If it looks too good to be true, it probably is. You may not be able to become an expert, but you still have to look after your own money.

Q: Would the two different approaches you mentioned earlier explain the difference in the way the Hong Kong and Singapore authorities handled the situation?

A: I would not like to comment on what other jurisdictions do. We do what is necessary in our circumstances. In Singapore, while dealing with specific complaints of individuals who feel that they were mis-sold the Lehman Minibonds Notes, High Notes or ML Jubilee Notes, we must also have in mind the right overall policy on the sale of financial products to retail investors.

We are a major financial centre. In regulating and supervising financial institutions and activities, we must be fair, consistent and transparent. Set the right rules, and work by those rules. We should not act arbitrarily. If a bank breaches the rules, we will not hesitate to take action against it. But if a bank has acted properly within the right rules, the Government cannot, just because it is under political pressure, lean hard on it to do something convenient and get ourselves out of a jam.

We have to stand back and ask: What is the right way to resolve this? What are the right rules, the right policies? Then everybody will know that these are the rules of the game. Not just in this situation, but all the time. And that gives people the reassurance and confidence that the Singapore Government will do the right thing when problems arise again in future.

If people lose confidence in what we are doing, the damage to Singapore will be considerable. You may get out of the immediate jam but then what happens further down the road? The next time somebody sells a product, he will say: ‘Don’t worry. If this goes wrong, the Government will look after you.’ And then more problems will come. Because the good outcome is mine, the bad outcome somebody else will take care of. That is what ‘moral hazard’ means.

---

Two approaches Govt can adopt

Q: What is your take on the anxiety faced by the investors?

A: I think some emotional reaction when something like this happens is completely understandable. Nobody likes to lose money, and especially if it happens to you in a very sudden, drastic and unexpected way, that is a shock. Furthermore, if you feel that this possibility was not something that was explained to you, or if in fact you had been wrongly reassured that, do not worry, this is capital assured, you will get your money back, then you will be upset.

Let us stand back a little bit from dealing with the immediate problems, and think about how we should approach this whole issue of individuals investing their money, and banks and institutions selling financial products. There are two opposite approaches in dealing with this situation.

One approach is to say: Government knows best. You are consumers, you are not informed; you do not know how to judge for yourself, you should not be allowed to buy things that are risky. I, the Government, decide what is risky and what is not risky. If I allow you to buy, and I allow the banks to sell, that means it is safe, so if you buy, it is all right. You are protected by the Government. We decide for you, and you do not have to worry about it. Some people would say this is being paternalistic.

That is one way to manage. But in the long run, this is not sustainable.

The second approach is for the Government to adopt a freer, more flexible stance. We allow individuals to have choices, to make their own decisions, take responsibility for them, and accept the consequences. Whether it turns out well or badly, you have made the choice yourself, and you are prepared for the outcome, psychologically and financially.

I think this is the better approach. Let people make their own choices and decisions, but within a proper system, and with appropriate safeguards. We have progressively shifted towards this over the last decade.

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?

Speaking to investors at Speakers’ Corner

Pictures below

It was an eye opener for me. To personally speak with old folks who can’t speak English – and to be told about promises of ‘guaranteed principal’, ‘interest at the end of tenure’, ‘low risk’ and even a case of the product sold as a government bond made me see red.

Every single investor I spoke with told me that they were reassured that the product they were buying was ‘very safe’ and ‘principal guaranteed’. Some even said that they were told it was like a fixed deposit – ‘interest will be paid at the end of tenure’. In every case, they had either wanted to re-invest in a fixed deposit product upon expiry of their previous deposit (which should tell you volumes about their risk appetite) or they had wanted to invest in a fixed deposit with their cash. Instead, they were waylaid into investing in mid – high risk structured products. In all the cases, the forms were either never mailed to them at all, or sent long after the cooling off period. Many of the relationship managers involved had either resigned or are refusing to return any calls. Class act.

Cases of outright cheating

One old lady teared up when she told me that the relationship manager assured that she was buying into a government guaranteed bond. Since when the minibond become a government bond is beyond my minuscule financial brain. She does not understand English and was told to ‘just sign here’ and that the ‘bank will not cheat old folks’. She was not given any copy of the forms she signed because the relationship manager told her that they had to be sent to the government for record keeping. She had lost $40,000 of her life savings – an amount which she had repeatedly told the bank staff was her ‘coffin fund’ and that it needed to be contained in a safe investment vehicle.

Another lady in her 50s was edgy when I first approached her if she needed help. She had already attended an interview and was waiting for a reply from the bank. She felt little hope of being vindicated in this matter. She angrily recounted to me how she was duped into investing ‘a minimum of $50,000′ when she could have chosen to invest a minimum of $5,000. The usual spiel of ‘guaranteed principal, interest, fixed deposit, very safe’ and even ‘low risk’ was applied.

The worst thing was – the sales representative deliberately left out two pages when he sent the document copies to her. She was not aware of the missing pages until recently – in the interview with her bank, the staff showed her the pages. She then realized why the two pages were not sent to her. Some written content was added after she had signed on the forms. Content like the financial mechanics had been explained to her by an accompanying relative (not true) and that she understood the product carried certain risks (she was told it was low risk and principal guaranteed).

Bristling with anger and indignation, she shared about how she was paid only a salary of $80 in the 60s and that she had been working for the last 40 years – scrimping and saving to have that amount of money. In her words (Cantonese) – ‘?????????????’ – at this point, she started to cry. I had difficulty fighting back the tears that threatened to well.

I was strangely reminded of my mum perhaps from the similarity of their saving habits, thriftiness and being Cantonese. I wonder how I would feel if my mum had been duped into buying ‘government bonds’?

Politicians like Mr Goh Chok Tong, who said ‘That’s life, if you want good rewards, you have to take risks. Otherwise, leave your money with the CPF‘ are extremely lucky that the political climate here is engineered to be tamer and definitely less feisty and confrontational than say, that of Hong Kong. If he had been in Mr Joseph Yam’s position, I have no doubt that he would have been taken apart.

Joseph Yam Chi Kwong, Chief Executive of HKMA, had stressed that HKMA ’sympathise[s] with investors who have been affected by the collapse of Lehman Brothers. [Their] priority now, is to consider the complaints as quickly as possible. Within the authority of the HKMA, this is the action that will be most helpful to the aggrieved investors.’

Even so, Mr Yam, who earned more than S$2 million last year, was not exempted from a sharp criticism from Legislator Raymond Wong Yuk Man for “sitting still to wait for a salary”, while minibonds victims “sit still to wait for death”.

(In Cantonese)
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Translations:
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
“A salary for a national class treasure with an international class laziness.”

?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
“You sit waiting for your bi (?), which is the word for money! We sit waiting for our bi (?), which is the word for death!”

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
“This is your responsibility. It does not mean that you were unaware beforehand. You were hired at such a salary and you failed to even do this. You should go home and sleep!”

I am so grateful that I can understand and speak Cantonese well – because the beauty of the dialect often gets lost in translation.

Here’s the video (in Cantonese) [Thanks to Nelson and igp for sharing the video!]

Note 1.03 – 2.38 and 4.03 – 5.14

**

Mr Tan Kin Lian giving a volunteers’ briefing

While we were fresh at this volunteering stint, the enthusiasm and the can do spirit of the volunteers were really inspiring to me. It was inevitable that we felt a little lost and disoriented in the beginning but soon we were too busy to feel lost.

CNA crew working the grounds

Deputy editor of TOC, Mr Andrew Loh (left) with Mr Tan Kin Lian (right)

A member of the public giving a ‘certificate’ to Mr Tan that says
‘Thank you Mr Tan Kin Lian Champion of the underdog’

Expressing his anger with the authorities

Mr Goh Meng Seng translating Mr Tan’s speech in Mandarin

Board of grievances

An investor who invested $100,000. She will speak next Saturday and share about her experience.

ECL (in blue cap) helping out at event. I was too busy to even have time to speak with her as investors were taking up all my time but it was no issue for her – she very quickly took charge of the situation. Kudos!

Another reader of mine, Lilian, also came by to help out. Thanks Lilian!

A reader commented in my previous post -

How come you are not posting about your wonderful Mr Big anymore? I see you have gone political on your readers and I can’t say I like it. What are you trying to prove by suddenly changing your blogging style? Fame? Or to prove you are not a bimbo?

I am disappointed at this sudden 360 degree change of direction where you almost never talk about your own life, kids, Big anymore. Or is there something to hide?

Hope to see you reverting back to your old writing style and topics soon. Politics is just talk unless you can make a real difference. Otherwise, I don’t see why you should be dedicating your blog to something that can and is already being done at TOC website.

Hi reader

As my explanation is going to be rather losor, I thought it warrants a whole new entry of its own.

The direction of my blogging has taken on a socially and politically active angle. This is brought on by a few issues including the recent Olympics medal and the whole financial debacle and I acutely felt the need to write.

The family posts will still be here. Bimbotic adventures are covered here – where I write about fashion, lifestyle and beauty etc. I guess that answers your question about me being a bimbo – and I must admit that I am hopelessly one. Heck I look at numbers and my eyes glaze over. I am definitely more in affinity with price tags and nail polish numbers. LOL.

So, the personal posts are here to stay – along with the other social and political articles. Rather than a total change, I would say it’s an added on component. In that, I am somewhat different from the other mainstream socio-political bloggers out there.

What fame? I feel that there is hardly any ‘fame’ to be spoken of in the socio-political blogging circle. To be candidly honest, a more effective method of being ‘famous’ would be to splash pictures of me posing provocatively in cleavage baring outfits all over my blog or taking the opportunity to flash my curves wherever I can. But you are right in an aspect. I wish that people will stop seeing me as a ‘busty’ woman but as one who can think and write articulately.

As for ‘politics is just talk unless we can make a real difference’, I believe I am making a difference in my own small little ways. For example, I disagree with what is being taught in school about the Olympic medals, that our children are being taught to how to think. I always challenge my elder daughter, Germaine to think for herself and that she should not even take what I tell her for granted.

Take the recent financial saga where so many people did not know where to or who to turn to – Tan Kin Lian took the lead and then we went out there and helped those who need help. People who read my blog – like Lilian and ECL – were also there on the ground to help out. I’d like to think that yes, we did make a small little difference in our small little ways.

And to answer your question of Big, he is still the same wonderful man that he has always been, if not better. I have in my drafts, a post about his cooking, the article about Education and Germaine being in the top 15% of the schools, the article about dehumanization, the one about a birthday party Geanyne went to, along with 30 other drafts that indicate that I have so much to blog about but too little time.

While time is one factor, another reason is because I am happy. At this point, ours is the quiet steady kind of happiness that does not need constant reassurance and validation. Moreover, my frank opinion on constant horn-tooting or validations are merely shows of insecurity and lackof. Also, I find it rather vulgar and distasteful.

I guess I am happy, we are happy, I don’t feel the need to impress anyone and most importantly I don’t have anything to prove.

So, I am happy to report that all’s great and well in my life. But I must thank you for your little wake up call – that I should not be complacent about my happiness

Best wishes

Rachel

**

Note :
I approved the comment because I felt that the commentator was asking some genuine questions, as opposed to some others who had commented here with despicable agendas. Of course, these people have been promptly removed from my sphere. Yes I can tell who is being despicable, catty, malicious or plainly destructive, and who is giving genuine feedback even though both may consist of negative feedback or criticisms.

There is talk elsewhere that I am trying to project a ‘perfect image’ – the person(s) must be blind and stupid to have missed the biting acerbity in my writings. These people (or person) who are still hiding behind the screen and making cheap malicious little potshots – it’s your life, and it’s very sad. I have already moved on with my (very busy and fulfilling) life but there you are, still obsessing about my life and how perfect or imperfect I am. I wish you no ill because you are nothing to me but please live your own life already. Life is so short to go obsess about someone else all the time.

Anyway there is nothing ‘perfect’ about me. If you deliberately try to mess with me, I will tear you a new one.

The MP Chan Soo Sen had written to ST about this

I REFER to Wednesday’s report, ‘Fancy setting, worthless degrees’.

I was invited to the ceremony through one of my grassroots leaders who was a graduand. I checked the website of a West Coast University, an institution based in Los Angeles accredited for health-care subjects. I subsequently received an invitation printed on a West Coast University letterhead with a Los Angeles address. I have thus been misled into attending the ceremony on Monday.

I have not been associated with the West Coast University mentioned in the report. Nor was it my intention to lend credibility to its courses and degrees.

Chan Soo Sen
Member of Parliament
Joo Chiat Constituency

I was reading about the “big spenders” in the latest issue of the Female magazine. I pick up magazines every month to keep abreast of the local fashion coverage for my writing. This article about the ‘big spenders’ left me feeling a little, well, disconcerted.Don’t get me wrong, I am not against having money, living a luxurious lifestyle or being well groomed. I, for one, am a woman who likes my retail therapy, my grooming routines and my little indulgences.  The distaste is towards those who put on a casual nonchalance about the $54,000 massage machine, flaunting the $10,000 hairdo but claiming ’stealth wealth’) and the $600 pedicure. Class and breeding are not commodities bought by the abundance of money. I find the arrogant flaunting of wealth extremely vulgar and ‘Beverly Hillbilly’.

This is also a reason why I am glad I am not officially working in magazines – for fear of offending with the truth of what I feel. I will not be able to say that I have a real distaste towards the vulgar materialism that some ‘taitais’ exhibit. I will not be able to express that some of the richest ‘taitais’ I know will not dream of strutting around in such obscene displays of vulgarity. For them, a dignified and luxurious elegance is paramount and loud displays of wealth is considered vulgar.

Most importantly, a glaring difference between the old money and nouveau rich is their attitudes towards charity. While old money is known to give millions away on the quiet, the nouveau rich glorifies in the opulence and extravagence of haute couture gowns, ostentatious jewellery and designer stylists. The logic that the money spent on showing off and one upping each other could have been better put to use if it had been directed to the objective of the ball – the charity cause itself.

Perhaps my distaste is furthermore brought on by the fact that I come from a family that advocates the importance of working hard, humility and a general aversion towards boastful extravagence. Perhaps I have found that the truly rich tend to be discreet and it’s those who  are loud, arrogant or flashy tend to be well, somewhat lacking. Indeed, I cannot help explain my natural distaste of people flaunting how much they paid for anything and a comfortable acceptance of people with fortunes many many times of mine.

I leave you with this picture and a question:

Obama is obviously more wealthy than Palin. Why do the Americans not begrudge him his riches? Why then is he deemed more credible and able than Palin?

The answer is Substance.