Quantcast
Channel: If Only Singaporeans Stopped to Think
Viewing all 7503 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Changi Airport reaches 1 billion passengers milestone

May 30, 2017, 5:27 am
$
0
0
A billion passengers on, Changi Airport aims higher
New terminals to boost handling capacity even as airport pushes for more automation
By Karamjit Kaur, Senior Aviation Correspondent, The Straits Times, 29 May 2017

There was little chatter over the air traffic control radio as the historic flight approached Changi Airport at sunrise.

"We had the whole sky to ourselves," recalled Singapore Airlines Captain Gan Kim Hock.

It was July 1, 1981, and he was first officer on Flight SQ101 - the very first scheduled commercial flight to land at the spanking new $1.5 billion Singapore Changi Airport. "I was just a new first officer living my dream of flying and, there I was, making history with Changi Airport," Capt Gan told The Straits Times.

About an hour earlier, the Boeing 727 aircraft had taken off from Kuala Lumpur airport, with 140 "excited" passengers on board.

In the cockpit with him were Captain T.K. Pow and Assistant Chief Flight Engineer P.H. Cheah.

"It was fantastic... The first thing we saw was the iconic control tower at Changi. Looking down at the airport and the space around the control tower and the terminal building, we could see it was going to expand a lot more," said Captain Gan, 59.



It was a far cry from Paya Lebar Airport, which opened in 1955 and was, by then, bursting at its seams.

Even as he foresaw further expansion, "never in my wildest dreams did I expect that Changi would be what it is now", Capt Gan said. And he cannot imagine what it will be like in 10 to 12 years, when Terminal 5 (T5) is ready.

Thirty-six years after SQ101 and from the 4.3 million passengers handled in the first six months after its opening, Changi Airport marked a significant milestone last month when it crossed the one-billion-passenger mark.

It was a proud moment for Mr Ho Beng Huat, 69, who joined the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore before Changi Airport's opening and is now a Changi Airport consultant.

The growth has surprised everyone, he said, including the foreign consultants who drew up Changi's plans.

"The whole masterplan was wrong... They grossly underestimated the potential," Mr Ho said, adding that the projection was for Changi's annual handling numbers to eventually grow to about 30 million passengers. Last year, the airport handled almost 60 million passengers, he said.

The numbers continue to rise, with the latest data showing a 7.8 per cent growth in traffic last month to 5.17 million passengers, compared with April last year.


With a fourth passenger terminal opening later this year and plans for T5 in full swing, the expansion will more than double Changi's annual handling capacity to 150 million passengers eventually.

Mr Ho is confident that the capacity will be utilised as demand for air travel is expected to continue to grow strongly.

The challenge for Changi Airport will be to ensure that passenger comfort and convenience are not compromised when T5 - which will eventually be bigger than T1, T2 and T3 combined - opens, Mr Ho said.

"T5 is a totally different ball game and will present new challenges we are not familiar with... We don't have all the answers yet, but we will," he said.

Changi is working with its partners, including ground-handling firm SATS, to push automation and do-it-yourself processes that will allow the airport to rely less on manpower.

Veteran SATS staff member Augustine Lim, 53, who works with airlines to ensure that aircraft are loaded correctly, is excited about the future.

He said: "Changi has come a long way in 36 years. It is much busier now, which adds to operational challenges. But automation and technology, which have totally transformed the way we work, have helped us manage the higher loads."







↧
Search

National Wages Council Guidelines 2017-2018

June 2, 2017, 2:49 am
$
0
0
NWC calls for pay hikes for more low-wage workers
It proposes monthly wage hikes of $45-$60 for workers with a basic salary of up to $1,200
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 1 Jun 2017

Low-wage workers should be given a rise in monthly pay of between $45 and $60 this year, said the National Wages Council (NWC).

And to spread the gains wider, it recommended yesterday that these increments be given to those earning a basic salary of up to $1,200 a month, a higher threshold than the $1,100 used last year.

The higher pay ceiling will benefit an additional 40,700 local full-time employees, according to Ministry of Manpower figures. The ceiling was last raised from $1,000 to $1,100 in 2015, which covered some 92,400 of these workers based on last year's wages.

Employers that are doing well, with good business prospects, were also urged to reward their workers with built-in wage increases and variable payments in line with business performance.

These annual wage guidelines by the NWC, announced yesterday, were accepted by the Government and will take effect on July 1.

For the second year in a row, the NWC recommended a range of pay increments for low-wage workers instead of a fixed amount as in the previous four years.

The range, however, was pegged lower than the $50 to $65 recommended last year. This takes into account the patchy labour market and economic outlook, said NWC chairman Peter Seah."The range is to provide flexibility for employers in the application of this particular recommendation," he added.

In a further fillip for low-wage workers, the NWC also called on employers to give those earning above $1,200 a pay rise and/or a one-off lump sum based on their skills and productivity.

For all workers, the NWC wants employers to give "fair and sustainable" wage increases. Those that did well but face uncertain prospects may moderate built-in wage increases but reward workers with variable payments.

Those that did poorly and face uncertain prospects may restrain wage rises, with management leading by example. They should strive harder to transform and grow, said the NWC. "The council's call has always been to share with workers your productivity increases, your performance improvements, and where you need to exercise restraint, you have to, because it is more important that workers keep their jobs," said Mr Seah.

The Government said yesterday that it would refer to the guidelines in its annual wage increment exercise even though all government employees earn above $1,200.

Pay hikes are getting harder to come by. Last year, three in four employees received them, slightly lower than the year before, as slowing economic growth hit firms.

Still, 21 per cent of employers rewarded low-paid staff according to the quantums given in last year's guidelines, up from 18 per cent in 2015 before the figures were given as a range, said the NWC. The guidelines are not legally binding.

Unionised companies fared better, with at least half of those with workers earning up to $1,100 giving increments of at least $50, and over half of this group giving increments of over $65, the top of the recommended range, said National Trades Union Congress assistant secretary-general Cham Hui Fong, a member of the 36-person NWC.

Singapore National Employers Federation president Robert Yap, also a council member, said that lowering the recommended increment range this year is to encourage more employers to implement the pay rises and ensure they are sustainable.

"Employers may not be afraid to give an increment, but can we keep on giving? It is very difficult to give one year and the next year take it back," he said.










Wage increases must be sustainable: NWC members
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 1 Jun 2017

Wage rises must be sustainable so that companies can remain competitive, members of the National Wages Council (NWC) said yesterday, in releasing the council's wage guidelines for the year ahead.

Businesses need to redesign jobs and innovate to stay competitive, and workers should also make full use of available support to refresh their skills, said council chairman Peter Seah.

"We must continue to press on with efforts to achieve higher productivity growth. This will ensure that real wage increases are in line with productivity growth over the long term," he said.

The council called for rises in monthly pay of $45 to $60 for workers earning a basic salary of up to $1,200 a month.

National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) secretary-general Chan Chun Sing said in a Facebook post yesterday that "the labour movement can play an important role in helping our businesses to transform and workers to deepen their skills, so as to achieve higher productivity and sustainable wage growth".



Unionists had tried to push for a higher quantum increase, but this had to be balanced with the need to get more employers on board.

Labour MP Melvin Yong, who is NTUC's director for tripartism and an NWC member this year, said the council took into account business conditions, labour market performance and productivity growth.

NWC called for implementing the Industry Transformation Maps, which set out strategies for businesses to seize growth opportunities. The plans include skills and wage ladders for various job scopes, said Mr Yong.

Unionists cheered the raising of the salary ceiling for the quantitative guidelines to $1,200, a move which will benefit 40,700 more local full-time employees.

"Past increments saw some low-wage workers already getting paid $1,200, and if the guidelines were based on last year's $1,100 threshold, those workers may get a smaller increment," said Mr Nasordin Mohd Hashim, president of the Building Construction and Timber Industries Employees' Union.

He also welcomed the NWC's recommendation that companies using outsourced services incorporate annual wage adjustments and the annual wage supplement for workers into new contracts.

Business groups such as the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry were supportive of the latest guidelines.

Association of Small and Medium Enterprises president Kurt Wee said that the flexibility of a range of suggested increments was useful, given that the current economic climate is soft and companies digitalising their business processes are still retraining their staff. "The new guidelines, being slightly more tempered, would allow employers to phase in wage increases from increases in performance or output from the workforce," he said.















Salary hikes stall as firms see their earnings sputter in 2016
Wage growth slowed last year, more workers had pay cuts and more firms suffered losses
By Charissa Yong, The Straits Times, 31 May 2017

Fewer workers received salary hikes last year and more took a pay cut as slowing economic growth hit companies.

Real total wages also grew at a slower rate, rising 3.6 per cent last year compared with 5.4 per cent in 2015, after accounting for negative inflation of 0.5 per cent. As they struggled to turn a profit, companies scaled back payouts made to their workers.

This year, economists expect another hard slog with uneven performance and wage growth across different sectors.

A Ministry of Manpower survey showed that with nine in 10 firms putting some form of a flexible wage system in place, the earnings of workers in Singapore have moved more closely in tandem with the fortunes of their employers.

Last year was a choppy one for businesses, with the share of loss-making companies creeping up for a third year in a row. Almost a quarter - 24.3 per cent - racked up losses, compared with 21.5 per cent in 2015.

This was the highest proportion of companies in the red in the past 10 years - and it hit workers directly in the pocket.

A bigger proportion of companies cut workers' pay last year: Around 17 per cent compared with 11 per cent in 2015. The cuts were also steeper: 5 per cent in 2016 compared with 4.7 per cent the previous year.

Of 1,232,800 workers across 4,800 companies surveyed, 13.1 per cent took a pay cut, compared with 11.1 per cent in 2015.

While the flexible wage system docks a worker's pay when times are tough, it also serves to protect jobs and keep firms competitive as they can cut costs without trimming headcount. Since 2004, the proportion of firms with a flexible wage system has never been higher, and they typically adjust wages when they are not doing so well.

Despite this buffer, some 19,170 workers were made redundant in 2016, compared with 15,580 the previous year.



Meanwhile, the proportion of profitable firms dropped from 78.5 per cent in 2015 to 75.7 per cent last year. For workers, this meant that 75 per cent of them got a pay raise in 2016, down from 77 per cent the previous year.

The survey findings, given in the annual Report on Wage Practices released yesterday, also show that the pay rise workers received was not as good as in 2015.

Last year's nominal pay increase was 4.9 per cent, a decline from 5.6 per cent the previous year.

Bonuses stayed about the same at 2.16 months of basic wage last year. But a bigger proportion of companies said they tied bonuses to market conditions and their own performance, compared with an employee's performance.

The economy grew by a sluggish 2 per cent last year, but is expected to do slightly better this year.

DBS senior economist Irvin Seah said that this should improve wages in externally-oriented sectors like financial services, which are buoyed by stronger global demand.

But other sectors like domestic services will still struggle as they face structural challenges.

"Some clusters are disrupted by new technology and will continue to find it tough going forward," Mr Seah said, citing the retail sector competing with e-commerce.

"Any improvement in wages will be uneven," he added.

Singapore University of Social Sciences labour economist Randolph Tan also noted that unemployment may worsen as Singapore grapples with a mismatch between jobs created and skills that workers have.

"It will not make much sense to expect significant wage growth until the situation has stabilised a bit more," he said.





Fewer low-wage workers received pay rises in 2016
By Charissa Yong, The Straits Times, 31 May 2017

A bigger segment of low-wage workers did not receive pay rises last year as more companies struggled to stay afloat, according to the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM) annual report on wage practices released yesterday.

About 60 per cent of companies with workers earning a basic monthly pay of $1,100 and below said that they did not give, or did not intend to give, these employees wage increases last year. In 2015, only 53.5 per cent of companies had said the same.

Companies cited poor business for not raising the pay of low-wage workers. Some said they were already paying the market rate.

MOM surveyed 4,800 companies with 10 or more workers and found that the less profitable a company, the less likely it was to increase the pay of its low-wage workers.

About half the profitable companies which did better last year than in 2015 granted pay rises. But this proportion plunged to just over a quarter among loss-making companies.

The National Wages Council's wage guidelines for 2016-2017 had recommended a built-in monthly pay rise of $50 to $65 - opting for a range instead of a fixed sum like in past years. About 21 per cent of companies gave their low-wage workers salary increases of at least $50, up from the 18.5 per cent in 2015 who stuck to that year's guideline of a hike of least $60.

Low-wage workers in the construction industry were the least likely to get a pay rise, with 73 per cent of companies in the industry saying they did not grant such hikes. Between 60 per cent and 70 per cent of companies in the transportation and storage, wholesale and retail trade, and accommodation and food services industries said likewise.

On the flip side, about 40 per cent of companies in administrative and support services gave low earners a built-in wage increase of at least $50 last year.

MOM highlighted this as significantly higher than the hikes of between 10 per cent and 27 per cent given in other industries.

This was mainly driven by the security sector, where more firms raised the basic wage of their low-wage workers to meet the requirements of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM). This model boosts the wages of low-wage workers by setting minimum pay levels for the cleaning, security and landscape sectors. Firms must abide by the wage guidelines to get licences to operate.

Singapore University of Social Sciences labour economist Walter Theseira said: "The Progressive Wage Model is probably more effective in improving wages than the moral suasion of the National Wages Council because companies have no choice (but to raise wages) if they want to get licences or government contracts."

He added that because the model covers several important groups, it puts upward pressure on wages for workers in other sectors.

"Raising the PWM when warranted will effectively increase wages for low-wage workers. The goal with the model was, after all, to set a de facto minimum wage in the covered sectors, which it has achieved," he added.



↧
↧

Terrorism threat to Singapore remains at highest level in years: Home Affairs Ministry

June 2, 2017, 9:02 am
$
0
0
Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report 2017

Republic was specifically targeted last year; events in Marawi a cause for concern: MHA
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 2 Jun 2017

The rising tide of extremism worldwide has not left Singapore untouched, and it faces its highest terror threat level in recent years, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said yesterday.

"Singapore was specifically targeted in the past year, and the regional threat has heightened," the MHA said in its first Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report.

In October last year, an Arabic online publication titled The Fall Of The Idol: External Action And Individual Jihad singled out two entities here as potential targets - part of a wider bid to bring down United States and Western interests.

The Straits Times understands that the targets were the Singapore Exchange and a port.

MHA said security measures have been ramped up in the areas.

Saying that security agencies remain on high vigilance, it added: "The public should continue to stay alert and be prepared."

The report said that the worsening threat in the region arose mainly from terror group Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and its affiliates.

In the Philippines, a group calling itself "IS East Asia" overran Marawi City in Mindanao late last month.

While Philippine forces have moved to retake the city, the MHA said the siege of Marawi attests to the group's potential to turn parts of Mindanao into an "ISIS wilayat", or province for militants in the region. "Should this entity proliferate into a regional network, like the Jemaah Islamiah had done previously, the terrorism threat will deepen further in South- east Asia," it said.

At home, the threat remains very serious, the ministry added.

"Singapore is a key target. We have taken part in international coalitions against terrorism, and we represent many things that are anathema to ISIS," said the report.

Singapore is a secular democracy and host to economic and commercial interests from Western nations that ISIS considers "infidels", it added.

There have already been two ISIS plots to attack the country that the authorities have been aware of.

In the first half of last year, there was "reliable information" that foreign ISIS militants were considering carrying out an attack, and the authorities moved to mitigate the threat, said the MHA.

And last August, the Indonesian authorities foiled a plot by terrorists in Batam who planned to launch a rocket attack on Marina Bay.

Singapore also faces the risk of an attack by those influenced by ISIS propaganda.

Between 2007 and 2014, 11 radicalised Singaporeans were dealt with under the Internal Security Act. But the numbers have been growing, and since 2015, the Act has been used against 14 radicalised Singaporeans.

ISIS propaganda has also radicalised foreigners here - including some 40 Bangladeshi nationals since late 2015, and eight Indonesian domestic helpers since 2015.

The report called these radicalised individuals "a grave security concern". Any attacks they carry out can be hard to prevent and happen without warning - as everyday items like cars and knives are used.

A strong community response is critical in detecting and reporting radicalised individuals, MHA said.

It noted that in some cases that it detected, friends and family members had withheld information from the authorities because they refused to acknowledge the problem, or believed they were protecting their loved ones.

"The opposite is true," it added.

"The amorphous nature of the enemy we face today means that even though our security agencies will do what it takes to detect and prevent terrorist attacks, they cannot do so alone."

At stake are not just property and lives, but Singapore's identity as a multiracial, multi-religious society, MHA said, calling on people to play their part in keeping Singapore safe.





















Terrorists marked two Singapore spots as targets last year
Singling out of entities here signals significant increase in the threat level, say analysts
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 2 Jun 2017

Two places in Singapore were marked by terrorists as potential targets last year, signalling a significant increase in the terror threat here, analysts said.

In its inaugural Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report yesterday, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said an Arabic publication circulated last October, titled The Fall Of The Idol: External Action And Individual Jihad, had identified two entities here as targets as part of a wider bid to damage American and Western interests.

The Straits Times understands that the entities are the Singapore Exchange and a port.

Dr Kumar Ramakrishna, head of policy studies and coordinator of the national security studies programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said the fact that the targets were singled out showed a "ramp-up" in the threat level.

"Previously, Singapore would usually be mentioned generally as a target, but this suggests that (the terrorists) are going a step further," he said, adding that the public should be concerned that the country was being "seriously considered" as a target.

In its report, MHA called the terrorism threat facing Singapore "very serious".

The ministry revealed that in the first half of last year, there was "reliable information" that foreign Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants were considering carrying out an attack here.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had alluded to this plot in his National Day Rally speech last year.

"The Singapore authorities acted swiftly but discreetly to mitigate the threat," said MHA.

The plot was one of two ISIS-linked plots that the authorities were aware of, MHA said in its report.

The other was a foiled plot by Batam-based militants who were planning to launch a rocket targeted at the Marina Bay Sands integrated resort from the island.

Singapore has also been cited repeatedly as a target in militant publications and videos, MHA said yesterday. An ISIS publication released in September 2015 named Singapore as one of the countries in the "crusader coalition" that the terror group was battling.

An ISIS video in May last year singled out Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines as countries infiltrated by "disbelievers", and threatened action against them.

Security agencies in Singapore remain in a state of "high vigilance".

Analysts said one of the reasons that the terror threat here remains high is that Singapore exists in a region with countries such as Indonesia and the Philippines, where terrorism has taken root.

The report pointed out that over the next two years, about 200 terrorists would be released from prisons in the region and could return to terrorism if they were not rehabilitated.

"It is important for governments to track them and see what activities they engage in," said Dr Rohan Gunaratna, head of the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, adding that these individuals could infect others with their ideas.

Dr Gunaratna added that while the Government has dealt with the problem effectively, with tools such as the Internal Security Act to preventively detain suspected terrorists, more could be done.

He suggested tightening requirements under the Public Order Act, which requires organisers of public events that draw crowds of more than 5,000 to put in place security measures.

"Even if there are only 1,000 people, given the vulnerability of events, the Government will have to act," said Dr Gunaratna.

Dr Kumar added that the public can no longer assume a terror attack will not happen.

"The bottom line is - nobody needs to be alarmed, but people need to be more alert and pay attention to what is happening in the region," he said.















Biggest worry is attack by radicalised persons within Singapore: MHA
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 2 Jun 2017

The greatest terror concern facing Singapore is an attack from radicalised individuals within the country, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said yesterday.

The ministry flagged this yesterday in its report, and assessed this form of terror threat as the top concern - over an attack by an organised terror network or cell, or regional terrorist elements.

Individuals who pose this threat would have been "galvanised by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria's relentless exhortation" to take things into their own hands.

They could carry out attacks that are hard to prevent, and may happen quickly, without warning.

"The perpetrators do not need sophisticated weapons and can turn instead to everyday items for weapons, like cars and knives," said MHA.

This is where the community can play a part - in detecting and reporting radicalised individuals to the authorities. MHA said that family and friends of such people are often the first to notice "tell- tale behavioural changes", and are best-placed to counsel self-radicalised individuals, or alert the authorities if they cannot rein in their loved ones.

Yet, MHA also noted that in some cases of self-radicalisation, friends and family have withheld information from the authorities either out of a sense of denial of the problem, or a misguided belief in wanting to protect their loved ones.



In the Manchester Arena suicide bombing last month that killed 22 people, friends and family of the bomber had detected signs of growing religiosity and extremism in him. The Guardian reported that on at least four occasions, community leaders and family members had warned the authorities of his "dangerous tendencies", even though these warnings were dismissed or overlooked.

Mr Jasminder Singh, a senior analyst at the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, said family intervention in such cases is key.

"We cannot wait until the person books a plane ticket or reaches the airport to tell the authorities," he said.

"To save this individual at the first instance... tell the authorities the moment that he or she shows an interest in or sympathises with terror groups."

In Singapore, the authorities launched the SGSecure movement last September to sensitise the community in the fight against terror. The SGSecure app, which can be used to send alerts in major emergencies, has been downloaded on over 461,000 mobile devices so far.

Programmes that seek to teach people life-saving skills and how to respond in the event of a crisis have also been launched.

Dr Rohan Gunaratna, head of the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, said these programmes would go a long way in keeping Singaporeans vigilant.

"No successful attack can take place as long as people are vigilant and alert," he said.















Dealing with terror threat in South-East Asia
Editorial, The Straits Times, 2 Jun 2017

There are fears that terror in South-East Asia, previously stoked by fighters from the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union, is now being shaped by those fighting under the flag of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The jitters were heightened by the battle in Marawi city between the Philippine military and an ISIS-linked group. Taking parts of the city, the militants killed innocent civilians and took hostages. The brutal audacity of the group, in facing off against an army brigade, spawned worries that ISIS' influence might spread in the region, especially with the return of hardened militants from the Middle East, and that the phenomenon of ISIS might inspire Islamist groups and lone wolves.

Such apprehensions are capable of both being overblown and not taken seriously enough. First, South-East Asia is vastly different from the Middle East where ISIS has made a great impact. Notwithstanding the existence of a Malay-speaking wing of ISIS, Katibah Nusantara, the central group has not formally expressed an intention of migrating to South-East Asia. Further, the authorities in the region have been generally active in guarding against the rise of terror as the danger is obvious. The first ISIS-inspired event in South-East Asia in Jakarta last year was not a mass casualty attack, as the militants were deterred by tight security at a larger target in the area. Indeed, if the large-scale struggles spawned by ISIS in the Middle East - marked by barbaric acts of beheading - were to be replicated in the region, it would transform South-East Asia from a crucible of growth to a high-risk zone that would condemn all to years of insecurity and uncertainty. However, such a scenario is unlikely.

That said, other forms of terrorism in the region should not be dismissed as these have a long history. The radicalism of the Darul Islam Indonesia movement (Islamic State of Indonesia) has not been entirely wiped out. Under former president Suharto, Islamist hardliners were effectively constrained but, in recent times, they have resurfaced and infiltrated educational institutions and the bureaucracy. The last decade saw the rise of Jemaah Islamiah (JI), which was behind the Bali bombings in 2002 and 2005. As a result of signal threats arising from the Middle East, JI was later given public space to denounce ISIS which it loathes. But JI and other hardline groups are also capable of violence and division.

These risks are higher in societies where a "climate of religious conservatism and intolerance has created fertile conditions for ISIS ideology to gain popularity", as a commentator has noted. In vying for appeal across a broader plane, even mainstream groups might try to "out-Islam" each other. Blinded by political expediency, they fail to see that the main antidote to the poison of rising radicalism is resilient pluralism.


↧

The role of the arts in making a nation home

June 5, 2017, 1:58 am
$
0
0
Art can root young Singaporeans to their land and, through the imagination, anchor them to their forebears
By Paul Tan, Published The Sunday Times, 4 Jun 2017

One of the most abiding memories in my leisure travels is visiting the small islands in the Seto Inland Sea of Japan. This is a clutch of islands in a rural part of Japan in between the city of Okayama and the large island of Shikoku. Previously an under-the-radar destination among art aficionados, these isles have in recent years become popular with general tourists looking for a unique experience focused on art and culture, coupled with the assurance of quality Japanese hospitality and cuisine.

What struck me on my brief visit to that region was how art has been integrated into these islands and how this process has been instrumental in revitalising local communities. These were islands which faced a raft of problems - depopulation, the loss of a farming economy and even environmental degradation.

Today, there are small museums, public art installations and art trails found everywhere - particularly on the islands of Naoshima, Teshima and Shodoshima - and old buildings and industrial sites have been repurposed to house fascinating and visually arresting artwork.

Anyone who has visited the islands would have interacted with elderly island residents acting as docents in arts spaces, or serving in cafes and bed-and-breakfast establishments.

When one reflects on the local history of these islands, it is nothing short of amazing how art has activated all typologies of spaces and brought back life to the region, generating economic activity and bringing a sense of purpose and optimism to the local communities.

Given the charge that contemporary art is an elite enterprise which alienates the average man on the street, there is something refreshing in hearing an elderly local - possibly a farmer in an earlier part of his life - explain how one could interact with an artwork.

The islands also play host to a well-regarded contemporary arts festival, the Setouchi Triennale, which sees temporary site-specific artwork installed across the islandscape. First organised in 2010 and running for about eight months each time, the Triennale was last held last year.

With the support of the National Arts Council (NAC), Singapore's independent arts centre The Substation and artist Grace Tan took part in the 2013 edition of this visual arts festival. Grace Tan's work, titled In The Stillness, transformed a classroom in a defunct school on Shodoshima with a huge cloud-like sculpture made of two million polypropylene loop pins. (These are the plastic bits you see in a department store which attach price tags to apparel.)

Grace, who spent about three weeks in Japan, described how the work was constructed with the help of volunteers from Fukuda town, involving residents ranging from kindergarten and high school students to nursing home residents. They would spend time creating the sculpture bit by bit in the community centre or at other local sites, drinking tea and sharing local snacks.

Grace spoke of the warm ties that resulted from time spent together and how the completed work attracted Triennale visitors, who also got to enjoy the food specially prepared in the makeshift cafe within the defunct school. (Parallel to the art-making were workshops which taught local residents how to cook South-east Asian dishes, such as chicken rice and prawn noodles.)

It is heartening that a Singapore artist like Grace can create work which resonates on so many levels, in both critical reception and social outcomes. It is a reminder of the power of good art. I suspect though, that in all likelihood, such broadly transformative arts projects are more the exceptions than the norm, across the globe.

DIVERSITY IN ART

As the agency that champions the arts, NAC has to acknowledge that art in Singapore is created with different artistic intentions for diverse audiences. Singapore is a modern cosmopolitan country with a multi-ethnic, multi-religious heritage. This means we have artistic traditions that go back centuries as well as an open attitude towards external ideas. For sure, these circumstances create for a complex art-making and reception in a relatively young nation.

Borrowing the lingo from the marketing world, one could say that the potential consumer base for the arts in Singapore can be divided into discrete describable segments. Each segment has different attitudes and expectations of the arts, responds to different stimuli and thus, needs to be addressed differently, if NAC wants Singaporeans to embrace the arts.

Our most recent population survey in 2015 revealed that while eight in 10 Singaporeans attended an arts event, in reality, only four in 10 expressed an interest in the arts.

It could mean, I remarked to colleagues in a moment of levity, that half the people who encountered the arts in 2015 - perhaps a free performance or exhibition in a public space - were dragged there reluctantly by family members, or had experienced the arts "accidentally" on a weekend errand run.

The statistics underline the fact that the appreciation of the arts is in its nascent state in Singapore. But when taken together with the upward trend of important indicators, it gives us in NAC some comfort. Things can only get better in the longer term.

This is especially so when we consider today's opportunities for arts exposure in our public schools. There is also increasing recognition that young people should chase their dreams and that there are many possible pathways to become a contributing member of society.

ART FOR ALL AUDIENCES AND AGES

For today's artists, there is little doubt that the base of interested audiences and arts appreciators (the four in 10 Singaporeans) is indeed a varied one.

For every serious collector of conceptual art who visits international art fairs and enjoys in-depth discourse about art, there is someone who derives an uncomplicated aesthetic pleasure from a beautiful watercolour painting.

For every audience member who is willing to shell out top dollar for a hard-hitting stage drama on a difficult topic, there is someone who is happy to hear beautifully harmonised pop songs, reprised from her youth.

For every reader of serious poetry and follower of the vibrant literary scene, there is a parent hunting for accessible children's stories for his mobile-device addicted child.

With this demographic diversity - which we at NAC are trying to understand better - as well as the variety of art forms practised here, NAC's support of the arts needs to be multi-dimensional. We will need to cater to audiences who are encountering the arts for the first time as much as we need to champion artists who are presenting art which well-informed arts lovers expect of a global cultural city.

For us to deepen the level of arts appreciation, there is a need for the arts to be relevant or accessible for first-timers, with the aim of helping them build a foundation of understanding and importantly, a love for the arts. This must be the only sustainable way to broaden the base of Singaporean audiences, readers and art collectors in the long term.

Fortunately, there are many artists in Singapore like Grace who can develop work which can be accessed at different levels and who are interested to reach out to the community in the process of artistic creation. There are also many seasoned programmers, curators, and producers who know how to build bridges between the artwork and the audience, who know how to mediate that tricky space between artistic intention and critical reception. We can do more in this area, for sure.

PUSHING BOUNDARIES AND POSING AWKWARD QUESTIONS

While we have said Singapore's arts scene is still relatively young, there is no denying that the last decade has seen a dynamic growth in the range and quality of cultural offerings.

There is a plethora of quality art which reflects our diverse communities, recognises our local contexts and poses thoughtful questions. We have, for instance, enjoyed theatre that uses humour to talk about integration of new immigrants, experienced installation art that expresses the hope of prisoners waiting for their day of release, and read poetry that mourns the loss of local landmarks and captures a forgotten way of life.

This vibrant scene has not gone unnoticed internationally, with both international tourists and expatriates appreciating the sea change.

At the same time, there is a need to remember that art is not about the lowest common denominator. We cannot assess the merit of the arts based on the numbers of audiences, or exhibition attendees, or book sales. If we did, we would not support poetry, vernacular theatre, experimental performance art, or contemporary dance. Niche, we should not be shy to declare, is not a bad word in itself.

Of course, some Singaporeans will like their art immediate, not taxing or overly cerebral. They just want a good evening out after a demanding work day, or a stress-free excursion during the weekend with the children in tow. We have to respect that art serves that role too, and NAC must strongly support such endeavours.

In the same breath, it also needs to be said that we must also continue to support artwork that challenge boundaries or pose awkward questions. We should not be afraid.

If a play pokes fun at us as Singaporeans, may we have the grace to laugh it off, recognise our foibles and think about the merit of the critique.

If a piece of music sounds strange at the first listening, or a novel seems too difficult in the first few pages, may we have the patience to persist a little longer and give the artist that consideration. If we do not like any work in the end, may we have the generosity not to generalise all home-grown artwork.

Such works do reflect the polyphony of artistic voices in Singapore, even if at an individual level, we may not take a shine to some of these works. More often than not, they are unique to our island and collectively express perspectives on life here, ultimately adding to and enriching our growing national canon.

Singapore would be poorer if we did not support such art forms.

ART IN MAKING A COUNTRY HOME

My wish for the next few years is to see more arts in the heartland and for artists to keep creating works which have universal appeal but are yet locally anchored and to showcase more works that welcome multiple responses.

Critically, I hope to see more Singaporeans who understand that art, in all its forms and voices, is relevant to their lives, their sense of self and their well-being. When that happens, there would be greater recognition of the role of the artist in society, including a ready willingness to support the arts as patrons, collectors, ticket-buyers and volunteers.

With the present uncertainty in global geopolitics and gloomy talk of protracted slow growth, there should also be a recognition, however unquantifiable it may seem, that an appreciation of and participation in the arts too have a part to play in the future economy of this island.

The creative mind does not belong only to the artist. An engaged arts lover will have the intellectual curiosity and nimbleness of a creative disposition: An individual who can imagine broader horizons and may be better able to respond to challenges created by the "disruptions" that we see in the market today.

In this age of global connectivity and unprecedented movement of peoples, some have responded to the accompanying anxieties by looking inward or raising barriers.

Singapore, as a port city and trading hub that has prospered by being open to ideas and people, cannot afford to do that.

While we must be careful of placing too much emphasis on the instrumental role of the arts, the truth is that the artwork being created in Singapore are uniquely placed to speak to our citizens and residents. They can capture, channel and reimagine the lives of residents in a way that an imported Broadway musical or a work by an international writer cannot.

The understanding and connections forged by such art can indeed be a bulwark against the vicissitudes of uncertain times or the anxieties of a borderless cyber world.

What art can do is to root the young Singaporean who is still finding his or her voice and provide a link, through the imagination, to his or her forebears and a physical landscape that has been lost.

It can also create a sense of empathy for the people we encounter in our midst - from the unhappy domestic worker to the newly retrenched office manager or the child from a new immigrant family.

At the end of the day, what makes a country home? The answer must lie beyond physical trappings, gleaming buildings and state-of-the-art infrastructure.

The bedrock of that home must be in its social fabric - its people, the relationships they have with each other and the experiences they build in the common spaces they share. The arts and culture form a vital part of this fabric and there is so much potential yet unlocked.

On the one hand, Singaporeans can remember the lump in the throat when an entire stadium sings in unison to Cultural Medallion recipient Dick Lee's song Home.

But what else is out there? What artwork can articulate what we know, remember and treasure about our world; capture the struggles and milestones of a young nation; and ultimately, help us see ourselves and the world beyond? What new visions of the future can inspire us?

If we want a glimpse of the answers, we should all support our artists as they imagine those possibilities and together celebrate the works they create.

The writer is the deputy CEO of the National Arts Council and a published poet.

This essay was first published in Cultural Connections Vol 2 May 2017, an annual publication by The Culture Academy Singapore.


↧

Ex-GIC chief economist blames aliens not alcohol for Little India Riot

June 7, 2017, 12:25 am
$
0
0

Singapore police respond to academic's comments alleging inadequate community policing
Yeoh Lam Keong, a former chief economist at GIC, also wrote that "alienation from police" was a big reason for the 2013 Little India riot - comments which the police say show "a clear lack of understanding of what happened."
Channel NewsAsia, 6 Jun 2017

The Singapore Police Force (SPF) has responded to comments by an adjunct professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy who said that "penny wise pound foolish policy decisions" have resulted in inadequate community policing in Singapore.

Mr Yeoh Lam Keong, a former chief economist at GIC, also alleged on his Facebook page on Monday (Jun 5) that "alienation from the police" was a big reason for the cause and poor handling of the 2013 Little India riot. "Alcohol is just a convenient scapegoat," he wrote.

"Mr Yeoh's sweeping statement is not only inaccurate, it shows a clear lack of understanding of what happened during the Little India riot, and an ignorance of our community policing efforts," said SPF on its Facebook page on Tuesday.

The police reiterated that what mainly led to the riot was a fatal road accident and that the violence was escalated by the consumption of alcohol and a "desire for street justice". These were findings released in 2014 by the Committee of Inquiry that was tasked to investigate the causes of the riot.



The police also criticised Mr Yeoh's "ignorance" of its community policing efforts, and highlighted its strategies in keeping Singapore safe, such as the Community Policing System - adopted by all Neighbourhood Police Centres since April 2015 - and terror response movement SGSecure.

"Singapore is one of the safest cities in the world. There is a high level of trust and confidence amongst Singaporeans in our police force," said SPF, citing a 2016 public perception survey.

"It is regrettable that Mr Yeoh did not check his facts before commenting on areas he has little knowledge of," SPF added. "His distorted points on the Little India riot and community policing will mislead others who don't know the facts."

SPF also said it would be helpful if "people like Mr Yeoh came forward and volunteered in community policing" to help them get a better understanding of what the police do.

POLICE NUMBERS HAVE NOT KEPT UP WITH POPULATION GROWTH: YEOH

In response to the Facebook post on SPF, Mr Yeoh said that his view was based on his "personal macro observation that police numbers on the ground have not kept up with our population growth" particularly with the foreign worker community.

He expressed concern that policing in Little India is outsourced to auxiliary police officers and said they "may not have the same good training in community relations that our regular police receive".

"This trend worries me because of the sheer numbers of unskilled foreign workers and the potential threat they pose to public safety and law and order if not adequately policed in terms of quantity and quality of police presence and good relationships with the communities there," he wrote.

"I have no doubt that Singapore is one of the safest cities in the world and that the SPF is still doing very good work given its admittedly lean structure.

"I hope the SPF does not read my comments as having any more intention than just giving my personal views on how to keep Singapore as safe as possible for all citizens."

He added that "a certain level of civility is needed on both sides" for constructive public discussion and debate, as "this will contribute much to community and police mutual partnership and cooperation".

"In this spirit, I apologise if I had sounded unnecessarily strident and hope we continue to regard each other as partners in helping to improve our society together."










































↧
↧

Singapore must stay corruption-free to succeed: PM Lee

June 8, 2017, 6:00 am
$
0
0
All Singaporeans play role in fight against corruption: PM
He urges everyone to do their best to protect legacy of clean system
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 7 Jun 2017

Singaporeans play an important part in ensuring that corruption does not become a social norm, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday.

While the courts, the Government and public servants need to maintain the highest levels of professionalism and integrity, the people must also actively reject corruption to prevent the scourge from taking root here, he added.

"Our founding leaders left us a clean system, built up over more than half a century. It is a legacy that we can be proud of, and we should do our utmost to protect it," he said at the official opening of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau's (CPIB) Corruption Reporting and Heritage Centre in Whitley Road.

The centre, which has been running since Jan 9, is another location where people can complain in person about corruption. Previously, they had to do it at the CPIB headquarters in Lengkok Bahru.



Reiterating Singapore's zero-tolerance approach towards corruption, Mr Lee said a clean system, which is necessary for the country's success, is not a natural state of affairs.

"We have a system that works, and we must keep it that way," he added.

This is unlike many countries, where corruption is accepted as the "natural state of affairs" and is impossible to eradicate, he said.

Singaporeans demand and expect a clean system, and do not condone giving or accepting bribes, said Mr Lee, noting that they also trust that the law will be applied transparently and fairly to all.

"People believe that they can make it because they work hard, not because they have special connections or are paying extra 'fees', and that is the way things should be."

He said that Singapore also has a professional public service that is paid "fair and realistic wages" benchmarked against the private sector. This, he added, reduces the temptation to accept bribes.

Elections in Singapore also do not cost a lot of money, unlike in other countries, where clean candidates and political parties stand no chance of being elected if they do not have the resources, he said.

Turning to the new CPIB centre, Mr Lee said it shows that the Government treats complaints about corruption seriously.

He called on people who know or suspect corrupt behaviour to report it, pointing out that many successful investigations arise from such tip-offs.

"We will investigate any complaint on corruption thoroughly," he said.

The number of corruption cases fell 11 per cent last year from the year before, hitting a 32-year low - with the CPIB investigating 118 cases.

Singapore was ranked the seventh least corrupt country in the world last year by graft watchdog Transparency International.

After touring the centre, Mr Lee presented prizes to students who won a short-story writing competition organised by the CPIB.

Nanyang Polytechnic student Corwin Pek, 17, one of the award winners, said: "Not many Singaporeans know how the CPIB works, and this gallery will help people get a better understanding of it."

The centre also houses a heritage gallery, where visitors can view artefacts about old cases and learn of the CPIB's history through quizzes played on interactive screens.

CPIB director Wong Hong Kuan said it creates "an accessible space for the public to report and learn about corruption".















No bribes allowed, not even a $2 hongbao for postman
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 7 Jun 2017

It was a case of the $2 hongbao.

During the Chinese New Year festive period in the 1970s, postmen would collect red packets from shopkeepers. Those that gave would get their letters delivered intact and on time.

"Those that didn't would have their letters thrown away by the postmen,'' said Mr Raymond Ng, 74, who was then a young investigating officer with the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).

It had earlier received complaints that postmen were getting red packets as bribes from shopkeepers.

Recounting the case of a postman he caught, Mr Ng said he had received a $2 hongbao from a shopkeeper in Joo Chiat Place.

When he was arrested, he pleaded for a second chance. "He went down on bended knees to ask me to let him go... but I couldn't. I had to take him in." The case left an indelible mark on Mr Ng as it underscored Singapore's no-nonsense stance towards corruption.

He was among several past and present CPIB officers who spoke to the media last week about their experiences in investigating graft cases, ahead of the official opening of the Corruption Reporting and Heritage Centre in Whitley Road.

Another memorable case in his 27 years at the bureau involved a senior public servant receiving bribes totalling about $13.85 million.

It was Singapore's biggest graft case, and Mr Ng was on the team that dug out the evidence that convicted Choy Hon Tim, then deputy chief executive of the Public Utilities Board. He was jailed for 14 years in November 1995.

In his early years with the CPIB, Mr Ng said, corruption was particularly widespread among junior civil servants and police officers.

"Although the bureau was set up and corruption was under control, there was a lot of petty corruption," he said.

Today, while corruption cases are at an all-time low, criminals are exploiting technology and the ease of travel to avoid getting detected, said CPIB's head of operations management Thomas Cheo, 45.

Unlike in the past, when bribes were paid locally, nowadays, they could be paid overseas, or with electronic currencies such as bitcoin.

Investigators often have to travel abroad to get evidence like foreign bank records, Mr Cheo said. To be good at their job, "investigators need an inquisitive mind, be good listeners and have an eye for detail".















↧

Parent sues school over confiscated mobile phone

June 8, 2017, 9:10 am
$
0
0
By K.C. Vijayan, Senior Law Correspondent, The Straits Times, 7 Jun 2017

Should a school hang on to a confiscated phone for three months?

This issue has reached the courts after a parent felt that the penalty was too harsh. The parent is suing a secondary school principal for damages, but has not succeeded in getting the school to return the phone.

The parent's request to have the phone returned immediately was turned down by District Judge Clement Julien Tan. The judge ruled that the principal was justified in holding on to the phone, as the school rules had made it clear that any student caught using a phone during school hours will have it confiscated for at least three months.

The boy met the principal on March 21 and admitted that he had used an iPhone 7 during school hours on March 8. It was confiscated and the SIM card returned along with a receipt stating that it could be retrieved in three months' time.

Later in the evening of March 21, the parent wrote to the principal to say that the phone was his and he wanted it back.

He added that "a three-month confiscation is disproportionate to the offence", and his son had assured him that he would not break the rule on phone use again.

Failing to get a reply, he took the principal of the well-known secondary school to court.

The father, represented by lawyer Andrew Hanam, is claiming that retaining the phone amounts to the tort of conversion - which involves denying a person's rights to his property. He asked the court to get the school to return the phone while the case is being decided.

The principal's lawyer Alfonso Ang said that the claim is "frivolous and vexatious", and pointed out that the principal is responsible for overseeing student discipline based on regulations.

He also highlighted that the parent and son had both been told that the use of phones was banned.

District Judge Tan, who heard the application on April 28, said the principal was simply following the rules. He also rejected the parent's contention that he, personally, is not bound by the school rules as there is no contract between him and the principal.

"Such a position is , in my view, untenable," said the judge, in dismissing the application. The parent, he pointed out in judgment grounds obtained by The Straits Times yesterday, knew about the rules on phone use and if he had an issue with it, "could have enrolled his son in another school".

The judge added that the father had not "established any special circumstances in the present case" to enable the interim injunction to succeed. He also pointed out that having the phoned returned early defeats the school's rule.

"I accept that there may be a risk that until the matter is fully and finally disposed of, the school may be faced with demands from parents or guardians for the return of confiscated phones. This may also send a wrong signal to the students that they can use their mobile phones during school hours with impunity, thus rendering the phone rule otiose (ineffective), however temporarily this might be so."





















Most schools have strict policy on phone use
Not uncommon for phones to be seized and kept for months when students break rules
By Yuen Sin, The Straits Times, 8 Jun 2017

Most schools here impose strict rules on mobile phone usage in class, given that they can be a major source of distraction, and students may easily misuse phones for other purposes like circulating banned content in class.

If students break these rules, it is not uncommon for their phones to be confiscated.

And yes, they can be kept by the school for a few months. Repeat offenders may even have their phones retained for the remainder of the school year, a check by The Straits Times on 10 schools found.

The issue of mobile phone usage in schools has come under the spotlight after it was reported on Tuesday that a parent had sued the principal of Anglo-Chinese School (Barker Road) for damages after his son's phone was confiscated. The parent had also argued that the mobile phone, which belonged to him, should be returned immediately.

The student's father had said that keeping the phone for three months was "disproportionate" to his son's offence in March of using an iPhone 7 during school hours.



The parent's application for the phone to be returned immediately was dismissed by the judge, who said the principal was simply following the rules. The suit for damages has not concluded.

Sales director Michelle Tan, 48, who has a son in Secondary 3 in the same school, said that she, along with other parents of children in the school, stood by the principal's decision to enforce the rules.

"(It is) an excellent way to minimise distraction and temptation," said Ms Tan, adding that teachers had reminded students of the penalties for offences, which are also listed in the students' handbook.

Mr Lee Keng Siang, 21, who studied in ACS (Barker Road), said he had his phone confiscated by the school on three occasions, each time for three months. But he said that not having access to his phone helped him to focus on school work.

"We accepted the harshness of the punishment if teachers were to catch us using our phones during school hours," said Mr Lee, who is waiting to enter university.

A spokesman for ACS (Barker Road) said the rule has been in place for over 10 years, and has been communicated to all students and parents. "It has served as an effective deterrent against the misuse of handphones," he said, adding that the school is unable to comment further given that the case is pending before the courts.

The Ministry of Education (MOE) said schools are provided with a set of guidelines for managing disciplinary issues and they have the discretion to set their own rules within this set of guidelines.

ST found that schools may confiscate phones for periods that range from a week to a year, depending on whether students are repeat offenders. In some cases, parents must go to the school to collect the phones. These rules are communicated to parents and students on the school website, in letters to parents or at parent-teacher meetings.

For example, St Joseph's Institution states on its website that mobile phones are completely banned from 7.30am to dismissal time, and students who want to take their phones to school have to turn them off and surrender them to the class committee till the end of the day.

At East Spring Secondary, third-time offenders can have their mobile phones retained for the rest of the school year.

While ACS (Barker Road) returned the phone's SIM card to the student, some schools like Yuan Ching Secondary or Bukit View Secondary retain the SIM cards, along with the phones.

Acknowledging that some parents may be concerned about their child's well-being, most schools also have payphones or alternative arrangements for parents who want to contact their children urgently while they are in school, such as calling the school office.

ST understands that most polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education do not ban the use of phones on campus, though students are discouraged from using them for non-academic purposes in classes.

Parenting coach Jason Ng, 52, said that such confiscations can be "teachable moments" for students.

"Children can learn that they have to bear the consequences of their actions, and avoid repeating the same mistake in the future. They can also appreciate the importance of values like responsibility, respect and self-control."

Additional reporting by Aaron Chan










Parents should not interfere with school discipline

The case in which a parent took a school to court for disciplining his errant son is yet another example of parental interference that seeks to subvert the school's authority (Parent sues school over confiscated mobile phone; June 7).

This parent needs to think about the values he is imparting to his child.

What is to stop this parent from bailing his son out over far worse misdemeanours in future?

As with the judicial system, schools impose harsh penalties for a reason - to not only punish the offender but also to serve as a strong deterrent to others.

Maintaining school discipline is essential for order and a conducive learning environment to be established, and also to ensure that the right values and socially acceptable behaviour are cultivated in students.

Kudos to the courts and District Judge Clement Julien Tan for dismissing the parent's claim as "untenable" and for ruling in favour of the school principal, whose responsibility is to oversee student discipline based on regulations.

I hope it also sends an explicit message that the court's time and resources should not be needlessly wasted this way.

If the parent remains unappeased, there is always the option of enrolling his son in another school or even homeschooling him.

Perhaps, the most prudent course of action would simply be to trust the school's efforts in helping the son learn to take responsibility for his actions.

Marietta Koh (Mrs)
ST Forum, 8 Jun 2017










What kind of values is the boy learning?

I was shocked after reading about the parent who took legal action against a school because it disciplined his son (Parent sues school over confiscated mobile phone; June 7).

Schools are entitled to have their own set of bylaws, rules and standard operating procedures.

The school in question has an explicit rule prohibiting the use of mobile phones during school hours.

Instead of defending the school by chastising his son, the parent takes the school to court over a misdemeanour which his son admitted to committing.



What moral values is the parent imparting to the son, except that if one has the means, it is acceptable to be belligerently disrespectful?

Such a mentality ought to be demolished. Has it not occurred to the father and his legal counsel that this legal pursuit is futile?

Also, if ever such an undeserving case should succeed, such a precedent will serve as a mockery to rules and bylaws.

I am glad District Judge Clement Julien Tan turned down the request for the phone to be returned.

Anthony Ng Seet Boo
ST Forum, 8 Jun 2017















Don't make things tougher for teachers

Having been an active volunteer in my children's schools for the past 10 years, I can understand why the school involved in the mobile phone incident with one of its student had to act and not budge from its stand (Parent sues school over confiscated mobile phone; June 7).

Teachers today have hectic teaching schedules, and their lives are made tougher by parents who set exacting standards for both their children and educators. But the teachers' lesson plans can easily go awry if students in their class misbehave.

It is not uncommon to see it happen. Some students start to distract the class even before the teacher has had a chance to begin teaching.

Perhaps it is their way of trying to stall, in the hope that the bell will sound by the time the teacher starts to get into her lesson.

This is why schools need rules and need these rules to be enforced strictly.

School authorities would have learnt by now that they need some clear rules when it comes to mobile phones and their usage.

They are also smart enough to spell out clearly the punishment for breaking these rules, and these are made known to students and parents at the beginning of the school year.

Respect and honour the rules, and the student gets to enjoy the use of his mobile device at the end of the school day and at home.

But if the student chooses to defy the school's authority and disobey the rules, then no one should be surprised if the student is punished.

The student should then just accept the punishment handed out.

As a parent, I find that I need to put my faith in the school and trust the teachers, the principal and the school system.

I have to believe that the teacher will do her best to engage my children and that she will provide instant feedback if they misbehave.

It is very trying to rein in individual "characters" in each class to get the lesson going.

Rather than get into altercations with teachers, I hope to be able to partner with my children's schools to bring out the best in each of my three children, be it academically or in the area of character building.

I urge more parents to speak up for teachers and schools, and not let these educators lose heart in what they have set forth to do: teach and impart passion for lifelong learning and knowledge acquisition in the future generations of Singaporeans.

Esther Chan (Mrs)
ST Forum, 8 Jun 2017








↧

National Library withdraws Malay language books on religion; Not possible to vet all reading materials but Govt will learn from incident: Yaacob Ibrahim

June 10, 2017, 1:21 am
$
0
0
Ministry of Communications and Information asks NLB to review vetting process for divisive material following withdrawal of books
Series that seems to legitimise use of violence taken off shelves after member of public shares photos of books
By Kok Xing Hui and Zhaki Abdullah, The Straits Times, 9 Jun 2017

The National Library Board (NLB) has been asked by the Government to review the way it checks for divisive and sensitive materials, a day after it removed a controversial series available for loan to young people.

Copies of the Malay-language series - Agama, Tamadun Dan Arkeologi (Religion, Civilisation And Archaeology) - had been available in libraries since 2013, and placed in the junior non-fiction section.

Published in Malaysia by Penerbit Sinar Cemerlang, the series purported to give "factual" insights into several civilisations and religions, including Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Yet, it presented Jews in a negative light and seemed to legitimise the use of violence in the name of Islam.

One book in the series said a third world war would start in the Middle East between Israel and neighbouring Arab states. Another book had a picture of a Muslim boy, wearing what seemed to be a suicide vest, surrounded by masked adults.

The books came to light after a Twitter user here shared photos of them at the weekend.



The NLB had told The New Paper it would withdraw the books immediately, and "call upon the Library Consultative Panel to review the series". The independent panel is made up of 18 members and chaired by Mrs Mildred Tan, managing director at Ernst & Young Advisory.

At the same time, the NLB said it could not vet all titles thoroughly given its large collection, and "hence, we take seriously readers' feedback on titles added to our collections".

Yesterday, the Ministry of Communications and Information told The Straits Times that it has asked the NLB "to review its vetting process for potentially divisive and sensitive materials". "We thank the member of the public and The New Paper for raising this particular series to our attention," it said.

The ministry spokesman added: "As a multi-cultural and multiracial society, we do not condone materials that denigrate any racial or religious groups, or which promote intolerance or violence. The cultural and racial harmony that our people enjoy today has taken us generations to build. This must not be taken for granted."

The Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP) said it was worrying that such material was easily accessible to the public, especially children. AMP chairman Abdul Hamid Abdullah said: "Such books could potentially sow seeds of discord and prejudice among readers."

Ustaz Yusri Yusoff, executive director of the Singapore Islamic Scholars and Religious Teachers Association, urged the public to come forward if they find "materials that can affect our social fabric and inter-faith relations".

Singapore Chief Rabbi Mordechai Abergel said the books' presence in libraries was of "much concern" to the Jewish community, and was glad they had been taken off shelves.

The books had earlier also been reported to the authorities in Malaysia over their content.

The publisher did not respond to calls.

In explaining how the series ended up on its shelves, the NLB said librarians use tools such as pre-publication information from publishers and vendors and reviews from library journals to select materials. The series was selected based on the publisher's description of it as a "factual book series tracing the development of civilisations, archaeology and religions".

Additional reporting by Ng Jun Sen















Anti-Semitic rhetoric and suicide bombers
By Zhaki Abdullah, The Straits Times, 9 Jun 2017

Agama, Tamadun Dan Arkeologi (Religion, Civilisation And Archaeology) is a series of eight books which purports to provide a "factual" depiction of world religions and civilisations.

Published in Malaysia by Penerbit Sinar Cemerlang, the titles - dealing with topics such as Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, ancient civilisations, Sikhism and Hinduism - were available for loan at 20 different libraries under the National Library Board.

The book titled Jews: Religion And Lineage, which has a picture of Jewish children in yarmulkes holding guns on the cover, includes anti-Semitic rhetoric. It claims that a third world war will start in the Middle East, between Israel and the Arab states.

Elsewhere, a photo of a boy wearing what appears to be a suicide bomber vest, surrounded by masked men wearing similar vests, is accompanied by the statement that "every Muslim is required to wholeheartedly defend his nation".

The imagery and content of the books "can be exploited to promote incitement and hatred", said Professor Rohan Gunaratna, head of the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research.

He added that it was a "concern and worry" that the books were found in the children's section.














NLB reviewing 130 titles by publisher of withdrawn book
Not possible for NLB to vet all books carefully, so readers' alerts taken seriously: Yaacob
By Sean Lim, The Straits Times, 10 Jun 2017

The National Library Board (NLB) has said that it is reviewing another 130 titles by the Malaysian publisher which produced a series on history and religion which contained anti-Semitic rhetoric and seemed to glorify violence in the name of Islam.

On Thursday, the NLB was asked by the Government to review its vetting process for sensitive and divisive content after concerns were raised on how copies of the Agama, Tamadun Dan Arkeologi (Religion, Civilisation And Archaeology) series had been available in the junior non-fiction section in libraries since 2013.

The Malay-language series was published in Malaysia by a publishing firm called Sinar Cemerlang.

NLB said yesterday that it has "130 other titles from the same publisher in our libraries".

It added: "We are conducting a review of all these titles. They will not be available for loan while the review is under way. We are reviewing other titles by the publisher to ensure that they are suitable for our readers."



Earlier yesterday, Minister for Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim said it is "not possible" for the authorities to go through every piece of reading material, so even if the Government imposes guidelines, it is "difficult to enforce".

But he said the Government and the NLB will learn from the episode.

The controversial series came to light after a Twitter user in Singapore shared photos of the series last weekend.

One book in the series had a picture of a Muslim boy wearing what seemed to be a suicide vest, surrounded by masked adults. The caption said Muslims had a duty to defend their country.

The NLB had told The New Paper earlier this week it would withdraw the books immediately and "call upon the Library Consultative Panel to review the series".

The independent panel is made up of 18 members.

The NLB added that it could not vet all titles thoroughly, given its large collection, and "hence, we take seriously readers' feedback on titles added to our collections".

Speaking on the sidelines of a reading event yesterday, Dr Yaacob said that he would leave the NLB to do the work it needed to do with its panel of experts, and that the Government "can tighten in some areas".

Asked if the NLB should have been more stringent about filtering what is acceptable for the public and whether all books should be made available to everyone, Dr Yaacob said that "there are some lines we need to draw".

"Some books that undermine national security and racial and religious harmony, we have to take (those) off. Because if you provoke one group to hate another group, then that is not something we would want to promote in Singapore," he said.

"So there should be some lines that we should not cross. Beyond that, I think that the boundaries are very wide for Singaporeans to decide for themselves."

Additional reporting by Ng Wei Kai









↧
Search

Get rid of poor service staff, let only the fittest survive

June 11, 2017, 12:35 am
$
0
0
Does Singapore have an inbred poor service culture? To shake things up, make staff compete for limited positions, sack the poor performers and raise the remainder's pay.
By Tan Ooi Boon, Published The Straits Times, 10 Jun 2017

Imagine you are hosting an important business lunch at a fine-dining restaurant but end up having to raise your hand repeatedly to ask the waiters for service.

The chief executive of a well-known company here told me recently: "It's not that the restaurant did not have enough people. It's whether we have what it takes to wow first-class tourists (when they come) to Singapore. In fine-dining restaurants overseas, they will even ensure the water in your glass will never be half-filled."

His story is not unfamiliar. Many Singaporeans have encountered shoddy treatment at restaurants here, such as being ushered to a table that is next to the toilet or kitchen in a near-empty restaurant. Recently, I was given a table next to the entrance even though I had made a booking at the six-star hotel restaurant almost a week earlier. The waitress just pointed at the table nearest to her, even though the restaurant was half-empty. Of course, we also have a similar experience at many retail stores here where the common answer to a query on a different size or colour is the common, curt refrain: "If it is not there, we do not have it."



Service quality is not a trivial issue to be ignored if Singapore aspires to be a world-class destination.

In our quest to remake Orchard Road and promote Singapore overseas, we must realise that while the quality of places of attraction matter, the software - the people providing the services - is just as important, if not more.

When was the last time you heard someone raving about good service in Singapore, in the same manner that we often gush about the service we received in Japan? If poor service continues to be common occurrences here, the hard truth is that a customer-unfriendly culture has sunk its roots. Yes, it's true that there are more service staff who give decent service than those who do not. But like a splash of ink on paper, the black sheep will ruin it all for us.

Before employers start blaming the Government again for not allowing them to hire more foreign help, note that having more workers does not guarantee good service if all of them just gather in a corner to chat and ignore the customers. What they should do is motivate their existing workers and turn them into great service champions. The workers should know that every customer who is turned off will translate almost certainly into a loss of future income. Surely having a bad service reputation is not an accolade employers want to collect, even if their business is thriving.

Many of us who have dined at overseas restaurants will be able to recall instances where some of these joints provide great service even when they had one or two waiters. I once witnessed a lone waiter in Germany giving marvellous service to about 10 tables - he was so attentive that mere eye contact would have him standing next to you. Invariably, appreciative diners would leave generous tips for him and so, the harder he works, the more he will earn.

Financial reward is a good motivator but it must be given in the right manner to be effective. In the German example, the waiter had every reason to do better because he got to keep every cent. This will not work here because we do not have a tipping culture. Also, tipping is ineffective if the pool has to be shared by a team. There is no motivation for bad apples to do better since they still get a share.This will even discourage good workers because nobody likes to see his rewards enjoyed by undeserving colleagues.

One solution may be to subject staff to a survival test. If you have five average workers, tell them that only the best three will remain. Those who remain will receive a hefty pay rise of about 30 per cent each, which should be a strong enough motivation to change.

From the management's perspective, such a drastic measure will deliver two desirable outcomes - you spur and identify people with the right mindset to do better while you save cost by not hiring those who refuse to change.

This exercise borrows from ancient Chinese war strategy in creating a fighting fit army that can take on enemy forces twice its size. To do this, everyone must put in equal effort because all it takes for a defensive line to break is a weak link.

Employers must know good employees are human too - if they see lazy colleagues getting away with it once too often, they too will develop a "why should I care" attitude. So a strong message must be sent to workers with poor attitude that their behaviour will not be tolerated.

Employers too should raise their game, and should not view employees as digits on their ledgers because behind every number is someone who has a family and an aspiration. When was the last time you spoke to your staff, planned their career and rallied them behind you? If you do not care about them, why should they care about you or your business?

This sounds simple enough but the simplest instruction is very often the hardest to follow. Just like how two simple phrases - "Thank you" and "I am sorry" - are still the least used ones by many people in the service industry today.

Tan Ooi Boon, a former Straits Times journalist, is senior vice-president (business development) at Singapore Press Holdings' English / Malay / Tamil Media Group.









↧
↧

Never tired of sea: Singaporean captain shares tales of life at sea and his most memorable voyages

June 12, 2017, 12:54 am
$
0
0
By Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent In the Sea of Japan, The Sunday Times, 11 Jun 2017

It is May 29, a calm and sunny Monday morning at sea.

North Korea fires a ballistic missile over the sea between the country and Japan. The Japanese Coast Guard issues a warning to ships in the vicinity of the Sea of Japan.

One of the ships is Singapore-registered Parsifal. One of four ships that are the largest vehicle carriers in the world, it is helmed by Captain Nordin Rais, a Singaporean.

The ship's bridge receives a warning message on its computer printer at 6.04am: "There is information that flying object launched from North Korea. Vessels requested to pay attention to further information and to keep clear when recognising falling object. Vessels requested to report related information to Japan Coast Guard."

The Parsifal had left Masan, South Korea, about seven hours before the message. It is bound for Kobe, Japan.

Capt Nordin, 66, purses his lips, turns to this correspondent and says: "It's all right. We are not in danger."

The 1.69m-tall captain, who always wears a cap atop his grey hair, says: "We are near mainland Japan. The (North Korean) missile will be shot down by the Japanese and American missile defence systems if it comes this near."

The missile flew for six minutes before landing in Japanese waters, some 300km away from the nearest Japanese islands.

Just two days earlier, Capt Nordin had invited The Sunday Times to sail with him for a first-hand view of the life of a seafaring officer. The sector is finding it hard to attract Singaporeans who are put off by the long periods at sea.

The missile incident was the latest adventure for the captain, who has been sailing for more than 40 years.

The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore says it has tested and qualified 140 Singaporeans to helm commercial ships.

But Capt Nordin says the pool of experienced captains is dwindling. "I am in the 1968 batch of Singapore Polytechnic graduates with a marine studies certificate. I am the only one in the batch who is still sailing," he says. "Nothing can substitute experience when handling unexpected situations at sea."

'NOT MY FIRST CHOICE'

Ironically, seafaring was not his first career choice. "I wanted to join the air force after completing secondary school in 1967. But there was no air force to join."

The Singapore Air Defence Command, the predecessor of the Republic of Singapore Air Force, was set up only in 1968.

"So I signed up for the two-year sea cadet course at Singapore Polytechnic," he says, adding that, at 17, "I was earning $50 a month".

He completed the course in 1969 and became a third officer, the lowest grade for a seafaring officer, earning about $300 a month.

But one of his early voyages almost got him killed. He was aboard the Golden Spring, a Singapore-registered cargo ship owned by Guan Guan Shipping, when it sank near Shanghai on Nov 5, 1971, after hitting shallow reefs.

"I was taking a shower that night when I heard a loud bang and the ship started moving violently," he recalls. "From the porthole of my cabin, I saw salted eggs flying all over the place. The ship was carrying the eggs as cargo."

When he went on deck, he saw that the ship was sinking and a lifeboat had been lowered. "I jumped into the sea and swam towards the lifeboat."

When asked if he feared for his life, he says: "Yes and no - a part of me felt that it was an adventure."

He adds: "We were rescued by a fishing boat. The boat was very smelly, but I am thankful it saved the crew. I lost all my belongings."

The sinking of the Golden Spring, a rare event, was reported in The Straits Times on Nov 13, 1971.

All 47 crew survived.

The episode did not put him off sailing. He was promoted to second officer in 1972 and chief officer in 1976, raising his monthly pay to more than $2,000.

Four years later, he married Maimon Mokti and stopped sailing, working on land as a dock master for a shipping firm. His daughter, Nura Shereen Nordin, his only child, was born in 1982.

In 1985, when she was three, he felt the itch to sail again, so he studied to be a captain and passed the qualifying examination in 1987.

A year later, Capt Nordin joined Swedish shipping company Wallenius Lines. He is now the oldest among three senior Singaporean captains in the company.

Asked how many and what type of ships he has helmed, he says: "I have lost count. I have been in command of all types of ships, including oil rigs and livestock carriers.

"I have transported sheep from Australia to the Middle East. The only sounds they made were 'meh' and 'baah'. It is better to carry four-legged cargo because they don't complain as much as two- legged cargo."

Of his travels, he says: "I have sailed as far north as the Arctic Circle and as far south as New Zealand. I have passed through the Panama and Suez canals over 20 times."

STORMS AND STOWAWAYS

Capt Nordin recalls four memorable voyages. While he has weathered many storms, one in particular is etched in his memory.

In 1971, he was a third officer aboard a new ship being delivered from Japan to Kota Kinabalu in East Malaysia.

The ship ran into a typhoon. He says: "The waves were more than five storeys high and the ship was pounding up and down for three days. We used ropes to tie ourselves to the beds at night but, even so, we couldn't sleep.

"After the typhoon passed, we saw that the ship's new coat of paint had been stripped away."

He adds: "I learnt early in my career not to fight the weather. If we can avoid storms, we avoid."

In 1996, he was captain of a ship sailing from Liverpool in Britain to Montreal in Canada, when he found stowaways on board. "Two days after we left the port, they came out of hiding. There were 12 of them," he recounts.

"They were from Eastern Europe. I gave them food, water and shelter and handed them to the Canadian authorities when we landed."

Besides storms and stowaways, he has also had close shaves with terrorists and pirates.

In 1998, his cargo ship was berthed in Colombo, Sri Lanka, when Tamil Tiger guerillas slipped into the harbour in small boats under cover of darkness at night and launched an attack with rocket- propelled grenade launchers.

He says: "My ship was okay, but the one next to mine was damaged.

"I rang my wife the next morning and told her I was all right. She replied, 'Yes, I know about the attack. I read the news on air'."

His wife, now a senior editor at Mediacorp, was then a radio newscaster.

In 2004, he witnessed a pirate attack in the Gulf of Eden.

"My ship passed by a small cargo ship. Soon afterwards, it called for help," he recalls. "I saw two small boats speeding towards it.

"I could not turn around to help. A Dutch cargo ship behind us tried to block the small boats but failed. Then I saw pirates from the speedboats boarding the ship. I don't know what happened to it."

He does not have any favourite port in the world, but dislikes some of them. "The harbour pilots in Africa always ask for bribes. If we don't give them cigarettes or alcohol, they will find fault with the ship and fine us," he says, adding that his company has a strict policy against corruption.

FLOATING CARPARK

Since 2012, he has been one of three captains rotated to helm two "floating carparks" - the Parsifal and Salome. The other two are a Malaysian and a Myanmar national.

Built in Nagasaki, Japan, in 2011 and 2012, the Parsifal and Salome - named after operas - are owned by Wallenius and operated by Swedish-Norwegian joint venture logistics company Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics. The company registered the ships in Singapore and they fly the Singapore flag.

Each ship is 265m long. Each ship has a two-piece folding ramp about the size of four basketball courts using which cars, buses and trucks are driven onto the ship.

The ship has nine "carpark decks" that can transport about 6,000 cars, or about 2,800 cars and 680 trucks, at any one time.

Both ships ply a circular route from here to China, South Korea and Japan, picking up cars, trucks and construction vehicles such as cranes and bulldozers, and delivering them to the west coast of the United States.

It then sails through the Panama Canal to the east coast of the US for more deliveries, before crossing the Atlantic Ocean to Europe.

From Europe, it picks up cars and takes them to the east coast of the US, passing through the Panama Canal a second time, before heading south to New Zealand and Australia, and back to Singapore.

"The leg from Panama Canal to Auckland, New Zealand, is the longest, about 15 days at sea," Capt Nordin says. Each voyage takes four months.

Of his current job, he says: "I love car carriers. They are very clean. I have transported coal and the deck is full of coal dust that will turn your face black. I have transported ore and that will turn your face red."

Capt Nordin boarded the Parsifal from Singapore on May 17, taking over from Malaysian Captain Leong Kim Ming. He returns in September and takes a break before boarding the Salome in November, and returns next March. He then re-boards the Parsifal in May next year and the annual cycle repeats again.

"I work for eight months and rest for four months. Where do you find a job like that?" he says with a laugh.

His ship is so huge that it has a passenger lift and two pick-up trucks to ferry equipment within it.

The current voyage coincided with the start of the fasting month. Unlike in Singapore, where Capt Nordin fasts for about 12 hours, there are more than 14 hours of daylight in Korea and Japan, which means longer fasting hours.

"This is not the longest I have fasted," he says. He has sailed near the Arctic Circle between Norway and Newfoundland in Canada during Ramadan. "That was about 18 hours of daylight," he says.

He is one of two Muslims in the 27-strong crew of mostly Filipinos. The ship's cook prepares halal meals for them separately.

The captain admits that he misses his family. He tries to FaceTime his wife and daughter daily. "I also FaceTime the family cat," he jests.

He keeps to a strict routine, waking up at 3am, followed by prayers and exercise on the treadmill and weights machine. He checks on the various aspects of the ship's operation throughout the day. He has a simple lunch of fruit and vegetables on non-fasting days, followed by prayers and an afternoon nap.

By about 9pm, he retires to his cabin, where he reads online news, checks e-mails and prays before sleeping at about 11pm.

Some perks of the job keep him going. Being captain of a car carrier has allowed him to come close to exotic cars.

"I have picked up Lamborghinis and Bentleys from Europe and delivered them to the US, New Zealand and Australia," he says.

"I cannot afford to own these cars, but I can see them on the ship. I don't get to drive them though as they are driven by stevedores."

The company allows captains and first officers to take their family members onboard as passengers.

"My daughter sailed with me to Australia and Hong Kong before she was in Primary 1. My wife sailed once, but she got seasick," he says.

There is free Internet access on board and each crew member has his own cabin and toilet. Hot food is available round-the-clock.

He says: "The company looks after our welfare. That's why I have stayed with it for 29 years."

On the second night of the voyage from Korea to Japan, in the open sea near Japan, he held a barbecue dinner on the helipad deck. "We do this about once a month, depending on the weather," he says.

The job pays well too, Capt Nordin adds. He declines to reveal his salary for reasons of confidentiality, but says that his Yio Chu Kang condominium and BMW 5-Series sedan are fully paid for.

"I have not withdrawn my Central Provident Fund savings," he says.

According to the collective agreement between the Singapore Maritime Officers' Union and Wallenius Marine Singapore, a captain who has served more than six years is paid at least US$5,886 (S$8,100) a month. The union says that experienced captains can earn as much as $25,000 a month.

"I don't pay any income tax," Capt Nordin adds. Seafarers' salaries are considered income from foreign sources and are not subject to Singapore taxes.

But he laments that younger Singaporeans are not taking up the job because they find it tough to be outside their comfort zone.

"I took a Singaporean cadet onshore at Panama Canal two years ago and he wanted to look for McDonald's instead of trying local food," he says, shaking his head.

Sometimes, it is the parents who stop their children from sailing. "They see it as a tough life."

When asked what is the best way to attract Singaporeans to join the industry, he says: "It's very hard to answer the question. They must have a sense of adventure to begin with."

On how long he plans to keep sailing, he says: "For as long as I am healthy. More than 10 years ago, I met an Australian captain and a harbour pilot in Tokyo - both were 86 and still at sea. I may not be able to sail until I am as old as they were, but I hope to do what I love doing for maybe another 10 years.

"I do not get tired of watching sunrise and sunset at sea."

He adds: "After all these years, sea water has got under my skin and into my veins."










Officers must clock minimum months at sea for promotion
By Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent, The Sunday Times, 11 Jun 2017

Seafaring officers are responsible for piloting ships, delivering the cargo and the well-being of the crew.

Those who want to join the sector in Singapore have to pass examinations conducted by the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) and clock minimum months at sea before they can be promoted to the next level.

The MPA has qualified 140 Singaporeans as ship captains. But the majority of them, about 80 in all, are doing shore-based work rather than taking ships out to sea.

About half of these qualified captains are aged 50 and above. About one-third are under 40.

Only 10 of the 140 Singaporean ship captains are women.

Seafaring officers typically join shipping companies as permanent staff, but are paid only when they are deployed out at sea, usually on six-month sea contracts. Periods of rest in between range from one to three months.

Their career path starts from cadet level, gradually progressing up the ladder to being a captain at the top.

There are two ways to enrol as cadets.

The Singapore Maritime Academy, which is part of Singapore Polytechnic, runs a three-year Diploma in Nautical Studies programme, which includes one year at sea.

Graduates qualify to sail as third officers, but those who start diploma studies before they enlist for national service need to complete NS before they can start working as third officers.

Besides the polytechnic, the Singapore Maritime Officers' Union (SMOU) also runs a Tripartite Nautical Training Award scheme.

The scheme, which was started in 2010, is backed by Workforce Singapore, the National Trades Union Congress and employers.

Trainee cadets under the scheme receive a monthly allowance of between $1,200 and $1,400 for the 31-month programme, which includes 18 months at sea. There is no bond.

About 300 Singaporeans are undergoing various stages of cadet training under the union-run scheme.

Eighteen graduates of the scheme are currently sailing as officers.

The path from cadet to captain can take only eight years but, typically, it takes more than 10 years to become a captain.


↧

First Singaporean woman detained under Internal Security Act for radicalism planned to join Islamic State

June 13, 2017, 2:36 am
$
0
0
• Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, 22-year-old PCF Sparkletots infant care assistant planned to join Islamic State terrorist group in Syria with daughter in tow to defend its self-declared "caliphate" and become 'martyr's widow'

• Her sister and parents - who are both freelance Quranic teachers knew of her ideological leanings but they did not alert the authorities

• One family member even destroyed important evidence relating to her plans to join ISIS, in order to try to minimise her acts, after she was placed under investigation

• Started becoming radicalised in 2013, at the age of 18, by online propaganda related to ISIS, developed wide network of foreign online contacts which included ISIS militants and supporters

• Actively posted and shared pro-ISIS materials online since 2014, social media platforms were taken down by administrators but she created new ones

• She boasted to a contact that the Singapore authorities had not detected her

• No threat to children under radicalised woman’s care

• Anyone who knows or suspects that a person is radicalised to call the ISD Counter-Terrorism Centre hotline 1800-2626-473 (1800-2626-ISD)




Radicalised female infant care assistant from PCF Sparkletots detained under ISA for pro-ISIS activities
First woman held under ISA for pro-ISIS activities
22-year-old Singaporean was infant care assistant and wanted to be 'martyr's widow'
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

A 22-year-old Singaporean who planned to travel to Syria with her child has become the first female here to be detained for radicalism.

Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari was not planning any attack here, but she had visions of becoming a "martyr's widow" for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). She was detained earlier this month under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

Izzah was a contract infant care assistant with a PCF Sparkletots Preschool, which is run by the PAP Community Foundation, and worked with infants aged between two months and 18 months old.

But she was also becoming deeply radicalised - a process that started in 2013. From 2014, she started to actively post and share pro-ISIS material online.

"Several of her social media platforms were taken down by administrators because of the pro-ISIS content," said the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).

Her parents, both freelance Quranic teachers, and her sister got to know of her radical views in 2015. They tried to dissuade her but did not alert the authorities.

Instead, when Izzah was being investigated, "important evidence was destroyed by a family member relating to her plans to join ISIS", said the MHA.

This was done to minimise the seriousness of her acts. The authorities are looking into taking action against this family member.

The MHA has pointed out in recent weeks that sharing information about an individual who is becoming radicalised could prevent a terrorist act - and help the person too.

"In Izzah's case, her family members did not bring her to the attention of the authorities when she was younger and could have potentially been turned back from the path of radicalisation," the MHA said.

As matters turned out, her radicalisation grew over time. She developed a wide network of foreign online contacts, including ISIS militants and their supporters, some of whom have since died fighting in Syria. Izzah also supported ISIS' use of violence.

Since 2015, she had been looking for an ISIS supporter to marry and settle down with in Syria with her young child. She believed that, if her husband died fighting, her status as a "martyr's widow" would help her marry another ISIS fighter easily.

"She also said that she was prepared to undergo military training and engage in armed combat to defend ISIS if called upon by the terrorist group to do so," said the MHA.

She boasted to a contact in April that the authorities here had not detected her. She was detained barely two months after that.

Last year, another woman, Dian Faezah Ismail, was placed under a Restriction Order after her husband was detained for being radicalised. But Dian herself was not detained and just had her movements and activities curtailed.

Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs Yaacob Ibrahim said it was important to seek help early from the religious authorities in cases of radicalisation.



"We are not here to condemn the individual. We condemn the act but we want to save the individual. We want to help him or her, who has gone astray. We want to bring him or her back to the straight path," said Dr Yaacob in a video posted on Facebook.



Acting Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean called on all communities to remain united and support the efforts of security agencies.

"While we are not immune from an attack, we must not let those who advocate or seek to commit acts of violent extremism divide us," he said in a Facebook post.




















Government takes serious view of withholding of key security info
Vital to report loved ones early if they show signs of being radicalised: MHA
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh and Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

The Government said yesterday it takes a serious view of any withholding of information that is crucial to national security and the safety of Singaporeans, even as it stressed the importance of family members and friends reporting early those at risk of becoming radicalised.

It is especially stern in cases where the "failure to report leads to violent activities that could kill or cause harm to others", said the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in a statement.

The ministry also said that reporting potentially radicalised individuals early will give them the opportunity to receive proper guidance and counselling, keeping them from being led astray by extremist ideology.

This also means they may not need to be severely dealt with under the law, it added.

The ministry made this call to the community in a statement announcing that, for the first time, a woman had been detained under the Internal Security Act for radicalism.



Detainee Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, arrested earlier this month, is a 22-year-old Singaporean who was a contract infant care assistant at a PCF Sparkletots pre-school. The centre is run by the PAP Community Foundation, the charity arm of the People's Action Party.

"The heightened terrorism threat worldwide and in Singapore makes it imperative for family members and friends to raise to the authorities anyone they suspect of being radicalised or planning terror activities," said the ministry.

"Singapore can be made safer if family members and friends do this. The time between radicalisation and committing violence can be very short in some cases."

Relatives and friends, it added, are in the best position to notice possible signs of radicalisation, which include the propagating of terrorism- related images, videos and posts.

Izzah started to be radicalised by propaganda related to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terror group on the Internet in 2013.

She was actively planning to travel with her young child to Syria to join ISIS, which has threatened attacks against Singapore.

She was prepared to take up arms in Syria on behalf of ISIS and supported its use of violence to establish its self-declared caliphate. Since 2014, she had actively posted and shared pro-ISIS materials online.

MHA said yesterday that the Government takes a stern view of anyone who supports, promotes, undertakes or makes preparations to undertake armed violence, regardless of how they rationalise such violence ideologically or where the violence takes place.

It also said Izzah's family did not inform the authorities when she was younger. Potentially, she could have been turned back from the path of radicalisation, said MHA.

Izzah's parents, both freelance Quranic teachers, and one of her sisters came to know of her postings and intention to join ISIS in 2015. They tried to dissuade her on their own but were unsuccessful.

Security experts and religious leaders interviewed by The Straits Times yesterday urged the community to react swiftly in getting help.

Ustaz Mohamed Ali, vice-chairman of the Religious Rehabilitation Group, said "a very small number" of people have asked the group for help with friends or family members who showed early signs of radicalisation, such as making pro-ISIS social media postings. The group of religious scholars and teachers then offers advice on how to debunk extremist teachings, and guides these individuals back to the right path.

"So far, none of the individuals has continued down the wrong path and to the stage that they are detained. It shows this approach - going to get help early - works," said Ustaz Mohamed.

Mr Jasminder Singh, senior analyst at the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, said the authorities would likely not be so "heavy-handed" with individuals who come forward of their own accord.

"You could save the person from being embarrassed, with this stigma of being detained," he said.

Security expert Kumar Ramakrishna of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies said family members of these individuals "face a hard choice", and that there has to be discussion at the community level about the gravity of what needs to be done in such situations.

"My suggestion is that if there are concerns about family members being radicalised, it should at least be a statutory requirement for that individual's family to consult the religious authorities," said Dr Kumar.

Yesterday, MHA also noted that recent attacks around the world show terrorists using easily available objects such as vehicles and knives to commit violence. Such attacks, it said, would be difficult to prevent.

"Such an act would drive a wedge between Muslims and non-Muslims and divide our communities, which is precisely what the terrorist groups want," the ministry said.









Tell-tale signs

For individuals in the process of being radicalised, their family members, relatives and friends are best placed to notice the tell-tale signs, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said in a statement yesterday.

The ministry listed some possible signs to look out for, and said the list is not exhaustive. These include:

• Avid reading of radical materials.

• Spreading and reposting terrorism-related pictures, videos and posts online.

• Expressing support for terror groups.

• Stating intentions to commit terrorist violence, or encouraging others to do so.

The ministry stressed that while the authorities are working hard to keep Singapore safe, they cannot do it alone.

"Every person in the community can help to protect Singapore and Singaporeans from the threat of terrorism," said the MHA.

USEFUL HOTLINES

Those with information on a person who may be radicalised can contact the ISD Counter-Terrorism Centre hotline on 1800-2626-473.

The community can also contact the following religious authorities:

• The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS): 6359-1199

• The Religious Rehabilitation Group: 1800-774-7747













Response depends on threat posed: MHA
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

Individuals in the early stages of radicalisation, and assessed to not pose a serious threat, may not be arrested at all. Instead, they could simply be referred for counselling.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) mentioned this yesterday while giving a detailed description of what happens after a report is made about a possibly radicalised individual.

The MHA spokesman said checks would be carried out to assess the veracity of a report. The checks would include speaking to the informer, whose identity would be protected.

If no indications of radicalisation are detected, no further action would be taken against the person reported, as well as the informer.

But if there is a basis to suspect radicalisation, that person would be interviewed by the authorities.

"How the investigation develops depends largely on the finding and the authorities' assessment of the threat posed by the individual," said the spokesman.

If found to be in the "nascent stages of radicalisation, he or she may be referred for counselling and other mitigating measures without the need for arrest", said the MHA.

The ministry said early reporting enables an individual who is at risk of being radicalised to be steered away from that path.

"(The individual) may not need to be severely dealt with under the law," said the MHA.

But the ministry added that it would not hesitate to use the Internal Security Act against anyone who is radicalised and has engaged in terrorist conduct.

"This includes any person who supports, promotes, undertakes or makes preparations to undertake armed violence, regardless of how he rationalises such violence ideologically, or where the violence takes place," said the spokesman.









Father of first woman held under ISA for radicalism regrets not reporting her
The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

The father of the first woman detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) regrets not reporting his daughter to the authorities.

Mr Syaikh Abdu Manaf Al Ansari told Berita Harian last night that he and his wife had questioned Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari in late 2014, after noticing she had started dressing in black and wearing the niqab, a facial veil which reveals only the eyes. She was also using the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) flag as her WhatsApp display picture, he said.

"I asked if she was an ISIS member. She denied it but said she thought ISIS was fighting for Islam," said Mr Manaf, 49.

"I told her all well-known Islamic scholars reject ISIS. I asked, is it halal in Islam to kill innocent people, children and women? I told her to show me evidence from the Quran and sunnah (prophetic teachings) that it is halal. She just kept silent."

Izzah was detained earlier this month under the ISA for radicalism.



Mr Manaf and his wife, both Quranic teachers, gave Izzah - the second of five children - religious advice, and decided not to inform the authorities after she stopped wearing the niqab and started listening to music and watching films again.

"We thought she was okay. But we did not realise she had become more radical. She was smart at hiding herself," he said.

After Izzah was arrested, he found documents in her room with information about moving to Syria, including how to get tickets.

He felt "disgust and anger" and, in a bid to "protect her", threw the materials away. He told the authorities about them only during the investigation, and was given a warning.

"This should not have happened. I really regret it," he said.

He advised the public to contact the authorities or the Religious Rehabilitation Group (RRG), which helps to counter radical ideology, if they notice suspicious changes in their loved ones. "To other parents, this comes from the bottom of my heart. If you see any sudden changes, et cetera, contact the authorities. If not (the authorities), contact RRG," he said.





Woman posed no threat to kids under her care, says MP
By Charissa Yong, The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

The radicalised infant care assistant detained under the Internal Security Act never posed a threat to the children under her care, said Tampines GRC MP Cheng Li Hui yesterday.

Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, 22, was a contract worker at the PCF Sparkletots Preschool at Block 385, Tampines Street 32.

Located in Ms Cheng's Tampines East ward, the pre-school is run by the charity wing of the People's Action Party, the PAP Community Foundation.

In a Facebook post, Ms Cheng assured parents that their children were safe. "We have been and will continue to work with the authorities and would like to assure parents that at no time was there a threat to the children under her care."

There is no evidence that Izzah tried to influence the children in the centre, the Home Affairs Ministry said yesterday. "There is also no indication that Izzah has tried to radicalise her colleagues."

It also said Izzah was the first case of radicalisation involving someone in the pre-school sector.



There are many excellent infant and childcare workers - many of them Muslims - who have taken meticulous care of the children in their charge, it said. "We should not let Izzah's case take anything away from the good work done by our Muslim staff in the pre-school sector."

The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA), which regulates the early childhood sector, said it had visited the centre.

"Based on our interactions with staff, we've assessed the children to be safe and well cared for," it said.

As an infant care assistant, Izzah worked under supervision in giving routine care to infants aged between two months and 18 months old at the centre. Her duties included helping to feed the infants, change their diapers and run playtime activities.

ECDA said she would always be supervised by trained staff.

Parents were told they could contact the centre's staff if they had questions on the matter.

Financial consultant Hong Wai Ling, 26, whose four-year-old daughter joined the centre this year, said: "I'd be worried if she influenced the kids but they are too young anyway."









Seeking expert help the best way to save loved ones: MUIS
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh and Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

Enlisting the help of religious experts is the best way to keep friends and family members from falling prey to radical ideology, said the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) yesterday.

It was a call made by several Muslim leaders yesterday, as news broke that 22-year-old Singaporean, Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, an infant care assistant, had been detained earlier this month for radicalism.

The Ministry of Home Affairs said last night that while there has been an increase in the number of radicalised individuals detected in recent years, the number of cases remains small.

"The vast majority of the Muslim community in Singapore are moderate and mainstream," it added in its statement.

Izzah's parents and sister had attempted to steer her away from the path of radicalisation when they came to know of her pro-ISIS social media postings in 2015.

But they did not succeed.

The incident, said MUIS in a statement, reinforces the fact that "we may not personally possess the capability to help those who are on the path to radicalisation, no matter how well-meaning our intentions".

It added: "The best way to help our friends and loved ones is to seek the help of experts."

Expert help is available from MUIS on 6359-1199, or the Religious Rehabilitation Group (RRG) on its helpline 1800-7747747 as well as its mobile app.



In a separate statement, Mufti Fatris Bakaram urged the community not to shy away from getting help from those with the religious know-how.

"Difficult as it may be, we must not hesitate to work with the authorities and with the RRG because it is only by doing so that we can save our loved ones," said Dr Fatris, the highest Islamic authority here.

The RRG is a group of local Muslim scholars who help terror detainees clear up their misunderstanding of religious concepts.

Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs Yaacob Ibrahim put up both a Facebook post and video, urging the community to inform the religious authorities about individuals who may show extreme behaviour. "It is really very heart- wrenching when you see young individuals who have been radicalised," he said. "They have a bright future ahead of them here in Singapore, and we can help them."

Dr Yaacob, who is also Communications and Information Minister, expressed the hope that the latest detention would not undermine the trust built up among the communities in Singapore over the past 52 years.

He noted how Singapore's Muslim community and its security agencies are working hard to counter the terror threat. For example, since the start of this year, it has been made mandatory for qualified Islamic teachers to be endorsed by the Asatizah Recognition Scheme. He added that the vast majority of the members of the Malay/Muslim community are peace-loving and want to contribute to Singapore.



Echoing these sentiments, Senior Minister of State for Defence and Foreign Affairs Maliki Osman said on Facebook that Singaporeans cannot let this incident divide them. "The Muslim community categorically rejects the views of the detainee, which have no place in either Singapore or in Islam," he said.

Islamophobia, he added, must not be allowed to take root here.

The Association of Muslim Professionals, calling for Singaporeans to stand united, said anyone who comes across material that can potentially damage the country's religious and racial harmony has a duty to alert the authorities.



The Muslim community, noted Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli, must also continue to be engaged in the wider society, and integrate with one another.

"This will convince everyone that we want to live in harmony with the people of Singapore," he wrote in Malay in a Facebook post.



Mr Chan Chun Sing, Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, said in a Facebook post: "We must guard against xenophobic behaviour or any other sentiments that can divide us. We must continue to promote inclusivity... even as we build up our resilience to be prepared, should a terror attack occur."















Detainee exemplifies women vulnerable to lure of extremists
By Lee Seok Hwai, The Straits Times, 13 Jun 2017

Extremist Muslim groups have in recent years increasingly tried to recruit women by tapping into a wide range of motivations: promise of romance or adventure, family or peer pressure, and what many say is a warped view of religious duty.

They use social media, slick packaging and "influencers" to entice women. Yet those who join are largely expected to play the traditional roles of wives and mothers.

Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, the 22-year-old childcare worker who was detained this month by the Singapore authorities, exemplifies the type of women vulnerable to the draw of extremist groups such as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

According to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Izzah was attracted by online propaganda and "supported ISIS' use of violence to establish and defend its self-declared 'caliphate'". She also wanted to marry an ISIS supporter and settle down with him and her child in Syria, and to be a "martyr's widow".

Another radicalised Singaporean woman, 35-year-old Dian Faezah Ismail, was placed under a Restriction Order last year. She had helped her husband, waste truck driver Mohamed Omar Mahadi, plan their relocation to Syria, with two children in tow.

In 2014, a female Singaporean, whose identity remains unknown, was said to have joined ISIS in Syria alongside her children.

In Malaysia, several women are known to have joined ISIS to become militants' brides. In one case, a 27-year-old student from Limkokwing University in Selangor married an ISIS fighter via Skype.

More than 1,000 South-east Asian ISIS fighters are believed to be in Iraq and Syria, but how many of them are women is not known.

By dangling the prospect of romance or by radicalising married men, "ISIS has been able to recruit an array of women", Dr Jolene Jerard, a research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said at a forum on terrorism last month.

That sense of romance is made all the more irresistible for impressionable women by being glorified with martyrdom.

ISIS' online propaganda magazine, Dabiq, has urged "every (foreign) sister who has been afflicted with the loss of her husband on the battlefield" not to become disheartened as she would ultimately be rewarded.

"Be firm, my dear sister, be patient and await your reward," it said.

Indeed, Izzah, the Singaporean detainee, believed she would reap "heavenly rewards" if her would-be husband died in battle for ISIS, said the MHA. She thought she would easily be able to marry another ISIS fighter with her "elevated status" as a "martyr's widow".

Among Western countries, 550 women had left their homelands to join ISIS, according to a 2015 report titled Till Martyrdom Do Us Part by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue and the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King's College London.

Like Western men who have joined ISIS, the women felt socially and culturally isolated, and believed Muslims were being persecuted, the study said.

Those targeted were also increasingly younger, middle-class and well educated.

Whatever their motivation, female recruits have to obey rules governing their gender laid down by the ultra-fundamentalist ISIS. Girls may marry as young as nine, while women should be veiled, stay at home and consider motherhood the purpose of their existence.

While many of the recruits have regretted leaving their homes for a life of subjugation and danger, some of them have become ISIS' propaganda and recruitment tools, the British study said.

Aqsa Mahmood, a Scottish woman who reportedly travelled to Syria in 2014 to marry an ISIS fighter, was one such "influencer" through her English-language blog called "Diary of a Muhajirah" (Diary of a Traveller).

Well-known examples of Western recruits include three schoolgirls who travelled together to Syria from Britain in February 2015.

One of them, Kadiza Sultana, was killed in an air strike in Raqqa last year. She was 17, said reports, and desperate to return home.









↧

Lee Kuan Yew's legacy is about to be destroyed by daughter and other son; Lee Wei Ling and Hsien Yang use Facebook to demand demolition of LKY's house

June 15, 2017, 4:13 am
$
0
0
• In young nation where numerous useless buildings receive petitions for conservation, fate of iconic house where modern Singapore was founded fuels public show of sibling rivalry

• Lee Wei Ling, Lee Hsien Yang issue statement to say they have 'lost confidence' in Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong

• PM Lee refuted allegations by his siblings that he had misused his power in relation to their late father's house, saying he was disappointed and sad they had chosen to air a private family matter in public




PM Lee Hsien Loong saddened by siblings' Lee Wei Ling and Lee Hsien Yang allegations
He denies charges and will consider matter further after he returns from overseas leave
By Royston Sim, Assistant Political Editor and Tham Yuen-C, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has refuted allegations by his siblings that he had misused his power in relation to their late father's house, saying he was disappointed and sad they had chosen to air a private family matter in public.

"I am deeply saddened by the unfortunate allegations that they have made. Ho Ching and I deny these allegations, especially the absurd claim that I have political ambitions for my son," PM Lee said in response to a six-page statement his two siblings issued yesterday.

Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had said they had lost confidence in their brother, PM Lee, adding that they feared the use of state organs against them.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang said he and his wife Suet Fern felt compelled to leave Singapore "for the foreseeable future" because of this.

Titled "What has happened to Lee Kuan Yew's values?", their statement is the latest development in a long-running dispute over the demolition of their father's house at 38, Oxley Road.

The two siblings are joint executors and trustees of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew's estate, and have pushed for the Government to honour his wish, as stated in his will, for the house to be pulled down.

They alleged that PM Lee and his wife wanted the house preserved for their own political gain, adding that the PM had abused his position to drive his personal agenda. They further alleged Mrs Lee had outsized influence and power that went beyond her role as the PM's wife.



PM Lee said: "While siblings may have differences, I believe that any such differences should stay in the family. Since my father's passing in March 2015, as the eldest son, I have tried my best to resolve the issues among us within the family, out of respect for our parents."

He added: "My siblings' statement has hurt our father's legacy."

After the statement was publicised on the duo's Facebook pages around 2am, it was widely shared online and picked up by media.

The news also sparked talk in the legal fraternity about possible changes at law firm Morgan Lewis Stamford, at which Mrs Lee Suet Fern is managing partner.

Last year, Dr Lee had also called PM Lee a "dishonourable son" in a Facebook post, because of their disagreement over the house.

This time, she and Mr Lee Hsien Yang said PM Lee and his wife had opposed their father's wish for the house to be pulled down, as "the preservation of the house would enhance his political capital".

In December 2015, PM Lee had said in a joint statement with his siblings that he hoped their father's wish would be honoured, adding that he would recuse himself from all government decisions on the house. The Government also said it would not make any decision on the house as long as Dr Lee resided there.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang told The Straits Times that PM Lee had not kept his promise, citing the formation of a ministerial committee on the house. To him, this was a sign of PM Lee's interference.

But Cabinet Secretary Tan Kee Yong said in a statement the committee was formed to consider options for the house and their implications.

He also said PM Lee "has not been involved in Cabinet's discussions concerning this committee. As he had previously stated, he has recused himself from all government decisions (on) the house."

The committee was also looking into how the late Mr Lee's will was prepared, and the role Mrs Lee Suet Fern and lawyers in her legal firm played in preparing it, Mr Tan said.

The two siblings also alleged PM Lee and his wife harbour political ambitions for their son Hongyi. PM Lee called it an "absurd claim".

He said: "I will do my utmost to continue to do right by my parents. At the same time, I will continue serving Singaporeans honestly and to the best of my ability. In particular, that means upholding meritocracy, which is a fundamental value of our society."

He ended his statement saying: "As my siblings know, I am presently overseas on leave with my family. I will consider this matter further after I return this weekend."






















Lee Hsien Yang says he feels compelled to leave Singapore
He has not decided when or where to go, but would rethink if PM Lee is no longer in power
By Tham Yuen-C, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2017

Mr Lee Hsien Yang, the younger brother of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, is making preparations to leave Singapore with his wife, but does not know yet when he will leave and where he will be going.

He told The Straits Times yesterday that it was the only sensible option left for him. "There are many ways people are made to feel uncomfortable," he added. "I am a person who spent his life here, who has done public service, contributed in the private sector. This is my home. I wouldn't do this unless I really felt there is a serious issue.

"And I have felt this is not where I can continue to live, the way I have been living in the last two years."



Mr Lee Hsien Yang, 59, chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore, was elaborating on a statement that he and his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, had issued in the wee hours of yesterday morning.

They said they felt closely monitored and feared the use of state organs against them.

The situation made Mr Lee feel compelled to leave Singapore "for the foreseeable future", said the statement which centred on a dispute over the house of their late father, former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.

Following the release of the statement, The Straits Times went to Mr Lee Hsien Yang's home around 10.30am.

He had already left for work. His wife, Mrs Lee Suet Fern, 59, a top corporate lawyer, was on her way to work. She said they were making preparations to leave Singapore.

But Mr Lee told The Straits Times later yesterday that he had yet to decide when to leave or where he was heading.

He also added that if PM Lee was no longer in a position of power, "I would reconsider my position".

He also said his three adult sons, Shengwu, Huanwu and Shaowu, do not live with him any more and would make their own decisions.

Eldest son Shengwu, a junior fellow at the Harvard Society of Fellows, posted the statement on his Facebook page and said: "I generally avoid commenting on Singapore politics, but this is an exception. In the last few years, my immediate family has become increasingly worried about the lack of checks on abuse of power.

"The situation is now such that my parents have made plans to relocate to another country, a painful decision that they have not made lightly."



Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee, 62, are joint executors and trustees of the estate of their late father, and have pushed for his house at 38, Oxley Road to be demolished, in keeping with his wish as stated in his will.

In December 2015, PM Lee, 65, had also said in a joint statement with his two siblings that he hoped the Government would allow the late Mr Lee's wish to be honoured, adding that he would recuse himself from government decisions on the house.

But yesterday, his two siblings said in a statement they had lost confidence in him, and alleged that he had worked behind the scenes to preserve the house as it would allow him "and his family to inherit a tangible monument to Lee Kuan Yew's authority".



As proof of this, Mr Lee Hsien Yang cited the setting up of a ministerial committee on the house.

He said this showed PM Lee did not recuse himself from all government decisions on the house as he had pledged to do.

But Cabinet Secretary Tan Kee Yong said in a statement yesterday that the PM "has not been involved in Cabinet's discussions concerning this committee. As he had previously stated, he has recused himself from all government decisions concerning the house".

He added in a statement that the committee was set up to consider the options for the house and their implications. These included looking into aspects such as the historical and heritage significance of the house and the late Mr Lee's thinking and wishes in relation to it.

But Mr Lee Hsien Yang questioned why this was necessary, since the Government had said it would not be making a decision on the house as long as Dr Lee was residing there. "Wei Ling is there today. She has no intention to move out. Why is this committee in existence?" he said.

To this, Mr Tan said the committee had made it clear to Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang that the Government has no intention of doing anything with the house as long as Dr Lee continues to reside there.

In his statement, Mr Tan also said the committee had asked Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang questions on how their father's will was prepared, and the role played by Mrs Lee Suet Fern and lawyers of her firm in preparing it.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang told The Straits Times the will was prepared by his cousin Kwa Kim Li, a lawyer at Lee & Lee, the firm his father and mother, Madam Kwa Geok Choo, had co-founded in 1955.

He added that his wife had only prepared the words of his father's wish to have the house demolished.

He also said the committee should not be looking at a will which has been deemed valid by the court in probate: "A will in probate is beyond doubt and is the established and binding will of an estate."

He added that he and Dr Lee felt strongly about the house being demolished as they wanted to honour their late parents' wishes.

"Both my parents wanted it, we feel we owe a duty to honour our parents' wishes. My parents asked this of all three children and they told this to us many times in our lives. It is the least we could do for them, and actually I think many people would like to see that wish fulfilled," he told The Straits Times.



PM Lee said in a statement yesterday he was disappointed his siblings had chosen to publicise private family matters.

"While siblings may have differences, I believe that any such differences should stay in the family. Since my father's passing in March 2015, as the eldest son I have tried my best to resolve the issues among us within the family, out of respect for our parents," he said.





























Home of former PM Lee Kuan Yew at 38 Oxley Road at centre of dispute
By Royston Sim, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2017

A long-running question over what to do with the home of the late former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew at 38, Oxley Road has come into focus again after two of his children, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, issued a statement on the matter yesterday.

In their statement, they reiterated their father's wish that the house be demolished upon his death.

The two siblings, who are joint executors and trustees of their father's estate, also said that their elder brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and his wife Ho Ching had opposed this wish as "the preservation of the house would enhance his political capital".



The issue of the house made the news back in 2015, several weeks after Mr Lee Kuan Yew died at the age of 91 on March 23 that year.

On April 12, 2015, Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang stated publicly that the late Mr Lee had asked for his house to be demolished after his death, and asked Singaporeans to respect this wish.

In his will, Mr Lee Kuan Yew said that the house should either be demolished immediately after his death or after Dr Lee moves out of it.

If demolition is made impossible owing to changes in the law, rules or regulations, it was the late Mr Lee's wish that the house should not be open to anyone except his children, their families and descendants.

There had been calls after his death to turn the pre-war bungalow, which he had lived in since the 1940s, into a museum or heritage site.

 

PM Lee told Parliament at a sitting on April 13, 2015 that Mr Lee Kuan Yew knew about calls from the public to turn his Oxley Road home into a museum and a memorial to him, but was adamant that the house should be demolished after his death.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew had written formally to the Cabinet at least twice to put his wishes on record, PM Lee said.

The first time was soon after his wife, Madam Kwa Geok Choo, died in October 2010, and the second time was after he stepped down from the Cabinet in May 2011.

In his statement delivered in Parliament, PM Lee said that his father's position on 38, Oxley Road was unwavering over the years, and added that Singaporeans should respect his wishes.

PM Lee explained that his father was averse to the idea of preserving his home as he had seen too many houses of famous people "kept frozen in time... as a monument with people tramping in and out", and they invariably "become shabby".

The Prime Minister also said that a decision on the fate of the house was not required yet as his sister, Dr Lee, continued to live there.

Three MPs had tabled questions on ways to honour Mr Lee Kuan Yew during that Parliament sitting in April.

PM Lee replied that decisions on how best to honour the late Mr Lee should not be rushed into so soon after his death.

He also told Parliament that he had asked Esplanade chairman Lee Tzu Yang to head a committee to conceptualise a Founders' Memorial that honours not just Mr Lee but also his core team, including Dr Goh Keng Swee, Mr S. Rajaratnam, Mr Othman Wok, Mr Hon Sui Sen and Mr Lim Kim San.

The 15-member Founders' Memorial committee began work on how to honour Singapore's first generation of political leaders in June 2015.

Since then, it has made recommendations on two possible sites for the memorial: Fort Canning Park and Bay East Garden at Gardens by the Bay. A final decision on the site has not been made.


It also announced that PM Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had each agreed to donate half the value of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's Oxley Road house to eight charities, in honour of their father.

The December 2015 statement also stated that PM Lee has recused himself from all government decisions involving the Oxley Road house.

In their statement issued yesterday, Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang revealed that the house was bequeathed to PM Lee, but he sold it to Mr Lee Hsien Yang in late 2015. The brothers also agreed on the donations to charities.

In the statement, Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang said they were disappointed when National Development Minister Lawrence Wong wrote to them in July last year to inform them that a ministerial committee had been set up to consider options for 38, Oxley Road and their implications.


An online poll released in December 2015 by Hong Kong- based market research firm YouGov had found that a majority of those surveyed supported demolishing the house.

Of the 1,000 people it polled, 77 per cent said they backed Mr Lee's wish, while 15 per cent wanted the house preserved.
















Ministerial committee studying options for Mr Lee Kuan Yew's Oxley house
It has asked PM Lee's siblings questions about how the late Mr Lee's will was prepared
By Toh Yong Chuan, Senior Correspondent, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2017

The future of the house at the centre of a dispute between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings is being studied by a ministerial committee.

The existence of the committee was disclosed yesterday by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, the PM's younger siblings.

In a Facebook statement, both said they were told by National Development Minister Lawrence Wong last July that "a ministerial committee had been set up to consider options with respect to 38, Oxley Road and their implications".

The pre-war house in Oxley Road had been the home of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew since the 1940s. He died in March 2015 at the age of 91.

Cabinet Secretary Tan Kee Yong, who confirmed the establishment of the committee in a separate statement yesterday, said it was set up to consider options for the house and the implications of those options.

"These included looking into various aspects, including the historical and heritage significance of the house, as well as to consider Mr Lee Kuan Yew's thinking and wishes in relation to the house," Mr Tan said in the statement.



He also said the committee has been looking at how the late Mr Lee's will came to be made and the roles played in this by Mrs Lee Suet Fern - Mr Lee Hsien Yang's wife - and the law firm that she heads.

The statement from the Cabinet Secretary was issued in response to claims by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee in their statement that PM Lee made "extensive representations" to the committee and that he is in "a direct position of power over the committee" because the ministers in it report to him.

Mr Tan said: "The Prime Minister has not been involved in Cabinet's discussions concerning this committee. As he had previously stated, he has recused himself from all government decisions concerning the house."

He said the committee had sought the views of the Prime Minister, as well as those of his siblings, "to ask if they wished to say anything about the late Mr Lee's thinking in respect of the house, beyond what has already been stated in public".

"Mr Lee Hsien Loong's views were sought in his personal capacity, given his position as Mr Lee Kuan Yew's eldest son and his interest as a beneficiary of the estate," Mr Tan noted.



In the statement, Mr Tan also refuted Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee's claims that setting up the committee contradicted PM Lee's statement in Parliament in April 2015, in which he said there was no need for the Government to decide the fate of the house until Dr Lee stops living there. PM Lee had said in Parliament: "At that point, speaking as a son, I would like to see these wishes carried out. However, it will be up to the Government of the day to consider the matter."

Mr Tan said the committee's work "will help a future government when a decision needs to be taken about the house".

He added that it also "made clear" to Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee that the Government has no intention of doing anything with the house as long as Dr Lee lives there.

Mr Lee made it public, before he died, that he wanted his house demolished. But after his death, there were public calls to preserve the house and turn it into a museum or memorial.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee subsequently issued a statement as executors and trustees of their father's last will, outlining their father's wishes regarding the house.



Mr Tan, in his statement issued by the Prime Minister's Office , also said the committee received representations from PM Lee on various facts and circumstances in relation to how Mr Lee Kuan Yew's last will was prepared.

He said the committee asked Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang further questions about how the will was prepared, and the role that Mrs Lee Suet Fern and lawyers from her legal firm played in preparing it.

Mr Tan said the committee has also invited Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang to put their response by way of a statutory declaration, as PM Lee had done.

They have not responded to date, and have indicated that if they respond at all, it will be by the end of this month at the earliest, he said.

There was no further information immediately available on the make-up of the committee yesterday.










No political ambitions for my son, says PM Lee
By Toh Yong Chuan, Senior Correspondent, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday refuted allegations by his younger siblings that he harbours political ambitions for his son Li Hongyi.

Such a claim is "absurd", he said in a statement responding to Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling.

"I am deeply saddened by the unfortunate allegations that they have made. Ho Ching and I deny these allegations, especially the absurd claim that I have political ambitions for my son," said PM Lee.



He did not name his son in the statement, but his younger siblings had publicly accused him and his wife Ho Ching of using Mr Lee Kuan Yew's legacy for their own political purposes - and that included harbouring political ambitions for Mr Li.

PM Lee has a daughter Li Xiuqi and a son Li Yipeng from his first marriage. He married Ms Ho in 1985 and they have two sons, Mr Li Hongyi and Mr Li Haoyi.

He had previously said in interviews that his children are not keen on entering politics.

In an interview with a Chinese television station in Beijing in November 2014, PM Lee said none of his children was interested in politics.

"They have to find their own path in life," he said when asked whether he was steering them towards politics. "They have to choose, because a child's personality and aptitude have to be taken into consideration."



In a 2012 interview at the World Economic Forum, CNN's Fareed Zakaria asked PM Lee if his children would enter politics.

PM Lee replied: "They have to decide for themselves. At this point in time, the odds are not on it. They have so many opportunities - internships, job offers, the world is their oyster."



Mr Li Hongyi is in the public service. The 30-year-old is deputy director of the Government Digital Services Data Science Division of the Government Technology Agency of Singapore, a statutory board under the Prime Minister's Office.

He studied at Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) and Raffles Junior College.

In 2006, he won the Lee Kuan Yew Award for Mathematics and Science and received a Public Service Commission Overseas Merit Scholarship, a top government scholarship, to study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the United States.

After graduating from MIT, he worked in Google for two years from 2011 to 2013, before returning to serve a six-year bond, according to his LinkedIn profile.





























Family conflict gets wide media coverage
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2017

Social media was abuzz yesterday as Singaporeans woke up to the news of a renewed public dispute between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang.

Many responded with concern at what they saw as the airing of dirty linen in public. "Domestic affairs should not meddle with the nation's interest. What will the other nations think when they see this? I hope it won't lower the nation's bargaining power," said Mr Chason Li Zhong Ng on Facebook.

Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had posted a statement on Facebook yesterday saying, among other things, that they had lost confidence in their brother.

PM Lee, who is overseas on leave, responded in a statement saying he was disappointed and saddened by his siblings "publicising private family matters".

Many netizens, commenting on PM Lee's Facebook page, were supportive of his position.

Those commending PM Lee's two siblings praised them for publicly airing their concerns on the running of the country.

Mr Alvin Teo said on Facebook: "The PM's integrity and character are a matter of public interest. I'm glad there's someone in the family who speaks up (though their claims cannot be verified yet)."

Some felt that Mr Lee Hsien Yang's statement that he would leave the country was a poor example to set for fellow Singaporeans.

"If you truly love your country, stay. Work out your differences and forgive," said Facebook user Carmen Luanne Choy.



Stories on the spat by mainstream and alternative media were shared widely. It was the top-read story on The Straits Times' website after it was published.

The saga gained much traction in international media as well, and was widely reported by wire agencies and news outlets such as The New York Times, Agence France-Presse, Financial Times, BBC and The Star.

It was the most viewed story on the South China Morning Post international website, with the headline, "Siblings of Singapore PM 'fear for their safety', accusing him of harassment and trashing Lee Kuan Yew's values".

The statement by the duo centres on a long-running dispute over the fate of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew's house at 38, Oxley Road.

The siblings reiterated their late father's wish for the house to be demolished after his death, and said PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching had opposed this wish.

Some netizens in their comments called for the late Mr Lee's wishes to be respected, while others said the house should be preserved as a national monument to inspire future generations.

Facebook users Simon Tan and Terence Foong suggested that there might be a way to please both parties - creating a 3D map of the house to let Singaporeans visit it in virtual reality even after it is demolished.

"The Government's view to preserve the house as a legacy for future generations is not wrong, but going against the wishes of our late (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) will make it tough," said Mr Tan.






















Timeline

• 2010-2011: Mr Lee Kuan Yew writes formally to the Cabinet twice to put his wishes to demolish his house at 38, Oxley Road on record.

• December 2011: Mr Lee is invited to a special Cabinet meeting to discuss his house. After the meeting, he writes a letter to the Cabinet in which he acknowledges their unanimous view that his house should not be demolished.

• Dec 17, 2013: The date of Mr Lee's last will.

• March 23, 2015: Mr Lee dies.

• April 12, 2015: Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang issue a public statement which outlines their father's wishes on demolishing the house, and ask Singaporeans to respect his wishes.

• April 13, 2015: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong tells Parliament a decision on the fate of the house is not required yet as his sister will continue to live there. He adds that as a son, he would like to see his father's wishes carried out, but it will be up to the government of the day to consider the matter.

• Dec 4, 2015: The three siblings issue a joint statement announcing that PM Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang have each agreed to donate half the value of the house to eight charities. The statement also says PM Lee has recused himself from all government decisions involving the house.

• June 14, 2017: Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang issue a statement saying, among other things, that they have lost confidence in PM Lee. In response, PM Lee denies their allegations, and says his siblings' statement has hurt their father's legacy. Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang also say in the statement that they were informed about a ministerial committee set up to consider options for the house in July 2016.














































Many historical sites already lost

As a filial son, Mr Lee Hsien Loong should obey his father's last wish to demolish his house, but as Prime Minister, he has a duty to preserve a historical monument. After all, isn't that the reason why conservation laws are enacted in the first place?

Many significant sites have been torn down in the name of progress. The death houses of Sago Lane, the tongkangs along the Singapore River and Great World Amusement Park are just some of them.

The demolition of these landmarks did not cause an uproar because they were of no major significance to anyone.

But demolishing the house of the nation's founding father at 38 Oxley Road is a different matter altogether.

Everything that is associated with Mr Lee Kuan Yew's life should be made public after his death.

As a wise sage, the late Mr Lee should have known better. I can only surmise that his wish stemmed from a fear of having the sanctity of his house turned into a "tourist trap" of sorts.

Some possible ways to get out of this sticky situation include:

- Holding a referendum to decide.

- Carrying out the instructions in the will and building a replica somewhere else.

- Demolishing the house but building nothing in its place. A conspicuous empty plot of land can also speak volumes of the nation's indebtedness to this great man.

- A combination of the above.

Lee Peng Hon
ST Forum, 15 Jun 2017










Related
Mr Lee Kuan Yew and 38 Oxley Road
↧

Was Lee Kuan Yew rushed into signing his last will?

June 16, 2017, 7:35 am
$
0
0
• PM Lee Hsien Loong releases summary of statutory declarations to ministerial committee looking into options for Oxley Road house

• PM Lee questions the role of brother Lee Hsien Yang and his wife Lee Suet Fern in making of final will

• Clause to demolish 38 Oxley Road house re-appeared in Lee Kuan Yew's final and seventh will having previously been removed from his fifth and sixth wills

• Lee Wei Ling's extra share of father's estate removed in final will

• Lee Wei Ling, Lee Hsien Yang threatened to air dispute during 2015 General Election

• PM Lee agreed to sell Oxley house to resolve dispute




PM Lee Hsien Loong details 'deeply troubling' way Lee Kuan Yew's will was made
He says last will prepared in haste with help of Hsien Yang's wife, conflict of interest an issue
By Royston Sim, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday raised serious questions about the way his father Lee Kuan Yew's last will was made, and whether there was a conflict of interest when his sister-in-law Lee Suet Fern helped prepare the will.

In a statement issued by his lawyers at Drew and Napier last night, PM Lee set out in detail the "deeply troubling circumstances" surrounding the seventh and final version of the will, and said he has "grave concerns" about whether the late Mr Lee was "properly and independently advised" on its contents before he signed it.

PM Lee's five-page statement, which he later uploaded on Facebook, raised a notch the long-running dispute with his younger siblings, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, over whether to demolish their father's house at 38, Oxley Road. In it, PM Lee also questioned if Mr Lee knew that a clause to demolish the house was reintroduced in the last will. He noted that this demolition clause first appeared in his father's first will dated Aug 20, 2011.

It was removed in the fifth and sixth versions of the will, but "somehow found its way back into the last will", he noted.

The dispute spilt into the public sphere on Wednesday, when PM Lee's siblings released a statement saying they had lost confidence in him and feared the use of state organs against them.

The two siblings alleged that PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching wanted the house preserved for their own political gain, and said their brother had abused his power by making extensive representations to a ministerial committee, raising questions over the last will.



Last night, PM Lee refuted his siblings' claims that he had motives for raising questions about the will in a statutory declaration to the ministerial committee. Noting that his siblings continued to make allegations, he said: "This makes it untenable for me not to respond publicly to the allegations and to explain why I have serious questions about how my father's last will was prepared."

PM Lee said the family dispute first arose when the last will was read on April 12, 2015. Mr Lee Hsien Yang had repeatedly insisted on demolishing the house immediately, and the discussion ended only when Dr Lee said she wished to continue living in the house.

PM Lee recounted that during the reading, Mrs Lee Suet Fern volunteered that Mr Lee had asked her to prepare the last will, but she got a lawyer from her law firm, Stamford Law Corporation, to do so instead as she did not want to get personally involved.

PM Lee later learnt that Mrs Lee had e-mailed Mr Lee on Dec 16, 2013, about the seventh will, which would give the three children an equal share of the estate. The sixth will had given Dr Lee an extra share.

PM Lee said Mrs Lee helped prepare the new will in haste that same evening, and sent two lawyers to 38, Oxley Road on Dec 17 for Mr Lee to sign it.

He noted the two lawyers were at the house for 15 minutes. "They plainly came only to witness Mr Lee signing the last will and not to advise him," he said.

There is no evidence Mr Lee even knew the demolition clause was re-inserted into the last will, PM Lee said. He also expressed concern about Mrs Lee's involvement in the preparation and signing of the last will, when her husband stood to gain from the removal of Dr Lee's extra share in the last will.

As to why he had not challenged the validity of the last will in court, PM Lee said he had hoped to avoid a public fight which would tarnish the name and reputation of Mr Lee and the family.

His siblings hit back at his statement via multiple Facebook posts last night. Mr Lee Hsien Yang reiterated that the will is final and binding, and said: "Hsien Loong should not use a committee of his subordinates to allege what he did not dare to allege in court."

But PM Lee said questions had to be asked about the circumstances surrounding the last will. "I believe it is necessary to go beyond the last will in order to establish what Mr Lee Kuan Yew's thinking and wishes were in relation to the house."











PM Lee Hsien Loong questions the role of brother, wife in making of final will
Document differed markedly from its previous version, which did not have a clause on demolition of Oxley Road house
By Charissa Yong, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong raised questions about the role of his brother Hsien Yang and sister-in-law, lawyer Lee Suet Fern, in preparing the seventh and final version of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew's will, in a lengthy statement issued by his lawyers on Thursday (June 15) night.

The document differed markedly from its previous version, in that it gave equal shares of their father's estate to all three of his children.

This was a reversal of a decision that the late Mr Lee had made in his second-last will, in which Dr Lee Wei Ling, his only daughter, was given an extra share of the estate.

The other key difference was the inclusion of a clause stating that the late Mr Lee wanted his house at 38, Oxley Road demolished after his death.

The clause had been in the first, second, third and fourth wills, but was not in the fifth and sixth ones.

In his statement, PM Lee quoted e-mails exchanged by his family members, and recounted the series of events that "led him to be very troubled by the circumstances surrounding the last will".

He also disclosed his sister Wei Ling once held "grave suspicions" that the removal of her extra share of the estate was "instigated" by her brother Hsien Yang and his wife.

PM Lee said his father changed his mind on giving Wei Ling an extra share after discussions with Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife.

Unlike all the previous wills, the final one was not prepared by their cousin, Ms Kwa Kim Li, a lawyer at Lee & Lee, the firm co-founded by the late Mr Lee and his wife Kwa Geok Choo.

Instead, it had been prepared by lawyers from Mrs Lee's law firm.

This happened after Ms Kwa was removed from an email list regarding the last will on Dec 16, 2013, by Mr Lee Hsien Yang.

He told his father he could not get in touch with Ms Kwa and believed she was away.

He also said he thought it was not wise to wait for her to return and suggested having lawyers from his wife's law firm, including a partner of the firm, prepare the will and witness the signing.

On Thursday (June 15), PM Lee questioned the decision, saying that it was unclear what efforts his brother had made to get in touch with Ms Kwa.

Ms Kwa had also said to Mrs Lee that she did not receive an email sent by her immediately before being removed by her husband from the email chain.

PM Lee said it was not clear why his brother thought there was an urgency to the signing of the last will.

"It is however interesting that he suggested that his wife, clearly an interested party, and her partners would prepare the new will," he said.

He also cited emails showing that in the space of 41 minutes at night, Mrs Lee had seen to the preparation of the new will and had one of her colleagues to be on standby to get it signed by the late Mr Lee.

The next morning, he signed the final will in the presence of two lawyers from Mrs Lee's law firm, then called Stamford Law Corporation. It is now known as now Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC.



PM Lee noted that the two lawyers, Mr Bernard Lui and Ms Elizabeth Kong, were present at his father's house for "15 minutes only, including the time for logging into and out from the property".

"They plainly came only to witness Mr Lee signing the last will and not to advise him," he said.

Neither he nor his sister were copied in the emails on the last will.

PM Lee also questioned the re-insertion of the demolition clause into the final will, when the change the late Mr Lee had wanted only concerned the share of the house which Dr Lee was to get.

He also recounted how he went to look up old family emails, after he and his brother disagreed over whether the house should be immediately demolished during the reading of the last will.

At PM Lee's request, his brother forwarded him copies of other emails which had nothing to do with the last will.

But PM Lee said his brother "cut out and did not send me the incriminating exchanges in the email chain that followed".

These deleted parts showed Mr Lee Hsien Yang's and his wife's involvement in the making of the last will in December 2013.

PM Lee said that he continued to have grave concerns about the events surrounding the last will.

He also said he was not aware of any facts that suggested his father was informed or advised about all the changes that were made when he signed the last will.

"In fact, there is no evidence that Mr Lee even knew that the demolition clause had been re-inserted into the last will," added PM Lee.

In his statement, he listed a series of questions he had, including whether his father gave specific instructions to re-insert the demolition clause in the last will, and if so to whom.

He also asked about what role Mrs Lee played in the preparation and signing of the last will, and whether she, her fellow lawyers, and her law firm had a conflict of interest.

Said PM Lee: "Without proper and complete answers to these questions, the serious doubts about whether Mr Lee was properly and independently advised on the contents of the last will before he signed it cannot be cleared."




















EXTRACT OF PM LEE'S STATUTORY DECLARATION

The Demolition Clause in the Last Will is now being used by Dr Lee Wei Ling ("LWL") and Mr Lee Hsien Yang ("LHY") to claim that Mr Lee was firm in his wish that the house at 38, Oxley Road (the "House") be demolished, and that he was not prepared to accept its preservation or contemplate options short of demolition. There is no basis for these claims, not least because of the deeply troubling circumstances concerning the making of the Last Will...

LSF's (Lee Suet Fern's) e-mail distinctly and clearly gave Mr Lee the impression that the new will would change only the division of shares, with the result that each child would have an equal share, just like in the First Will. Yet, the Last Will that LSF and her law firm prepared and got Mr Lee to sign went beyond that. Significantly, they re-inserted the Demolition Clause, even though that clause does not appear to have been discussed at the time of the making of the Last Will and had in fact been removed by Mr Lee from his immediately prior two wills (the Fifth and Sixth Wills)...

My concerns are heightened by what appears to be a conflict of interest: LSF was involved in the preparation and/or signing of the Last Will, while her husband, LHY, was a beneficiary under the Last Will and stood to gain by the removal of LWL's extra share in the Estate under the Last Will.



















PM Lee Hsien Loong sets out timeline of events in the making of and execution of Lee Kuan Yew's will
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

This is a timeline of events in the making of the late founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew's wills and the execution of his last will, which Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loongdescribed in a statement issued by his lawyers on Thursday night (June 15) giving an edited summary of what he told a ministerial committee.

Aug 20, 2011: Mr Lee Kuan Yew's first will - first among seven versions - is made. It is prepared by Ms Kwa Kim Li, a cousin of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and a lawyer at Lee & Lee, the firm co-founded by the late Mr Lee and his wife Kwa Geok Choo.

All three children are given equal shares of the estate. The first will also contains a clause stating the late Mr Lee's wish for the house at 38, Oxley Road to be demolished immediately after his death or as soon as his daughter, Dr Lee Wei Ling, had moved out.

Nov 2, 2012: Mr Lee's sixth will is made by Ms Kwa. It does not include the demolition clause found in the first four versions. Dr Lee is given an extra share of the estate relative to her brothers.

Dec 16, 2013: Mr Lee Hsien Yang's wife Lee Suet Fern e-mails Mr Lee at 7.08pm with a draft of the last will, which she tells him ensures that all three children receive equal shares. This version also includes the demolition clause. She asks Ms Kwa to engross the document.

Twenty-three minutes later, at 7.31pm, Mr Lee Hsien Yang e-mails his father saying he cannot get in touch with Ms Kwa and believes she is away. He suggests it is unwise to wait for her to return and that Mr Lee should proceed to sign the will.

He says his wife "can get one of her partners to come round with an engrossed copy of the will to execute and witness".

At 8.12pm, Mrs Lee Suet Fern e-mails Mr Lee's private secretary, Ms Wong Lin Hoe, saying her colleague Bernard Lui had the last will ready for execution.

At 9.42pm, Mr Lee replies to Mr Lee Hsien Yang and agrees to sign the new will without waiting for Ms Kwa.

Dec 17, 2013: Two lawyers from Stamford Law Corporation - Mr Lui and Ms Elizabeth Kong - arrive at 38, Oxley Road at 11.05am for Mr Lee to sign his will. They leave at 11.20am.





March 23, 2015: Mr Lee dies.

April 12, 2015: Mr Lee's last will is read to the family by Mr Ng Joo Khin, another lawyer from the firm of Mrs Lee Suet Fern.

She said Mr Lee had asked her to prepare the last will, but as she did not want to get personally involved, she had asked Mr Ng to handle it.

A dispute arises between Mr Lee Hsien Yang and PM Lee over the immediate demolition of the house at 38, Oxley Road, but is ended when Dr Lee says she wants to continue living there.

June 2015: Copies of the six wills preceding the last will are provided to the family by Ms Kwa.

Late 2015: PM Lee and his siblings reach an agreement in which he transfers the house to his brother at market value, on the condition that the two of them each donate half the value of the house to charity.

In an earlier proposal, PM Lee had offered to transfer the house to his sister for $1, but a resolution was not reached.

PM Lee donated to charity another sum equivalent to half of the value of the house. The Oxley Road house now wholly belongs to Mr Lee Hsien Yang.

The three siblings issue a joint statement about the donation and their hope that the Government will allow the house to be demolished, in line with their father's wish.
















PM Lee agreed to sell Oxley house to resolve dispute
By Joanna Seow, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

The house at the centre of the dispute between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his two siblings now belongs to his younger brother Lee Hsien Yang.

The property was bequeathed to PM Lee by their father, founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.

The late Mr Lee's estate was divided equally among his three children, according to his last will read on April 12, 2015.

In a statement issued by his lawyers last night, giving an edited summary of what he had told a ministerial committee, PM Lee said he had offered to transfer the property to his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, at a nominal sum of $1.

He added that should the property be transacted later or acquired by the Government, all proceeds would go to charity.



PM Lee said the proposed transfer was made as part of efforts to resolve the family disputes amicably, after Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang expressed unhappiness that the house had been given to him.

The siblings could not reach an agreement until late in 2015, when PM Lee transferred ownership of the house to Mr Lee Hsien Yang instead, at full market value. The price was not disclosed.

In addition, the two brothers each donated half the value of the house to eight charities named in Mr Lee Kuan Yew's obituary notice.

This was "to pre-empt any future controversy over compensation or redevelopment proceeds", PM Lee said.

"It is not tenable for the family to retain proceeds from any dealing with 38, Oxley Road, as it would look like the family is opposing acquisition and preservation of the house for monetary reasons," he said, adding that his brother remains unhappy about him taking this position, and his sister appears to be as well.

The revelations in PM Lee's statement appeared to be in response to the allegations made by his siblings that he and his wife had been keen to have the house preserved for their own political gain, and that he had abused his position to push his political agenda.

PM Lee's statement also made clear that the Government would consider what to do with the house only after Dr Lee no longer lived in it.














Lee Wei Ling, Lee Hsien Yang threatened to air dispute during 2015 General Election, said PM Lee Hsien Loong
By Tham Yuen-C, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's siblings Lee Wei Ling (LWL) and Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) had threatened to embarrass him during the 2015 General Election by spilling details about the tussle over their late father's house.

"Matters reached the point where LWL and LHY threatened to escalate their attacks against me, coinciding with the September 2015 General Election," PM Lee said. "I was not prepared to be intimidated."

This was in a statutory declaration he made to a ministerial committee set up to consider options on the house at 38, Oxley Road.

In the declaration, he revealed his deep misgivings about his father's final will and said these circumstances had called into question Mr Lee Kuan Yew's thinking and wishes in relation to his house. Mr Lee had died on March 23, 2015.

In August that year, a general election was called, with polling day on Sept 11. During the election period, a dispute between PM Lee and his siblings had not been resolved, and he was threatened over it.



The future of the late Mr Lee's house had become a point of contention for the three siblings.

Dr Lee and her brother Lee Hsien Yang had expressed unhappiness that their father's house was bequeathed to PM Lee.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang also wanted it demolished right after Mr Lee's death, a move PM Lee opposed as he felt it was too soon and people's emotions were still too raw.

PM Lee said he was concerned this might force the Government to react by deciding to gazette the house, which would not be in the best interests of the late Mr Lee's legacy or Singapore.

Subsequently, PM Lee offered to transfer the house to Dr Lee for a nominal sum of $1, subject to some conditions, but this was not accepted by his siblings.

The family dispute was not resolved by the time the election was called. The People's Action Party won it with 69.86 per cent of the popular vote, its best election result since 2001.

In his declaration, PM Lee said he was not prepared to be intimidated as his siblings' accusations were baseless. He also said the accusations were made on the premise that nothing unusual surrounded the circumstances of how their father's final will was made.

















PM Lee's statements contradictory, says Lee Hsien Yang
He says PM Lee's statutory declarations inconsistent with his 2015 statement in Parliament
By Danson Cheong and Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

Mr Lee Hsien Yang responded to his elder brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in Facebook posts yesterday, saying in one that it was "wrong to lie to Parliament and it is wrong to lie under oath".

He said a statement that PM Lee made in Parliament contradicts the statutory declarations he made to a ministerial committee.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang was referring to a statement made by PM Lee to Parliament on April 13, 2015, on the home of their father, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, at 38, Oxley Road.

PM Lee told the parliamentary session - held nearly a month after Mr Lee's death on March 23, 2015 - that his father was adamant that the house should be demolished after his death and not turned into a museum and a memorial to him.



Mr Lee Hsien Yang's post was also a reference to what PM Lee had stated in statutory declarations to a ministerial committee that was set up to consider options for the Oxley Road house.

The committee's existence came to light on Wednesday in a statement issued by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, that was critical of PM Lee and which centred on the long-running dispute over the future of the Oxley Road house.

In a summary of the statutory declarations that PM Lee made to the committee, released through his lawyers yesterday, PM Lee rejected his siblings' claims that Mr Lee was not prepared to accept the preservation of the house, or other options short of demolition. "There is no basis for these claims, not least because of the deeply troubling circumstances concerning the making of the last will."

He also said later in the declarations that he held firm against objections from his brother and his wife Lee Suet Fern to him reading out in Parliament the full version of the demolition clause in the final will.

The full version included what the late Mr Lee wanted done to the house if it was not demolished - namely that the house be open only to his children, their families and their descendants.

But Mr Lee Hsien Yang said in his post last night: "We have a question for Lee Hsien Loong: Does he or does he not believe that Lee Kuan Yew was unwavering in his wish that the house be demolished? Is his statement to Parliament false, or is his statement under oath false?"

He also took aim at a point PM Lee made in the statutory declarations: that there was no evidence that their father knew that the demolition clause had been re-inserted into his last will.



To make his point, Mr Lee Hsien Yang's post included a picture of Mr Lee's initials just below the clause in the will.

"How could Lee Kuan Yew not know when he initialled right beneath the Demolition Clause, and (Lee Hsien Loong) has the will?" he added.

Earlier yesterday, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said in a separate Facebook post that the will of their late father was "final and binding". "We have no confidence in Lee Hsien Loong or his secret committee."

He also presented a series of statements to show discrepancies between statements PM Lee made in public and to the ministerial committee.

On the issue of deciding what to do with the house, for instance, he said PM Lee told Parliament "there is no immediate issue of demolition of the house, and no need for the Government to make a decision now".

But Mr Lee Hsien Yang noted that a "secret" committee of ministers was then set up to investigate and make recommendations about the house.

On the issue of Mr Lee's will, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said that probate for the will was granted on Oct 6, 2015, and that meant it was recognised as final and legally binding.

He said PM Lee raised no legal challenge at that time.

But in private, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said, PM Lee wrote to the ministerial committee to say "there is no evidence that Mr Lee even knew that the demolition clause had been re-inserted into the last will''.

He also said that on Mr Lee's position on the house, PM Lee quoted the demolition clause in Parliament and said that his father's position on the house was "unwavering over the years, and fully consistent with his lifelong values".

Mr Lee Hsien Yang added that PM Lee told the ministerial committee that "(Mr Lee Kuan Yew) then took a number of steps which put beyond any doubt that he came to accept Cabinet's position."






















Lee Wei Ling's extra share of father's estate removed in final will
By Danson Cheong, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

Initially, Dr Lee Wei Ling was promised an extra share of the estate of her father Lee Kuan Yew, but it was taken away in Mr Lee's final will, a document that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said was prepared in great haste by lawyers of his sister-in-law's legal firm.

That change aroused "grave suspicions" in Dr Lee that her younger brother Lee Hsien Yang and his wife, lawyer Lee Suet Fern, "did her in" by removing her extra share.

These events were described in a statement PM Lee released last night on a statutory declaration he had made to a ministerial committee considering options for the late Mr Lee's home at 38, Oxley Road.

PM Lee noted that his father gave all three children an equal share in his first will of Aug 20, 2011.

There were seven wills altogether, and in the sixth will of Nov 2, 2012, Dr Lee was given an extra share. PM Lee said this became "the subject of discussion" between his father and his brother in late 2013.

On Dec 16, 2013, Mrs Lee Suet Fern e-mailed his father, his brother and Ms Kwa Kim Li - his cousin and a lawyer at Lee & Lee who had prepared the six earlier wills of Mr Lee - an original agreed will that gave all three children equal shares. PM Lee said this showed discussions between his brother and father had led to Mr Lee reverting to his earlier decision. This would deprive Dr Lee of her additional share as stated in the sixth will.

But a "mere 23 minutes" after Mrs Lee's e-mail, PM Lee said, his brother wrote to his father saying he believed Ms Kwa was away and that he did not think it was "wise to wait till she is back" to sign the seventh will. PM Lee said his brother wrote that a lawyer in his wife's firm could bring the new will for Mr Lee to sign. His father agreed.

"It is also not clear why (Hsien Yang) thought there was an urgency to the matter. It is, however, interesting that he suggested his wife, clearly an interested party, and her partners would prepare the new will," said PM Lee.

That same night, Mrs Lee wrote to Mr Lee's private secretary to make arrangements for the new will to be signed.

"So, in the space of 41 minutes, (Mrs Lee) saw to the preparation of the new will and got one of her lawyers to be on standby to get it executed by Mr Lee," said PM Lee.

The following morning, two lawyers from her firm went to 38, Oxley Road to witness the signing of the seventh and last will.



PM Lee said neither he nor his sister was on the e-mail list of correspondences with his father, adding that he became aware of "these troubling circumstances" later.

He said Dr Lee had also begun to be suspicious of the change.

In July 2014, Dr Lee told PM Lee's wife Ho Ching about her concerns in a series of e-mails, said PM Lee.

"Crucially, she said, 'If that is what Pa wants, so be it. But I don't trust Fern, and she has great influence on Yang', " he added.

He said Dr Lee also wrote that she "wondered whether Yang pulled a fast one", and that she had a "sense that Yang played me out".

Dr Lee also wrote to Ms Ho Ching: "The money I don't get does not upset me. It is that Yang and Fern would do this to me."

PM Lee said: "In other words, (Dr Lee) herself believed that (Hsien Yang and his wife) did her in by either suggesting or facilitating the removal of her extra share, which happened in the last will prepared in great haste by (Mrs Lee) and her law firm."

He added that in letters to his lawyers after disputes arose between him and his siblings, "Dr Lee admitted she had been suspicious whether the change in shares was really (their father's) decision or one that was instigated by (Hsien Yang and his wife), but claimed she no longer held this suspicion".

"But she did not explain how or why her suspicions had now come to be so conveniently dispelled," PM Lee added.










Lee Wei Ling disputes PM's account of her reaction to changes to her father's will
By Royston Sim, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 16 Jun 2017

Dr Lee Wei Ling said yesterday that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his wife Ho Ching were being "mischievous and dishonest" for selectively using quotes from her "to suggest that Hsien Yang and his wife were trying to cheat me in our father's final will".

She said in a Facebook post that the final will of her late father, former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, was important to her as it gave her "a clear right" to live at 38, Oxley Road, which is what she wanted.



"I had much earlier and repeatedly made clear to Hsien Loong and Ho Ching the truth that there was no duplicity by Hsien Yang and his wife, Suet Fern," she said in a post shortly after PM Lee released a summary of a statutory declaration that he had made to a ministerial committee that was set up to look into options for the Oxley Road house.

"He continues to repeat a position that I have both clarified and discredited as a smokescreen to obscure the key point that Lee Kuan Yew's final will of 17 December 2013 is in the same terms as his will of 19 August 2011, including the demolition clause, exactly as our father had intended."



In the declaration, PM Lee outlined his concerns about how the late Mr Lee's will was prepared, and in one part said Dr Lee had "grave suspicions" that Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife Suet Fern "did her in" by removing an extra share that she had received in the estate.

Dr Lee said in her post that following Mr Lee's will of Aug 19, 2011, PM Lee and his wife "were unhappy that I had been given a right to live at the original house at 38, Oxley Road. They pushed and persuaded my father very hard on this issue. This eventually resulted in 2012 in my losing my right to stay in the house and my share of my father's estate being reduced to only a life interest".

She disclosed she was upset and had quarrelled with her father, and said it was Mrs Lee Suet Fern who interceded on her behalf, met Mr Lee and "made a case that since I was his only daughter and was unmarried, it was particularly important that he provide for me rather than reduce my interest in his estate".

"My father did reinstate me and gave me an extra 1/7 share as a result. Hsien Yang and his wife were never informed of this extra share and continued to worry that I should be fairly treated and have a right to live in the house," Dr Lee said.

"I, too, was concerned about my right to live at 38, Oxley Road. Lee Kuan Yew's final will of 17 December 2013 gave me that right. It is this that Ho Ching and Hsien Loong are trying to deny me."

Mr Lee Kuan Yew died on March 23, 2015, at the age of 91.



Dr Lee yesterday also uploaded copies of e-mails from September 2012 of exchanges she had with Mrs Lee Suet Fern, as well as one that Mrs Lee Suet Fern sent to Mr K. Shanmugam, who was then foreign minister.

In the e-mail to Mr Shanmugam, Mrs Lee Suet Fern disclosed, among other things, that she persuaded Mr Lee Kuan Yew "to capitulate" and give Dr Lee "equal share in the same manner as her brothers. No restrictions at all...".

The copies of these e-mails were, however, removed from her Facebook page shortly afterwards. They were then put back up again under another account.

In another Facebook post in the early hours of yesterday morning, Dr Lee had said she and Mr Lee Hsien Yang would not have issued a public statement if the disputes with PM Lee over the late Mr Lee's house "were merely a family affair".

She said the main message of their six-page statement released on Wednesday was not that the siblings feared what PM Lee would do to them. Rather, she alleged that PM Lee's "misuse (of) his official power" against his siblings in relation to the house at 38, Oxley Road suggests he could do the same to ordinary citizens. She added that their lawyer edited this message out of the statement.

In their statement, the two siblings also said they had lost confidence in PM Lee, adding that they feared the use of state organs against them.















↧
↧

PM Lee Hsien Loong apologises for damage to Singapore caused by family dispute

June 20, 2017, 2:13 am
$
0
0
He will deliver a ministerial statement in Parliament on July 3 to refute accusations
By Royston Sim, Assistant Political Editor, The Straits Times, 20 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong apologised to the nation yesterday for the harm caused by a protracted and publicly aired dispute with his siblings, which has affected Singapore's reputation and its citizens' confidence in the Government.

He will deliver a ministerial statement to refute the "baseless accusations" his siblings made against the Government, when Parliament sits on July 3.



PM Lee issued a statement and a video on the matter yesterday, on his first day back at work after a vacation. He expressed deep regret about the harm caused by the dispute with Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang over whether to demolish their late father Lee Kuan Yew's house at 38, Oxley Road.

His siblings had released a statement last Wednesday accusing him of misusing his power in a bid to preserve their father's house, among numerous other allegations.

PM Lee yesterday said these "serious allegations" went beyond private and personal matters, extending to the conduct of his office and the integrity of the Government.

"Much as I would like to move on, and end a most unhappy experience for Singaporeans, these baseless accusations against the Government cannot be left unanswered. They must be and will be dealt with openly and refuted," he said.

PM Lee said all MPs will have the opportunity to raise questions after his statement next month, adding that he has instructed that the People's Action Party whip be lifted. This will allow PAP MPs to speak according to their conscience and not be bound by the party position.

PM Lee yesterday urged all MPs, including opposition MPs, to "examine the issues thoroughly and question me and my Cabinet colleagues vigorously" about the matter.

"I hope that this full, public airing in Parliament will dispel any doubts that have been planted and strengthen confidence in our institutions and our system of government," he said.



When contacted last night, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said he needed time to study his brother's statement and would respond later.

In his statement, PM Lee acknowledged that Singaporeans have been disturbed and confused by news of the private dispute between him and his siblings.

A day after his siblings released their statement, PM Lee made known his "grave concerns" and questioned the "troubling circumstances" surrounding the preparation of the late Mr Lee's final will in a statement issued by his lawyers.

His siblings hit back with multiple Facebook posts, disputing his account about the last will and alleging that PM Lee had used his position to influence the ministerial committee into challenging the validity of a clause to demolish the Oxley Road house in the final will.

That prompted Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean to reveal the members of the committee and detail their scope of work last Saturday.

PM Lee said he had "done everything possible to avoid this state of affairs". He noted that his siblings were unhappy after their father bequeathed the Oxley Road house to him as part of his equal share of the family estate. He said he tried to deal with their unhappiness privately, first by offering to transfer 38, Oxley Road to Dr Lee for a nominal $1. When that failed, he sold the house to Mr Lee Hsien Yang at a fair market valuation, and donated all his proceeds to charity.

"I had hoped that this would satisfy them. There should be no reason for any further quarrel, since I no longer own the house and I do not take part in any government decisions on the house," he said.

Besides pledging to refute the allegations, PM Lee assured Singaporeans that the dispute would not distract him and other Cabinet ministers from governing Singapore and dealing with more important national issues, including pressing economic and security challenges.

"As public servants, my ministers and I will always protect the integrity of our institutions, and uphold the strict standards separating private affairs from our public duties," he said. "We are determined to repair the damage that has been done to Singapore. We will continue to lead our nation and serve you to the best of our ability."















Oxley Road dispute: House debate will clear the air, say MPs and political watchers
MPs, political watchers say it will allow allegations of abuse of power to be addressed publicly
By Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent, Joanna Seow and Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 20 Jun 2017

Members of Parliament and political observers yesterday said they supported the move by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to make a statement in Parliament about a dispute with his siblings over their late father's house.

Putting the issue under scrutiny in the House will allow the Government to address in public the serious allegations about abuse of power that have been made by Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, the younger children of the late founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.

PM Lee, in a statement yesterday, urged MPs from both sides of the House to examine the issues thoroughly and to question him and his Cabinet colleagues vigorously.

Parliament has been the setting where contentious issues had been given an airing in the past, like in 1996, when the late Mr Lee and PM Lee, who was then deputy prime minister, were accused of receiving discounts for properties they bought from Hotel Properties Limited.

The late Mr Lee, who was senior minister then, gave a public account of what he described as open and above-board transactions during the four-hour debate.

Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat, in a Facebook post, said: "Like PM, I hope this will be the chance for all of us to discuss things openly and thoroughly, dispel doubts, and strengthen confidence in our institutions and system of government."

Meanwhile, MPs contacted said it would be a chance to clear the air.

Nominated MP Kok Heng Leun said: "The debate is important for accountability... There is so much reported in the news. Singaporeans do want to know what is going on."

He cited specifically the issue of the future of 38, Oxley Road, the house where the late Mr Lee lived for most of his adult life.

"The key questions are: What was Mr Lee Kuan Yew's wish? What is the Government looking into with regard to the house?" he said.



Chua Chu Kang GRC MP Zaqy Mohamad said the move to lift the Whip shows that "PM Lee is not afraid to put the matter under the microscope".

He added that the debate in Parliament will be welcomed by Singaporeans because the serious allegations made have created a buzz in Singapore and overseas.

"The accusations go to the heart of the integrity of the Government as well as PM as the leader of the Government," he said. "Having it properly scrutinised in Parliament will hopefully put the matter to rest and assure people that whatever actions taken so far are above board, so that the Government can continue to focus on the pressing issues it has to handle."

Non-Constituency MP Daniel Goh from the Workers' Party, noting PM's call for all MPs to scrutinise the issue, said: "We have already been doing that and will continue to do so, in order to raise questions in Parliament on July 3."

Others, such as Tampines GRC MP Desmond Choo, said they would canvass views from grassroots leaders and residents so that they can reflect them in Parliament.

Political observers interviewed said it was important to thrash out the issue in Parliament as the family feud has been taken public.

"It would help to clear the air and set the record straight. It would also help in regaining the complete trust and fullest confidence of the people of Singapore," said Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, a research fellow at the ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute.

He also said PM Lee's decision to apologise was "honourable".

Dr Norshahril Saat, another research fellow at the ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute, said he hoped MPs would speak their minds when Parliament sits because they are no longer bound by party lines.

"Citizens should also encourage their MPs - PAP or non-PAP - to speak on their behalf and raise tough questions," he said.

He added that many Singaporeans would feel assured knowing that PM Lee has said the issue would not affect important government business and pressing economic and security concerns.

Political commentator Derek da Cunha, meanwhile, suggested a live telecast of PM Lee's ministerial statement and the Parliament debate.

He added, though, that even a parliamentary debate "might not see an end to the matter".

He said: "It is entirely possible that we have seen only a small portion of the private correspondence that could be disclosed. I would not be surprised if, during the parliamentary debate, more correspondence is disclosed online."
















'Baseless accusations against the Government cannot be left unanswered'
The Straits Times, 20 Jun 2017

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong made a statement yesterday about the allegations his siblings made on the dispute over their former family home at 38, Oxley Road. Here is the full text of his statement:

Over the last week, Singaporeans have been disturbed and confused by news of the private dispute between my siblings and me. I deeply regret that this dispute has affected Singapore's reputation and Singaporeans' confidence in the Government.

As your Prime Minister, I apologise to you for this. And as the eldest of the siblings, it grieves me to think of the anguish that this would have caused our parents if they were still alive.

I had done everything possible to avoid this state of affairs. My father left the property at 38, Oxley Road to me as part of my equal share of his estate, but my siblings were not happy about this. I tried to deal with their unhappiness privately. I offered to transfer 38, Oxley Road to my sister for a nominal $1. Unfortunately, that offer failed. I then sold the house to my brother at a fair market valuation, and donated all my proceeds to charity.



I had hoped that this would satisfy them. There should be no reason for any further quarrel, since I no longer own the house and I do not take part in any Government decisions on the house. However, my siblings have decided to go out and make serious allegations publicly. For example, they say that I am using my position as Prime Minister to influence the Ministerial Committee chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean. These allegations go beyond private and personal matters, and extend to the conduct of my office and the integrity of the Government.

Much as I would like to move on, and end a most unhappy experience for Singaporeans, these baseless accusations against the Government cannot be left unanswered. They must be and will be dealt with openly and refuted.

When Parliament sits on 3 July 2017, I will make a Ministerial Statement to refute the charges. All MPs will then have the opportunity to raise questions for themselves and their constituents. I have instructed that the PAP party whip be lifted. I urge all MPs, including the non-PAP MPs, to examine the issues thoroughly and question me and my Cabinet colleagues vigorously. I hope that this full, public airing in Parliament will dispel any doubts that have been planted and strengthen confidence in our institutions and our system of government.

I want to assure all Singaporeans that this matter will not distract me and my Cabinet colleagues from our responsibility to govern Singapore, and to deal with more important national issues, including the pressing economic and security challenges we face.

As public servants, my ministers and I will always protect the integrity of our institutions, and uphold the strict standards separating private affairs from our public duties. We are determined to repair the damage that has been done to Singapore. We will continue to lead our nation and serve you to the best of our ability.
















Lee family spat: Many concerned about fallout
People worry about Singapore's reputation, but some say claims of abuse must be addressed
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 19 Jun 2017

The public spat between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings over their father's will and the fate of the original family home at 38, Oxley Road has kept tongues wagging over the past week.

But as accusations continue to fly between the children of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, a majority of the 100 people polled by The Straits Times are urging the family to take the fight offline.

About 80 of those interviewed over the past two days said they see the feud as a family matter that should not be thrashed out on Facebook or the news media.

They called for a stop to the airing of the dispute in public, concerned that Singapore's reputation may take a beating.

But the remaining people polled said that given PM Lee's position, even personal matters must get a public airing. They want him to address Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang's allegations about his abuse of power.



The family dispute spilled into public view in the wee hours of last Wednesday, when the two younger siblings issued statements on Facebook accusing PM Lee of going against their father's wish to have the Oxley Road home demolished.

They accused PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching of wanting the house preserved for their own political gain - a claim PM Lee refuted, saying: "I will do my utmost to continue to do right by my parents."

Over the past week, as conflicting accounts and personal e-mail exchanges emerged, questions also surfaced about the validity of Mr Lee's last will.

Amid the exchanges, retired supervisor Mohammed Ishak, 68, and IT consultant Ravi Parthasarathy, 55, said they hoped the family would choose to resolve the issues privately instead.

Said Mr Mohammed: "I'm very sad that this is happening. For all the great things that Mr Lee Kuan Yew had done, and with me belonging to the pioneer generation, I'm shaken. This should be discussed in private. Don't air dirty laundry in public."

Retiree Sim Jui Gek, 72, added: "It casts a pall over family values which are so important for those of my generation."

Many were also concerned about the international attention the spat has garnered.

Administrative manager Lisa Ng, 59, said: "I used to be quite proud of our country's reputation. Now, I don't know how to explain what is happening to foreign friends."

While marketing executive Eqtaffaq Saddam Hussain Gudam Hussain, 22, found the episode entertaining at first, he has grown tired of it. "I feel a bit embarrassed because other countries are publicising this. We depend on our political reputation for our economy."

Communications associate Rachel Yong, 24, said especially damaging are the accusations about PM Lee abusing his position.

Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had said in their statement that they feared organs of state being used against them.

Ms Yong wondered if it may give pause to foreign investors, adding: "With so many things to worry about - global trade war, terrorism, the Singapore economy and weak labour market - we really don't need this family dispute to destabilise the country."

But financial consultant Rosette Alcantara, 37, felt Singapore's stability would not be affected. "I think it's more of the late Mr Lee's family being affected since this country has been very stable for many years."

There were also those who agreed with the dispute being brought to light, such as teacher Michelle Bakelmun, 45, and housewife Bee Cheng, 51, who felt the issues raised, such as misuse of power, must be addressed.

Agreeing, student Barnabas Teong, 21, said: "Now it's in the public domain, they owe us accountability."

Financial adviser Heng Wei Lian, 32, referring to an internal ministerial committee set up by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean to consider options for the house, said: "And because a ministerial committee has been set up, it's not really private."

DPM Teo has said the committee is not "secret" as charged by Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, and is not unlike other committees set up to consider specific issues affecting Singapore.

Some, like housewife Sharon Goh, 51, hope the issue will not divide the country. She said: "Singaporeans must stay united and be supportive of Singapore itself, and let the matter resolve itself rather than being pessimistic and letting it polarise them."

Additional reporting by Revathi Valluvar, Lee Si Xuan and Ng Wei Kai






Unity needed to get through challenging times

It is unfortunate that the feud between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings is occurring at a time when we should be focusing on tackling the many challenges our nation faces both internally and externally.

Terrorism is on our doorstep. An uncertain economic outlook and rising unemployment are of concern. Renewal of political leadership to take us through trying times is still a work in progress.

We need unity and strong political leadership to take us through this difficult and dangerous period.

Preserving or demolishing the Oxley Road residence is of little significance to the well-being of Singapore.

However, accusing the Prime Minister and the Government of being morally corrupt undermines the trust and bond between the people and the Government.

It diminishes the Government's prestige and efficacy in protecting and enhancing the livelihood of the people.

I believe neither PM Lee nor his siblings harbour vicious, selfish motives in their family feud.

They just differ on how to respect the will of their father and how to honour his legacy.

While I sympathise with the frustrations of Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, I urge them to settle the family matter amicably and quietly away from the public eye.

Robert Tang Hin Ching
ST Fotum, 20 Jun 2017




↧

Dear students, what you post online can wreck your life

June 20, 2017, 2:15 am
$
0
0
Your posts can shape your future
Getting into colleges, jobs hinges on online reputations nowadays
By Thao Nelson, Published The Straits Times, 19 Jun 2017

Dear Student,

Harvard recently rescinded admission offers for some incoming freshmen who participated in a private Facebook group sharing offensive memes. The incident has sparked a lot of discussion: Was Harvard's decision justified? What about freedom of speech? Do young people know the dangers of social media?

I am a business school lecturer, career service counsellor and former recruiter, and I have seen how social media becomes part of a person's brand - a brand that can help you or hurt you. College admissions staff, future employers and even potential dates are more and more likely to check your profile and make decisions or judgments about you.

Here is what you should know, so you do not end up like those Harvard prospects.

SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS DISAPPEAR, RIGHT?

Let us be clear about one thing: You have been building your online reputation since your first Snapchat. Think the posts disappear? Think private pages are private? Think again.

You might feel like your life and opinions are no one's business, but you cannot always control who sees what you post. Every photo, video, tweet, like and comment could be screenshot by your friends (or frenemies). You might make a mistake with your privacy settings or post to the wrong account. And a determined online sleuth can sometimes find ways around privacy settings, viewing photos and posts you might think are well hidden.

DO EMPLOYERS AND SCHOOLS ACTUALLY LOOK AT THIS STUFF?

Your profile will very likely be scrutinised by college admissions officers and employers. According to a recent CareerBuilder recruitment survey in America, social media screening is through the roof:

• 600 per cent increase since 2006 in employers using social media to screen candidates

• 70 per cent of employers use social networking sites to research job candidates

• 34 per cent of employers found online content that caused them to reprimand or fire an employee

This trend is common with admissions as well. Kaplan Test Prep's 2017 survey of over 350 US college admissions officers found that 35 per cent checked applicants' social media profiles. Many who do said social media had influenced their admission decisions.

WHAT ARE RECRUITERS WATCHING OUT FOR?

So what are the potential hazards to avoid? These are some of the types of posts that left a bad impression on me when I used to recruit:

• References to illegal drugs, sexual posts

• Incriminating or embarrassing photos or videos

• Profanity, defamatory or racist comments

• Politically charged attacks

• Spelling and grammar issues

• Complaining or bad-mouthing - what is to say you would not do the same to a new school, company, boss or peer?

WHAT CAN I DO TO BUILD A POSITIVE ONLINE REPUTATION?

Remember, social media is not all bad. In many cases it helps recruiters get a good feel of your personality and potential fit. The CareerBuilder survey found 44 per cent of employers who screened candidates via social networks found positive information that caused them to hire a candidate.

From my experience, the following information can support and confirm a candidate's resume:

• Your education and experiences match the recruiter's requirements

• Your profile picture and summary is professional

• Your personality and interests align with the values of the company or university

• Your involvement in community or social organisations shows character

• Positive, supportive comments, responses or testimonials

HOW DO I CLEAN THINGS UP?

Research. Both the college of your dreams and your future employer could google you, so you should do the same thing. Also, check all of your social media profiles - even the ones you have not used for a while - and get rid of anything that could send the wrong message. Remember, things cannot be unseen.

Bottom line: Would you want a future boss, admissions officer or blind date to read or see it? If not, do not post it. If you already have, delete it.

Sincerely, Your Career Counsellor


The writer is a lecturer at the Kelley School of Business in Indiana University.

This article first appeared in The Conversation, a website which carries analysis by academics and researchers.














↧
Search

New laws against fake news to be introduced in 2018: Shanmugam

June 21, 2017, 2:28 am
$
0
0
Laws to tackle fake news likely out next year
By Seow Bei Yi, The Straits Times, 20 Jun 2017

New legislation to tackle fake news is in the works, and can be expected to be introduced next year.

The move, announced by Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam yesterday, follows his parliamentary statement in April that current laws for dealing with such falsehoods are limited.

Singapore officials had been to Europe, visiting Germany and Britain, to study measures these countries have taken or are planning to take to counter fake news, he said.

Consultations with stakeholders on the pending laws will be held in the second half of this year, he added.

Mr Shanmugam was speaking at the start of a two-day conference on fake news, Keep It Real: Truth And Trust In The Media, organised by The Straits Times and the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers.



Citing a survey of 1,617 Singapore residents conducted last month, he said that 91 per cent of them supported stronger laws to ensure fake news is removed or corrected.

Later, elaborating on the prospective legislation, he told reporters: "We know what the end point should be. It should be to de-legitimise fake news, help people identify what is and what is not fake news, and to deal with the perpetrators of fake news."






















Shanmugam sets out strategies in battle against fake news
Media literacy must be strengthened even as S'pore prepares new laws, he says
By Seow Bei Yi and Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 20 Jun 2017

The battle against fake news needs to be fought on several fronts.

Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam made the point yesterday as he underlined the importance of strengthening media literacy, even as Singapore prepares to introduce new legislation next year to curb fabricated stories.

He, however, felt platforms like Google and Twitter "bear significant responsibility" in tackling inappropriate content, including fake news, while the media plays a key role in being a trusted source of news.

Mr Shanmugam set out these battlefronts in his opening address at a conference on fake news, at which he announced pending laws against such falsehoods. The two-day forum is organised by The Straits Times and the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers.

To help shape the new laws, Singapore officials visited Germany and Britain. Germany proposed laws in April to punish social networking sites if they do not swiftly remove content such as hate speech or defamatory fake news.

In Britain, a parliamentary committee had been looking into online fake news, and whether new laws should be created to hold social networks responsible for inappropriate content.

But beyond laws, Mr Shanmugam told reporters, "the key is to build a more resilient society, a society that can pick up and understand what is fake".

"In that context, education is extremely important. And also the ability of civil society, people, to respond to fake news," he said.



The Education Ministry and Ministry of Communications and Information will help ramp up media literacy in the population, he added.

For the media, he said it is important to ensure journalism standards are robust as its role as a trusted news source is being challenged.

Meanwhile, firms like Google and Twitter have made a commitment to tackle misinformation, such as by removing hate speech, he added.

But the Government still has a key role to play, he said, noting: "It must stand ready to deal with misinformation that impacts society."

"Echo chambers" online amplify the negative impact of false narratives, and with 91 per cent of Singapore residents surveyed last month supporting stronger laws to remove or correct fake news, legislative action "seems a no-brainer", he said.

Highlighting that misinformation can be used to spread hate or used for profit, Mr Shanmugam stressed that Singapore remains "particularly vulnerable" to foreign influences harnessing fake news for their own ends.

The country also faces the risk of misinformation exploiting racial and religious fault lines, and rumours on social media and communication platforms like WhatsApp that confuse and promote distrust.

"If the distrust becomes deep rooted, people will have serious doubts about institutions, about governance, and you then get a fractured polity," he said.

The need for education and trust was also raised at a panel discussion.

Crucial steps must be taken to educate people and build up trust in the country's media, said Associate Professor Eugene Tan, a Singapore Management University law don.

The panel, on truth and trust in the digital age, was moderated by The Straits Times editor Warren Fernandez, who is also editor-in-chief of the English, Malay and Tamil Media Group at Singapore Press Holdings.

Prof Tan said: "It is important that regulation must not weaken the ability of any society to be able to discern for themselves. Governments cannot do the thinking for the people."

With fake news here to stay, people need to be taught how to react to attempts at misinformation, said the panellists.

"Governments always believe in their ability to do wonders... but we should bear in mind that there are inherent limits to what they can do when it comes to fake news," said Prof Tan.

The two other panellists - Ms Maria A. Ressa, chief executive officer of Manila-based online news site Rappler, and Mr Jason Subler, a managing editor of Reuters - also stressed that governments cannot fight fake news alone. Equipping people with media literacy skills must be a key strategy, they said.

Another tactic is to strengthen confidence in the media, they added, as plummeting trust in traditional media has driven people to look for news on alternative platforms that may carry information that is untrue or erroneous.















Misinformation can fan flames of Islamophobia globally: Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 20 Jun 2017

An unassuming video of a cheering crowd provoked an uproar two years ago, following claims that it showed Muslims celebrating the 2015 terror attacks in Paris.

It went viral on social media, racking up 500,000 views in two hours.

But it was, in fact, a video of people celebrating Pakistan's victory in a cricket match.

Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam gave the example yesterday at a forum on fake news to illustrate how misinformation has helped fan the flames of Islamophobia around the world. "There have been many attempts to use online misinformation to smear Muslims as a group, and turn non-Muslims against Muslims," he said.

This is done by people who are Islamophobic, as well as those seeking to make the Muslim community more exclusivist, such as radicals who want to turn other communities against moderate Muslims, and nudge these moderates towards more extreme ideologies.



Misinformation can play a part in silencing moderates, the minister noted at the conference organised by The Straits Times and the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers. He highlighted a photograph of Muslims protesting against the attack on London Bridge earlier this year, which was later taken out of context by hate-mongers, who claimed it was staged.

"It discredited the moderate Muslims, who wanted to step forward, and made them a target of attacks, so that in future, moderate Muslims will not hold their head high and stand up," said Mr Shanmugam.

There have been attacks around the world motivated by hate speech and religious divides, he noted.

"Locally, we have managed to integrate more successfully than many other countries. But that does not mean we are immune to such attacks," he said. "We are vulnerable - not just us, but every society - to misinformation that exploits racial and religious divides."

Fake information has been used to stoke anti-foreigner sentiments as well, he noted, citing an article by The Real Singapore in 2015 that claimed a Filipino family had caused an incident between police and participants of a Thaipusam procession. "We have to try and stop and deal with the attacks that try to spread hate and xenophobia here," Mr Shanmugam said.











↧

2 Singaporean auxiliary police officers arrested under ISA for terrorism-related offences

June 21, 2017, 10:04 am
$
0
0
One detained for planning to fight in Syria; friend on Restriction Order for supporting him
By Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent, The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

Two Singaporean auxiliary police officers have been arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for their links to terrorism, in what is believed to be the first such case involving uniformed personnel.

Describing the arrests as "chilling", Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli said: "These two were trusted to protect our society, but instead chose to endanger it."

The men were fellow AETOS officers at Woodlands Checkpoint when they were nabbed last month, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said yesterday.

Muhammad Khairul Mohamed, 24, has since been detained for planning to travel to Syria to fight against the Syrian government, while Mohamad Rizal Wahid, 36, has been placed on a Restriction Order for supporting his plan.

When Khairul was arrested, his job as an outrider with traffic enforcement duties did not require him to be armed, the ministry said. The Straits Times understands, however, that he has had weapons training and has performed armed duties before.

News of the arrests comes one week after MHA revealed last Monday that Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, 22, had become the first Singaporean woman to be detained for radicalism under the ISA. The infant care assistant planned to travel to Syria with her child to become a "martyr's widow", fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

Like her, Khairul became radicalised after going online to gather information about the conflict in Syria. He started to do so in 2012.

"Khairul perceived the Syrian conflict to be a 'holy war' in which he was prepared to die in battle as a 'martyr' and receive divine rewards," MHA said. In 2014, he tried to contact a foreign militant and Free Syrian Army (FSA) supporters on Facebook.

At the point of his arrest, he was still interested in engaging in armed violence in Syria. The ministry said his readiness to resort to violence in pursuit of a religious cause makes him a security threat to Singapore.



Several of Khairul's relatives and friends knew of his intention to fight in Syria, but none of them came forward, said MHA.

His colleague Rizal was working as an armed officer conducting general security duties at the checkpoint when he was arrested.

He knew about Khairul's plan to travel to Syria to fight, the ministry said, but he "not only failed to bring the matter to the attention of the authorities or the AETOS management, he even suggested to Khairul various ways to get to Syria and die there as a 'martyr'".

As an auxiliary police officer, he should have tried to dissuade Khairul and reported him to his superiors, MHA said. Rizal was placed on a Restriction Order that curtails his movements and activities. Both men are no longer with AETOS. Their last day of service was June 1.



The ministry said: "The Government takes a serious view of anyone who supports, promotes, undertakes or makes preparations to undertake armed violence, regardless of how they rationalise such violence ideologically, or where the violence takes place. This is particularly so if the person involved is a public servant, and especially if he or she is a uniformed officer."

AETOS said it will seek to educate its staff on the risks of self-radicalisation and train its supervisors to spot the signs.

The ministry added:"We strongly urge the public not to let the cases of Khairul and Rizal detract from the good work of the wider pool of Muslim police officers, or affect their confidence in our police officers."























Islamophobia as bad and unacceptable as terrorism, says PM Lee Hsien Loong
The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

Islamophobia is as bad and unacceptable as radical terrorism, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday.

He warned against letting anti-Muslim sentiments take root, hours after news broke that two Singaporean auxiliary police officers had been arrested under the Internal Security Act for their links to terrorism.

Mr Lee cited the incident in London earlier this week - when a Caucasian man drove his van into a crowd of Muslim worshippers leaving the mosque, and killed one person - as an act of Islamophobia.

Mr Lee was attending an iftar session last night at Tanglin Police Division Headquarters in a show of support for the uniformed services.

The arrests of two AETOS officers, announced yesterday, and the detention of infant care assistant Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari this month, have struck close to home, he acknowledged. However, he stressed that security forces such as AETOS, Certis Cisco and the Home Team have done an outstanding job in keeping Singapore safe.

It is one of the safest places in the world, without being heavily policed. "You don't see people with guns at every street corner, and yet you feel safe," said Mr Lee.










Officer 'didn't show obvious signs of radicalisation when hired'
Shanmugam cautions employers against looking at race or religion when hiring
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh and Rachel Au-Yong, The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

To vet Muslim candidates any differently from others when hiring people could backfire, Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.

In any case, no vetting process would have detected an auxiliary police officer's radical leanings when he joined the force, he added.

He told reporters there were no obvious signs that Muhammad Khairul Mohamad, who has been detained under the Internal Security Act for planning to fight in Syria, had been radicalised.

Khairul, 24, had studied at the Institute of Technical Education and held several odd jobs before joining AETOS in 2015, where his most recent duty was to help control traffic.

He had begun reading about the conflict in Syria online in 2012 and, in 2014, tried reaching out to a foreign militant and supposed supporters of the Free Syrian Army.



Mr Shanmugam said there were no obvious signs of radicalisation when he was hired in 2015. "It would be very wrong to suggest that employers start vetting Muslim candidates in a different way. That will have the very opposite effect of what you want," he said.

He was commenting on the arrests of Khairul and a fellow officer for terror-related offences.

Last night, the Home Affairs Ministry spelt out the stringent selection criteria for officers, including doing security and background checks.

The ministry also strongly urged people not to let the duo's actions diminish the good work of the wider pool of Muslim police officers: "The overwhelming majority of our Muslim police officers perform their duties diligently."

Mr Shanmugam also cautioned employers against thinking along racial lines, or looking at the race or religion of potential hires.

He added that Singapore's social compact is strong enough to withstand the latest arrests, and the firm bonds between the different races and religions will stand the country in good stead.



Still, observers stressed the need to prevent radicalisation, especially among security staff.

AETOS said its officers must meet stringent selection criteria and undergo a strict testing regime, but it is "neither easy nor always possible to detect signs of radicalisation in every case".

It reminded employees to report unusual behaviour among their colleagues so they can get help, and said leaders and commanders will continue to hold regular dialogues with front-line officers.

Private security firm Certis Cisco said it has a whistleblower policy for officers to report wrongdoing without fear of reprisal.

This allows the company to detect malpractices and misconduct, as well as officers who harbour radicalised ideologies or abnormal tendencies, its spokesman said.

Mr Remy Mahzam, an associate research fellow at the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, suggested that all front-line officers could be subjected to a more serious screening process, where their inclinations would be assessed through interviews, aptitude tests and personality assessments.

Such examination could include questions on their perspective on their country, multi-culturalism, religious tolerance and sensitivities towards other races and faiths, he said. But officers need to be aware of the part they play on the front lines of ensuring Singapore's safety, he added.

"Their roles are more heroic and prestigious as compared to any motivation to join extremist groups," he said.

Mr Shanmugam also warned other communities against Islamophobia.

"It is our duty to reach out and make sure that the Muslim community feels and continues to feel the bond, and be able to strengthen these bonds," he added.

At the same time, Muslims, especially community and religious leaders, must also ensure that such bonds with other groups endure.

Meanwhile, Singapore has looked to diversify its sources of auxiliary police officers.

Certis Cisco started recruitment of Taiwanese earlier this year, making them the first group of potential auxiliary police officers who are not Singaporean or Malaysian.

Mr Shanmugam noted that there are now several thousand officers from Malaysia due to the difficulty of getting more Singaporeans aboard.

"Ideally, we would like to get and fill up what we need from Singaporean sources alone. We have been forced to go overseas because we haven't been able to get Singaporeans, even though Singaporean officers get better terms than the foreign officers," he said.

"When you go overseas, I think you need to diversify your sources because if, for example, for some reason we cannot get more officers from Malaysia, we will be stuck without any other source. That is why we look at Taiwan."





Singapore not immune from terror threat, says PM Lee
By Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

With the pace of attacks around the world picking up, it is unrealistic to think that Singapore is immune from the threat of terrorism, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Already, there has been a "steady trickle of cases" in recent years of people who have been self-radicalised, he said.

Yesterday, news broke of two Singaporean auxiliary police officers being arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for terrorism-related offences.

Terrorism is a serious problem confronting many countries, said Mr Lee, as he highlighted the recent spate of incidents - from vehicular attacks to slashings - that have unfolded around the world.

There have not been big incidents, but the world is seeing such incidents happening more often, he told reporters at a break fast, or iftar, session at the Tanglin Police Division Headquarters.

He cited some examples, from the attack at Paris' Champs-Elysees on Monday, to the ongoing siege of the southern Philippine city of Marawi, over which Islamic State in Iraq and Syria-linked militants and Filipino armed forces are locked in battle.



Mr Lee attended the iftar session to reassure the uniformed services they have his support, just hours after the Home Affairs Ministry announced that two AETOS officers had been dealt with under the ISA.

"I decided to come here today to show my support for the Home Team, and my confidence in them, and encourage the officers that, well, these things happen, but we continue to have confidence in you and to work with you," he said.

This message of reassurance must go out to the broader community as well, he added.

The arrests will cause anxiety among the Muslim community, who will worry about coming under the spotlight, as well as non-Muslims, who may have concerns about their safety.

Mr Lee said he plans to meet Malay/Muslim community leaders next month to update them on the terrorism front, find out their worries, and "make sure we are still completely on the same page".

After that, he plans to hold a session with community leaders of the other races.

Noting that Singapore works on the basis of "when, rather than whether" a terror attack will occur, he said: "We make sure we are as well prepared as we possibly can be for when it happens in Singapore."



In his remarks in Malay, Mr Lee sought to give the Malay/Muslim community assurance in the light of the recent detentions.

He acknowledged that the community may feel concerned and unsure about what to do.

"The answer is simple: Stand shoulder to shoulder with the Government. The Government does not want the Muslim community to be viewed with distrust. We know the Muslim community in Singapore condemns terrorist ideology. They value and contribute to the peace and harmony that we enjoy."

He urged Muslims to speak to the police, Islamic Religious Council of Singapore or the Religious Rehabilitation Group if they know of friends and families who have been led astray.

This, he said, is "not to sentence them, but to help them return to the right path". "Together, we can overcome these challenges."





Family, friends play key role in stopping the radicalised
By Toh Yong Chuan, Manpower Correspondent, The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

It was yet another case of an individual getting self-radicalised and family members and friends doing nothing about it. But people who are seduced by extremist ideology may not grow out of it, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, said yesterday.

Their family members and friends also cannot merely hope that they will snap out of radicalisation and do nothing, he added.

"We cannot take the threat of radicalisation lightly, and merely hope that someone can grow out of it," Dr Yaacob, who is also Minister for Communications and Information, said in a Facebook post.



The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) announced yesterday that it had arrested two auxiliary police officers for terrorism-related offences last month.

One of them, Muhammad Khairul Mohamed, 24, has since been detained under the Internal Security Act for planning to travel to Syria to fight against the Syrian government.

The ministry said that "several relatives and friends knew of his intention to fight in Syria, but none of them came forward".

Last week, the ministry also revealed that it had detained Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, a 22-year-old infant care assistant, who was planning to travel to Syria with her child to become a "martyr's widow".

The MHA had said that her family members, too, did not report her to the authorities.

The news of the arrests yesterday again prompted calls on the need for families and friends to report those they suspect of being radicalised.

Dr Yaacob said that Khairul's parents and relatives had known about his intentions, but "did not take them seriously".

He added: "The new cases underscore once again the important role of parents, religious teachers and the community at large to look out for each other, and to immediately refer any signs of radicalisation to the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS), Religious Rehabilitation Group (RRG) or the police.

"This is the best and only way to help a loved one before it is too late," he said.



Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said the family members in Khairul's case had "a very serious responsibility, which they didn't discharge".

"They have to come forward. They are helping the individual, they are helping us, they are helping the country, and we have to urge, and where we think it is necessary, we will take steps," he said after a briefing on the arrests.

"It is not possible for intelligence agencies to know everything that is going on," the minister noted.

Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli said: "I hope my community will reflect the need to watch out for our children and loved ones. We cannot allow strident or extreme teachings of Islam to take root here."

He wrote on Facebook: "We must not let our guard down and must continue our efforts in tightening processes to detect and guard against terrorism."

Meanwhile, MUIS said the Internet is not the right place to receive religious guidance or to understand the "complex political and armed conflicts in the Muslim world".

The best way to help family members is to refer them to experts like those in the RRG when they detect something is amiss, MUIS added.

















Extremist preacher barred from teaching here; his 9 books banned
By Rachel Au-Yong, The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

An extremist preacher has been barred from teaching Islam in Singapore, and nine publications he authored have been banned.

Singaporean Rasul Dahri made statements in videos and books that were "exclusivist in nature and dangerous in that they promote enmity, strife and potentially violence not only towards Muslims, but also other religious communities and the state", the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) said in a statement yesterday.

The action against Mr Rasul comes amid reminders by religious and political leaders for people to be wary of extremist ideology, after the recent arrests of several self-radicalised Singaporeans.

MUIS denounced Mr Rasul's "problematic teachings", saying they are "totally unsuited for Singapore's multicultural society and may lead to extremism in religious thought and practice". It added that they do not represent the views of Muslims in Singapore.

Mr Rasul, who is said to have taught the Singapore leader of terrorist network Jemaah Islamiah (JI), opposes democracy and advocates the establishment of an Islamic state. Among his claims are that democracy, one of the fundamental governing principles of Singapore, is not part of Islam, said MUIS.

He also called on Muslims to establish an Islamic state through jihad (armed struggle) and da'wah (Islamic call), and denigrated Jews as "people who accept terrorism as part of their culture".



Muis said Mr Rasul "also persistently denounced established religious rituals practised by Muslim scholars worldwide and declared those who practise them as deviating from his own mistaken view of what is 'the real Islam'".

His nine banned books similarly contain extremist views.

MUIS said this was why his application to be a religious teacher here under the mandatory Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) was rejected.

Under the Undesirable Publications Act, it is an offence to distribute and own the banned books, and people who have copies must hand them over to the police, said the Ministry of Communications and Information. Those found guilty can be fined, imprisoned or both.

Malaysia's National Fatwa Council and the Pahang Islamic Religious Department had also banned seven of Mr Rasul's books.

He is known to have been preaching in Johor for decades, and Mas Selamat Kastari, who headed the Singapore cell of JI, is said to have attended his classes in the 1980s. Malay daily Berita Harian reported that Mr Rasul was arrested in Malaysia last year for the third time.



Minister for Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim and Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli warned that radical teachings can sow discord and disharmony in Singapore's multiracial and multicultural society.

"We will not allow his radical teachings and his extremist ideology to take root in Singapore," said Dr Yaacob, who is also Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs.

Mr Masagos said on Facebook that the recent arrests of radicalised Singaporeans drive home the need to be vigilant: "I must emphasise the importance of seeking Islamic knowledge from the right sources and have confidence in the guidance by our mufti and MUIS."

MUIS reminded Muslims here to seek religious education from qualified teachers endorsed by the ARS, which became mandatory this year.

Those who encounter extremist preachers should also report them to MUIS (6359-1199) or the Asatizah Recognition Board (6604-8568), it added.





London's famed tolerance takes a hit
Monday's attack at mosque comes amid rising tide of anti-Islamic sentiment after recent terror acts
The Straits Times, 21 Jun 2017

LONDON • London may be the most diverse and tolerant city in the world and is home to more than one million Muslims from dozens of countries. Its mayor, Mr Sadiq Khan, is Muslim and enjoys broad support outside the Muslim community too. When Britain voted to leave the European Union, London voted to stay.

But this proudly cosmopolitan city is now confronted with the tensions and ugliness that have been simmering on the fringes for years and are boiling to the surface.

Like many of London's Muslims, law student Mohammed Abdullah grew tired of defending himself, and his religion, after the recent terrorist attacks.

"It feels like you are under siege," said the 23-year-old, standing outside Finsbury Park Mosque, where earlier a white British man rammed a rental van into a group of worshippers. "I wonder," he said, "is anyone going to write about a 'white Christian terrorist' this time round?"

As Mr Hamdan Omar, also a student, put it: "There are people on both sides who want the clash of civilisations."



Police identified the suspect as Darren Osborne, 47, who lives in Cardiff, Wales.

Prime Minister Theresa May, who has been criticised for her response to the Grenfell Tower fire, denounced the assault as an act of "evil" and "hatred", and promised to bolster security at mosques.

The authorities said they were treating the attack as an act of terrorism against Muslims, while many of the city's Muslim leaders pleaded for calm and warned against a rising tide of anti-Islamic sentiment.

"During the night, ordinary British citizens were set upon while they were going about their lives, completing their night worship," said Mr Harun Khan, the secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain. "Over the past weeks and months, Muslims have endured many incidents of Islamophobia, and this is the most violent manifestation to date."

In the week after the June 3 terrorist attack on London Bridge and at Borough Market that killed eight people and was carried out by three men inspired by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, police reported 120 Islamophobic events, compared with 36 the previous week.

Throughout Monday in Finsbury Park, one of London's many diverse neighbourhoods, residents left flowers and messages of solidarity outside the mosque.

"With love, sympathy and support to our Muslim neighbours, victims of this horrific act of terrorism," read one handwritten note. "This does not represent Finsbury Park," read another.

There was a sense of relief, carefully expressed, that the suspect was not from the city. "Somehow, it would have been even worse if he had been from our city," said mother of two Zahra Mounia, 45.

But some worried that London's famed tolerance was fraying on the edges. Several residents said they experienced small but unsettling episodes of hostility.

"In London, people feel they must tolerate you, so they won't say anything, but you get the dirty looks," said Ms Suzanne Stone, 42, a convert to Islam who writes children's books. "My friend outside of London gets real abuse."

Many people pointed to the fact that it was Muslims, awake because of Ramadan, who saved a lot of lives in Grenfell Tower by waking up neighbours and alerting the fire department. And it was an imam of the Muslim Welfare House who helped form a protective ring around the van driver on Monday before the police arrested him.

"How many people know that?" asked Mr Omar Hussain, a community worker.

NY TIMES




Related
MHA: Issuance of Order of Detention and Restriction Order Under The Internal Security Act

MHA: Additional Comments from MHA on Actions Taken Under the ISA

First Singaporean woman detained under Internal Security Act for radicalism planned to join Islamic State

Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report 2017
↧
↧

Singapore Is Not An Island: Views on Singapore Foreign Policy by Bilahari Kausikan

June 22, 2017, 10:13 pm
$
0
0
Singaporeans urged to critically assess news they read
Be aware of how foreign media and agencies can manipulate public opinion: Diplomat
By Rachel Au-Yong, The Straits Times, 22 Jun 2017

Singaporeans need to be aware that the manipulation of public opinion has long been used as a tactic by many to pressure governments to change policies, said Ambassador-at-Large and former permanent secretary of foreign affairs Bilahari Kausikan.

For this reason, it is important that they critically evaluate the news they read and develop "clear, independent and balanced judgments", he told about 200 people yesterday at the launch of his book, Singapore Is Not An Island: Views On Singapore Foreign Policy.

Citing the flood of criticism in the Western media about United States President Donald Trump, he said it would lead one to conclude that nothing the US administration has done is right.

For instance, Mr Trump's reaffirmation of the "one China" policy was depicted as weakness though it has been a stance the US held since 1972, Mr Bilahari said at the event organised by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

And while acts like the pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership undermine American credibility, it is "factually incorrect to suggest nothing in Mr Trump's administration is right", he said.

For example, Mr Bilahari, 63, said it was correct for President Trump to deploy carrier strike groups to and near Korean waters in response to recent North Korean missile tests. Mr Trump's predecessor, Mr Barack Obama had adopted the policy of strategic patience - "a serious mistake that gave Pyongyang eight years to develop its nuclear and missile capabilities", he said.

These criticisms by the Western media and foreign policy establishments are often driven by their inability or unwillingness to come to terms with the election of Mr Trump, he said. Their motivations may be understandable "but are none of our business", he said.

"Rushing to judgment based on unprincipled acceptance of other people's assessments... may lead to wrong policy choices," he said.

Singapore as a small country has to work with all governments, he said, regardless of whether their policies suit its preferences.

Former foreign minister S. Jayakumar, who was the guest of honour at the book launch, urged Singaporeans to take a greater interest in foreign policy.

While people are often vocal about foreign policy, they are not always well informed and may sometimes become unwitting tools of other countries, he said.

There were also some who have fallen to the temptation of using foreign policy as a tool of partisan politics, he said.

"Not only must we be aware of national interests which lie at the heart of our foreign policy, but we must also not be blind to the fact that other countries will and have mounted rather clever and cunning tactics to influence various segments," he said.

He urged people to be wary of external influences that "don't have the best interests of Singapore at heart".

Singapore Is Not An Island: Views On Singapore Foreign Policy is published by Straits Times Press. The price (with GST) is $26.

















Why Singaporeans need to understand country's foreign policy
TODAY, 22 Jun 2017

In today’s fast-changing world, it is crucial for Singaporeans to take an interest in and understand the fundamentals of the country’s foreign policy, so that they do not become easily influenced by external forces, said former Senior Minister S Jayakumar. He noted that while people are often vocal about foreign policy, they may not be well-informed and may unwittingly be used by other countries trying to sway Singaporeans to their side.

Professor Jayakumar made these comments on Wednesday (June 21) as the guest of honour at the launch of the book Singapore Is Not An Island: Views on Singapore Foreign Policy, by Ambassador-at-Large Bilahari Kausikan.

Below is a transcript of the speech by Professor Jayakumar, who was previously Minister for Foreign Affairs:

I am very pleased to be here with so many friends and former colleagues to launch Bilahari’s book on Singapore foreign policy.

All Singaporeans should be interested in Singapore’s foreign policy interests and concerns. It should be in the consciousness of all Singaporeans.

However, like most countries, this is not in the natural order of things. Our general public, young and old, have their day-to-day lives occupied with many other demands. Hence those having knowledge of Singapore’s foreign affairs have been, traditionally, the professionals and academics who have to deal with it. This is too narrow a base.

With the fast pace of change today, Singaporeans have become much more aware of news breaking events taking place. This makes it all the more important that Singaporeans become aware of the parameters within which a small, multiracial country in Southeast Asia must operate. Otherwise we become susceptible to external influences that do not have the interests of Singapore at heart.

Some Singaporeans are more vocal and quicker than others to express their views or concerns. This can be seen especially in social media platforms today, where many Singaporeans and residents here express their views. Being vocal is however not the same thing as being informed. This sometimes creates dilemmas for policy makers.

Not only must we be aware of our own national interests, but also we must not be blind to the fact that other countries will mount, and have indeed mounted, cunning tactics using social media to influence various segments of our people, to swing them to their side and be critical of our own foreign policy stance. This is all part of the big power game.



Hence the title of Bilahari’s book is most apt: “Singapore is not an island”. It is typical Bilahari. Of course, every school student knows that Singapore is an island surrounded by the sea. But anyone who knows Singapore well, will understand that our success could not have been predicated on being an idyllic tropical paradise, like a deserted island in the South Pacific, depicted in the illustration on the cover of Bilahari’s book.

Our future depends on how well we understand and manage our connectedness to the rest of this region and to the rest of the world. Our past success depended very much on how we achieved this by balancing and bearing in mind the mutual interests of the other countries that we have built good relations with.

This means that what affects the countries that we are close to, will also affect us. We cannot live and prosper without constantly being aware of the implications of developments around us. During my time as Foreign Minister, foreign policy issues were not major issues in domestic politics. The opposition parties generally did not take issue with the government’s foreign policy decisions.

More recently however, there has been a worrying trend of groups that aspire to prescribe alternate foreign policies when they have only a superficial understanding of how the world really works. Singapore’s vulnerabilities have been dismissed or downplayed by such groups. Moreover, as Bilahari has rightly pointed out, “there are the first signs of failure by some to resist the temptation to use foreign policy as a tool of partisan politics”.

There will always be episodes arising from time to time, which will test us as a people. The haze (and Indonesia’s response) was a case in point. Developments in the Middle East and the radicalisation of Muslims living in Southeast Asia would be another.

When such episodes arise, it will be important that as a people, our reactions are not knee-jerk ones - they should be instead reasoned, on the basis of what are our national interests. A good understanding of our foreign policy by Singaporeans will add to our national resilience; it will give us the common instincts to act always as one people when faced with such challenges.

As Bilahari puts it, in the long run, a successful foreign policy must rest on a stable domestic foundation of common understandings of what is, and what is not possible for a small country in Southeast Asia.

It is important that Singaporeans become more and more familiar with the fundamentals of our foreign policy, and of what constitutes our national interests. There is today a changing international landscape; while old problems remain, new challenges continue to confront the region.

For example, the South China Sea territorial disputes have the potential to threaten regional stability. Singapore is not a claimant state but we have to position ourselves to safeguard our interests in the freedom of navigation in international sea lanes.

Events in the world are never predictable and we must always expect the unexpected. When surprising or important developments take place – whether the election of President (Donald) Trump, Brexit, the Qatari situation, the siege of Marawi in Philippines, we should ask ourselves equally important questions. Especially, what these portend for Singapore? Then again, how do we deal with the bigger powers - who have a penchant to pressure or bully smaller countries?

In one of my books, I gave an example of an Asean Regional Forum I chaired as Foreign Minister, where both the United States and China for quite separate reasons tried to bully and pressurise us. Bilahari worked with me closely on that issue to ensure that we stood firm and principled.

For how long can Singapore continue to take an independent and principled position with such big powers? We do not go out of our way to annoy or provoke them but they need to understand that at all times we act in our interests and no one else’s interest.

Therefore I am pleased to launch this book, which is a collection of essays and public speeches by Bilahari.

As Foreign Minister, I worked closely with Bilahari and found him to be one of the finest minds in Singapore’s public service. His unvarnished analysis of foreign policy trends is always refreshing.

Our foreign service was fortunate that he chose to devote his life to diplomacy. The publication of this readable collection can help many more Singaporeans, especially the younger ones who have not lived through much of our 52 years of history as a nation, to have better insights to Singapore’s foreign policy, to know why it was conducted the way it has been all these past years, and how it should be approached for the present and for the future.


↧

Singapore wins Most Improved Jurisdiction award at Global Restructuring Review Awards 2017

June 23, 2017, 9:50 pm
$
0
0
London awards boost to Singapore's efforts to be global insolvency and restructuring hub
Republic lauded for efforts to help troubled firms
By K.C. Vijayan, Senior Law Correspondent, The Straits Times, 23 Jun 2017

Singapore's efforts to be positioned as a major restructuring and insolvency hub received a boost in London on Wednesday when it was named the Most Improved Jurisdiction, fending off the likes of Germany, India and other nominees at an international awards event.

The inaugural award by the Global Restructuring Review (GRR) recognised recent ground-breaking legislative changes made by Singapore to its debt restructuring framework, resulting in a hybrid regime that incorporates the best features of the world's leading regimes, said the Law Ministry yesterday.



Senior Minister of State for Law Indranee Rajah said the recognition was significant because "we are positioning Singapore as a restructuring centre in Asia and it is the first time we have won these awards".

She added on the sidelines of the ground-breaking ceremony for Maxwell Chambers Suites: "In the past few years, we've seen many companies which have had difficulties. There's Swiber, there's Ezra, there's Hanjin Shipping. There's clearly a need in Asia for a place where such companies can be restructured, and Singapore has positioned itself to be such a place."

GRR is a daily information service providing cross-border insolvency and restructuring news, features and events.

Singapore also received the award for Most Important Overall Development, for the guidelines on cross-border insolvency matters that were drawn up and released by the Judicial Insolvency Network (JIN).

The JIN, made up of judges from 10 jurisdictions, including the Singapore Supreme Court, met in Singapore last year to discuss and draw up the guidelines.

Two Singapore High Court decisions were also nominated for Most Important Recognition Decision and Cross Border Cooperation in a Specific Insolvency or Restructuring Matter.

The inaugural GRR Awards celebrate the most important firms, cases and marketplace developments in cross-border restructuring and insolvency, said the ministry.

In awarding Singapore the Most Improved Jurisdiction prize, accepted by Justice Kannan Ramesh at the event, the organisers noted that the Republic had made changes to its Companies Act relating to restructuring and insolvency. It had also introduced refinements to its scheme of arrangement incorporating elements from abroad.

The Law Ministry thanked all local and international contributors who had made the results possible. and said it "looks forward to extending these strong partnerships as we continue to strengthen Singapore as a centre for international debt restructuring in Asia".

Additional reporting by Prisca Ang










Singapore law firm in global top 30
By K.C. Vijayan, Senior Law Correspondent, The Straits Times, 23 Jun 2017

WongPartnership became the only Singapore firm ranked on the Global Restructuring Review's (GRR) global top 30 law firms list for insolvency and restructuring.

Called the GRR30, these firms top a list of 100 firms identified by GRR in its guide to the world's best cross-border practices "as a safe pair of hands for carrying out insolvency and restructuring work with an international dimension".

WongPartnership, the only national firm from Asia in the top 30, was selected based on its track record, value of current cross-border restructuring and insolvency cases and the number of such active matters handled in the last two years.

The Singapore giant was also nominated for two other awards at the GRR Awards dinner held in London on Wednesday.

Mr Manoj Pillay Sandrasegara, the joint head of the firm's restructuring and insolvency practice who attended the London event, said: "The innovative legislative amendments by our Government has been a game changer in strengthening Singapore's ability to help troubled companies in the region rehabilitate effectively."

He said the firm was honoured by the international recognition of its practice, which he said was on the forefront of developments shaping Singapore's restructuring and insolvency laws. "For this, we thank our valued clients who continue to entrust to us, their most complex and important cross-border insolvency matters."





Red Dot Traffic Building renamed Maxwell Chambers Suites
By Prisca Ang, The Straits Times, 23 Jun 2017

To meet increasing demand for office space at Maxwell Chambers, the Government will have a second annexe of 3,500 sq ft built at the adjacent former Red Dot Traffic Building, now renamed the Maxwell Chambers Suites.

This is on top of the 120,000 sq ft - the equivalent of 100 five-room flats - expansion announced earlier this year.

The $25 million refurbishment and conservation project is expected to be completed in 2019, said the Ministry of Law (MinLaw).

The Red Dot Design Museum's lease ended in April. It will be relocated to the Marina Bay City Gallery by the last quarter of this year.

MinLaw said tenants have already taken up 65 per cent of the new office space and include The Arbitration Chambers, headed by Professor Lawrence Boo, and London barristers One Essex Court.

The Maxwell Chambers Suites will also house ancillary services firm Opus 2, an international company which specialises in transcription and hearing room services.



The details were revealed yesterday at a ground-breaking ceremony for the redevelopment of the site.

By 2021, the area will be served by the present Tanjong Pagar MRT station and the upcoming Maxwell and Shenton Way stations on the Thomson-East Coast Line.

Maxwell Chambers Suites will have four floors of about 50 offices for dispute resolution institutions, arbitration chambers, law firms and other ancillary service providers.

An overhead link-bridge will connect Maxwell Chambers and Maxwell Chambers Suites.



"Our vision is for Maxwell Chambers to be a base in Asia for all major players," said Senior Minister of State for Law and Finance Indranee Rajah yesterday.

"This is part of our larger plan to take dispute resolution in Singapore to the next level over the next decade."

On Wednesday, Singapore won international recognition for ground-breaking legislative changes made to its debt restructuring framework, and decisions in the High Court.

Singapore has seen 10 investment arbitration hearings this year, which have already been held, or are going to be held later in the year. This is double the number in 2013.

Ms Indranee said: "These are typically complex and high-stakes cases that provide good exposure for our legal talent, and raise our profile as a dispute resolution centre."


↧

Racial stereotypes in media: Not just a bit of harmless fun

June 23, 2017, 10:47 pm
$
0
0
By Leonard Lim and Mathew Mathews, Published The Straits Times, 23 Jun 2017

Singapore, with its polyglot population living and working together peacefully for the past five decades, often strikes international visitors as an oasis of social harmony.

However, undercurrents of racism do surface from time to time. Insensitive remarks or actions based on stereotypes about a certain race may cause offence, and social media amplifies both the effect and reach of the offence and the grievances of those who feel victimised.

But these incidents also offer good opportunity for Singaporeans to have open and civil conversations on what constitutes racial discrimination, as there are sometimes no clear lines, and these shift over time as social mores evolve.



In some instances, the markers are quite clear. There was a strong backlash against "blackface", or the use of make-up by ethnic Chinese to impersonate a dark-skinned character, last year (on a Mediacorp television programme) and in 2012 (at a dinner and dance event).

Many, including Chinese Singaporeans, spoke out against what they regarded as appropriating someone else's ethnicity and treating it like entertainment. The authorities also imposed a financial penalty on Mediacorp for what was deemed racially insensitive content.

There is relatively strong consensus when it comes to employment practices, and this is probably shaped by fair-hiring legislation. About four in five respondents in last year's Channel NewsAsia - Institute of Policy Studies (CNA-IPS) survey on race relations deemed not hiring someone because of his or her race as racist (the make-up of the 2,000 surveyed reflects Singapore's racial composition).

But when it comes to poking fun at someone's race, especially through stereotypes, the picture does not seem so clear. This was displayed in the range of opinions that surfaced after a local Indian actor's recent post on Facebook. Mr Shrey Bhargava had expressed disappointment over how he was asked to adopt a thick Indian accent and "make it funny" during an Ah Boys To Men audition.

The CNA-IPS survey brought out similar sentiments. Compared to employment practices, there was relatively less consensus on whether making jokes about another race was racist.

About one in three said they would not consider this racist. In fact, 42 per cent of respondents reported that it was at least sometimes acceptable to make those jokes in the company of friends, although the proportion dropped to 23 per cent when the respondents were asked if it was acceptable to make such racist jokes in public.

Such "casual racism" may be more commonplace than we think. About 60 per cent of respondents (regardless of race) had heard racist comments.

While many Singaporeans had presumably stayed silent previously, several were emboldened to share their experiences after a call by Mr Bhargava to do so. This could be an indication of the latent tension the minorities may be suppressing. Those who have been socialised to accept casual racism, especially through their childhood or at work, may begin to feel resentment towards society now, especially if they feel their objections are being brushed aside.

It is worth asking ourselves whether discriminatory actions or words that some of us deem to be harmless may unintentionally wound others' feelings.

Such reflection may be especially pertinent for the majority race. Researchers point to the phenomenon of "majority privilege", whereby members of the dominant ethnicity may fail to see things from the viewpoint of others who are not in the majority. For instance, in assessing whether making fun of a language associated with another race was acceptable, 59 per cent of Chinese survey respondents agreed that it was never acceptable. Among the minorities, the number was higher: 76 per cent of Indians and 69 per cent of Malays reject such actions.

While the facts in the Ah Boys To Men incident may never emerge for one to determine the full story, majority privilege was clearly in operation in some of the reactions. Some pointed out that the Chinese are also routinely made fun of, and Mr Bhargava's reaction was another instance of minorities being over-sensitive.

While parents, teachers, colleagues and employers can all play a role in their spheres of influence to call out casual racism, responsibility also falls on the local entertainment industry.

We cringe at how Asians and other minorities are sometimes still portrayed by Hollywood. Chinese men are bespectacled geeks, while the Asian woman is a bumbling domestic helper who speaks broken English. This, despite many men and women of Asian descent rising to prominent positions within academia and business in the United States.

In Singapore, minority actors have similarly lamented that they are often shoehorned into certain roles and seldom given opportunities for protagonists' roles.

Racial stereotypes in the media, whether for comedic effect or otherwise, unfortunately reinforce our prejudices (and in the case of children, help in forming those prejudices) against those who look, talk and behave differently.

We then tend towards a narrow view of what constitutes members of "the other", when in reality the make-up of "the other" is much more diverse. They hail from different backgrounds, and have an abundance of talent.

Further, the subliminal message to the audience is that statements or jokes that highlight and poke fun at a particular accent, mannerism or look are socially acceptable.

Some argue that the majority race is also subject to such treatment. They point to how several of the roles played by Chinese actors in Ah Boys To Men are premised on stereotypes - a sheltered mummy's boy and "Lobang King", an "Ah Beng" who has a knack for connecting his friends with good deals.

But that misses the point. These portrayals have more to do with personality types than racial differences.

In our multi-ethnic and multicultural country, a certain amount of caricaturing of race is expected. One could argue that the fact that we are able to talk and laugh about such differences openly points to the strength of our social fabric.

But what happens when those at the receiving end are no longer prepared to stay silent?

The recent episode involving Mr Bhargava will not be the last time that charges of casual racism and discrimination surface. Each provides an opportunity for reflection, and one question we might ask ourselves is whether we should insist that the status quo is fine, especially in the wake of growing protests from those who have been the subject of such "humour".

We cannot call ourselves a truly inclusive society, if racial stereotypes in the media and in daily interactions continue to be the stimuli for some of our loudest laughs.

Leonard Lim is a research associate and Dr Mathew Mathews is a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, National University of Singapore.









↧
Viewing all 7503 articles
Browse latest View live
Search
<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>