Staging a show Media reports of the Sichuan earthquake have been very extensive and open.  There was a press report that during a visit by Chinese leader Hu Jintao, he was interrunpted by a female survivor who said, “Give me water!”  The reporter made a point that the visit was not staged and everyone can see the real situation.  During my weekly block visits, I get comments from residents that the area has been scrubbed clean in preparation for my visit and it is not as clean normally.  Personally, I can accept that the authorities will go the extra mile to ensure cleanliness and tidiness before a VIP visit.  Even for ourselves, if we are expecting some guests to our home, wouldn’t we tidy up so that it leaves a better impression on our guests?  It is perfectly natural. The key is that such acts will not hide the fact.  There is nothing stopping residents from complaining to me that the cleaners are not doing their job.  I can easily tell that the cleaners need to buck up when cleanliness becomes a common complaint.  What is important is that I need to also walk around unannounced so I can see for myself what it is like on normal days.  Or maybe I should walk around more often announced so that the area will be cleaner! Subsidies - A double-edged sword? MM Lee’s statement on “Giving subsidies will not solve Singapore’s problem” has drawn mixed reactions from netizens.  Some netizens have even unfairly inferred that “subsidy is bad” and subsidies like medical and housing should therefore be discontinued, based on MM Lee’s statement above.  However, one should read the report in context before making such a hasty conclusion.  Never did MM Lee once said in his speech that “subsidy is bad” and that the government should not be dishing out subsidies to Singaporeans who needed a helping hand.  Rather, the gist of the matter is : “Singapore’s problems cannot be solved by giving subsidies, but by having a dynamic economy.”  He went on to elaborate that “The government must ensure that everyone has the highest paid job he is qualified to do. If his salary is below the minimum for a decent life, the government will top up with Workfare. When everybody knows the cost of what he consumes or uses, he will spend his money more to his benefit.” Subsidies from the government should ideally be targeted at the segment of society who needs it most, ie. the low-income and the needy.  Examples of such targeted help would include the medical and housing subsidies.  There have been calls to subsidise the prices of food, utilities and oil / petrol.  However, is this the right approach in tackling the rising inflation?  Look around us, our neighbours, and see how they have “dug a hole” so deep that it has become so difficult to extricate.  The amount of oil subsidy has risen so phenomenally with the rising oil prices that it has ”eaten” into a substantial portion of the government’s budget (There is an article in the Straits Times today defining the magnitude of the problem).  This would inevitably siphon much needed resources for infrastructural and social development in the countries.  By extending subsidies indiscrimately, yes no doubt the poor will benefit, but those who can afford, including foreigners and tourists will also benefit.  This adverse phenomenon is seen in Malaysia who has recently announced that foreign-registered vehicles will not be allowed to top-up petrol within 50km from the borders.  Similarly, with the subsidies on food, restrictions have also been imposed on foreigners for bringing out of country staple products like rice, sugar and oil etc. With the continuous northward trend in food prices, I certainly hope that tourists will not be banned from eating rice and bread in the future. 共享舞台 百花齐放 I thank Dianelle for her comment and interest in this post.  It was an article I wrote for Lianhe Wanbao and I just thought it could reach a different audience by posting it here.  I guess I should highlight the main points in English. Essentially, I observed a visible presence of foreigners in some arts and school performances, who clearly stand out from other performers.  There have been some negative sentiments that these foreign talents compete with Singaporeans.  I was looking at many of my JC classmates who came to Singapore on the ASEAN scholarship.  Most have stayed on in Singapore, working here, contributing to our economy, marrying local Singaporeans and raising future Singaporeans.  I think the importance is that as a country, Singapore must enlarge the pie so that it becomes bigger for both Singaporeans and foreign talents. I was very happy to learn that among the Best Female Singer nominees for Taiwan’s Golden Melody Music Awards (the Grammy’s in the Chinese pop music industry) announced recently, Singapore’s Stefanie Sun, Tanya Chua and Joi Chua make up half the number.  The others are A-Mei (Taiwan), Karen Mok (HK) and Fish Leong (Malaysia).   I know this is not an apple-to-apple comparison, but if the organiser only reserves its award nominations (and thus winners) for Taiwanese, will it be able to command the respect and authority as the premiere industry award?  Can Singapore become a truly global city if we adopt a protectionistic attitude towards talents?  While we are proud that our Singaporeans are achieving success abroad and bringing the country glory, should we close our doors so that Singaporeans will prosper in a protected environment? 上个月观赏了本地舞蹈团体聚舞坊《情愫舞台》的演出，表演者外形亮丽，又演又唱又跳，令人耳目一新。   五一劳动节，看了德明政府中学中文学会的舞台演出，非常欣赏几位同学的精湛表演，包括京剧的春草角色，和又说相声又演舞台剧的一位男同学，舞台根底和魅力明显比其他同学更胜一筹。   果然不出所料，从聚舞坊艺术总监严众莲老师口中知道，表演者有一半是她特别从中国遴选聘请来新加坡培养下一代的舞蹈老师；德明的负责老师也告诉我，那几位出色的同学都是中国学生。   不知不觉，我们周围多了很多外国人。正因为我们吸引的都是优秀人材，所以有人认为这带来激烈竞争，把新加坡人比了下来。   我在高中时，班上有不少来自马国、汶莱和香港的外地同学。他们都很用功，成绩优秀。会考后有些留在本地大学就读，其他则到国外深造。现在，多数已在新加坡结婚生子，事业有成。毕竟，他们已熟悉新加坡的环境，很自然选择在这里落地生根，贡献社会。   新加坡国小人寡，国人有时没办法得到外地开创另一片天空，跟他人争一长短。难道我们应该用保护主义来为自己建造一个温室，让自己永远是朵小花？野花虽然不是土生土长，但却有坚韧的生命力。就算花园城市不欢迎它，它也很容易在其他更大更美丽的花园占有一席之地。何不把心胸放大，让百花齐放，尽收眼帘？   舞台上纵然争艳斗丽，最重要的还是观众要喜欢。演出有水准有观众，戏就能演下去。心有多大，舞台就有多大。只要我们不辞演，舞台肯定容得下你我不同的角色。 《联合晚报》 2008年5月17日 Voting Age Dr Andy Ho’s column “If old enough for NS, why not the vote” in the Straits Times had stirred up quite a fair bit of discussion, both in the mainstream media as well as in the cyberworld.  The issue of lowering the voting age from 21 to 18 is not a new one.  This issue was raised in Parliament last year and was thoroughly explained by then Minister for Law, DPM Jayakumar. A voting age is a minimum age established by law that a person must attain in order to be eligible to vote in a public election.  There is really no magic formula in determining what this voting age will be.  Many countries in the world have established a voting age for various reasons and considerattions, but majority would rationalise that those of an age below the chosen threshold lack the necessary mental capacity to independently decide how to cast a vote. A quick research on the voting ages around the world revealed the following interesting findings: Out of 231 countries in the world with an established voting age, 205 (88.7%) have a voting age of 18 12 (5.2%) have a voting age of 21 4 (1.7%) have a voting age of 20 4 (1.7%) have a voting age of 16 1 has a voting age of 25 Throughout history, most countries started with a higher voting age (generally at 21), which over time the vast majority had moved towards lowering it to the age of 18.  Many who lobbied for the change then argued that the youth (18-20) suffers a double standard of having adult responsibility (and also subject to adult criminal penalties) but not the rights (to vote). In 1971 the United States ratified the 26th Amendment to the Constitution granting the right to vote to 18-20-year-olds. The 26th Amendment was the fastest to be ratified in U.S. history. At the height of the Vietnam War most Americans realized the apparent double standard inherent in sending 18-year-old soldiers to fight and die for their country when they weren’t allowed to vote. The Ministry of Law’s stand on the voting age issue was articulated in the reply to the Andy Ho’s article by Ms S. Radha, Head, Corporate Communications:  “In Singapore, we do not have a single threshold age of majority for all purposes. Adulthood is attained through a gradual process, with a progressive increase in rights and responsibilities. For example, one may drive at 18; but must be 21 to qualify to be a Member of Parliament, or to make a will, to renounce citizenship or to enter certain professions, such as the law, public accountancy or engineering; and be 25 to adopt a child. Voting in elections is a very serious matter. The voting age of 21 means that many voters would have finished national service or even have some working experience. They would then be in a better position to assess the quality of the candidates and to make considered judgments about the national issues at stake in the political debate. It is for these reasons that voting age in Singapore is 21.” Derrick Paulo, Assistant news editor of Today newspaper also wrote an article on this issue. Please refer to the link for a read: http://www.todayonline.com/articles/254167.asp If you ask me if this magic figure is cast in stone? I think not.  Societal norms and expectations change with time and the responsibilites of younger citizens are progressively increasing.  Therefore, the figure may be adjusted eventually, just like the rest of the world did. The big question is : When? Count Our Blessings I was speaking with a very good friend of mine yesterday, who shared that his 8 year-old son lamented that almost an entire first 20 pages of the newspapers yesterday were filled with news of natural disasters and terrorist bombings; pictures of mass devastation, dead bodies of young children and adults and faces of anguish and despair.  “Why is this happening? Why does earthquake occur? What causes a cyclone?”  These are simple yet sophisticated questions from a young, straightforward and innocent child. The misfortune and sufferings of the affected are indescribable. Children left orphaned, women and men widowed, families gone overnight, homes destroyed, survivors struggling to fight hunger, thirst, diseases and the harsh climate, people uncertain about what their future will be.  The sight and thought of these images are just too heart-wrenching.  Looking at the magnitude of the destruction left behind by the Szechuan earthquake and Myanmar cyclone, our worries and troubles seem to be paled and trivialised.  Singaporeans are indeed very fortunate.  We have been living in a prosperous and peaceful environment where many good things are in abundance.  Things run smoothly and Singaporeans have benefited from the efficiency of our system. In fact efficiency has become a norm and should anything happen otherwise, we will start to complain.  Our expectations have risen manyfolds from the days of our forefathers.  We are gradually developing the habit of looking at the negative side of life.  We lay undue emphasis and worries on those exceptional incidents that create inconveniences, discomfort or unhappiness for us.  What’s worse is that we do not stop at this.  We allow these distressing conditions or circumstances to cloud our entire outlook, and to cause us to judge people as well as situations in terms of the isolated, unfavourable things, rather than of the more usual and favourable ones. Undoubtly, life is filled with problems and challenges. I agree, at times, it can be very ruthless. But these distresses and problems are exceptions rather than the norm, as their occurences are insignificant when compared with the countless blessings that are a part of the warp and woof of each day.  But to recognize and appreciate these blessings we must develop an “awareness” of them.  We have to cultivate the habit of seeing that which is the norm, rather than that which is the exception.  We must learn to respond to the flowers and the birds in our garden, rather than to concentrate on the few weeds and insects we do not like. Let’s count our blessings, or at least a few of the thousands of things that life unconditionally gives us, often without efforts on our part – things that mean so much to us that they are priceless.  We should develop this awareness and appreciation of the seemingly “little things in life” and raise the caliber of our life to one of jubilation, confidence and challenge.      More Dangerous Dead than Alive Shark’s fin is a delicacy in many parts of Asia, including China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand.  Demand for the delicacy is rising fast, and at up to $100 a bowl, fisheries around the world are in open competition to supply more than 10,000 tonnes of fins to Hong Kong, China, Taiwan, Japan and Singapore every year.   But British conservation groups warn that the high market value of shark’s fins is fuelling the outlawed practice of “finning”, where sharks are hacked with machetes to remove their fins, often while still alive, before the carcasses are dumped overboard. The bodies, worth less to the market than fins, are discarded because they can contaminate other catches and take up valuable space in the hold.  According to the conservationists, finning is exacerbating a crisis in global shark populations, some of which have already plummeted by more than 90% since the advent of industrialised fishing. Sharks are unusually sensitive to fishing because their populations grow so slowly, a consequence of reaching sexual maturity late and producing few young.   Until the 1980s, the consumption of shark’s fin soup was discouraged in China. However, the Chinese government relaxed its attitude towards what had been seen as an elitist dish, and consumption soared. Mainland China is now the world’s biggest end-market for shark fin: the effect on shark populations has been disastrous.  Anti-fins activists have been lobbying hard to ban “finning” and to discourage the sale of shark’s fin in restaurants, citing the high market demand as one of the main causes of the rapidly dwindling shark population.   Interestingly, an article entitled “Shark’s fin soup – eat without guilt” published in the Straits Times in 2006 by Giam Choo Hoo, painted a different picture. Choo Hoo is a member of the CITES Animal Committee and a member of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons of England.   Here are some excerpts of the article: “The perception that it is common practice to kill sharks for only their fins - and to cut them off whilst the sharks are still alive - is wrong.  No one denies that such cruelty exists. The footage of ‘live-finning’ has been shown all over the world. However, these sensational pictures obscure the fact that many within the industry are against such practices.  The vast majority of fins in the market are taken from sharks after their death. This is the preliminary findings of a review made with the assistance of shark experts, fishermen, captains of big fishing ships, and the representatives of fishery departments, the fishing industry, fish markets and fishing ports.”   “The barbaric practice of ‘live-finning’ is done by some long-line fishing boats, principally targeting tuna. When they get the less valuable sharks in their hooks, they cut the fins and throw the shark into the water to make room for tuna. This deplorable practice is outlawed in many countries.”   ” The anti-fins group has misinterpreted the facts.  By aggressively flooding prints, TV and the Internet media with slective images, they have portrayed an untruth : that all fins are derived from ‘live-finninf’.  Their aim?  they want shark’s fin soup to be shunned.   The truth is this: Sharks will continue to be caught and kileed on wide scale by the more organised and sophisticated fishing nations.  Targeting shark’s fins soup will not stop the the accidental catch.  The fins from these catches will be thrown away or turned into animal feed and fertilisers if shark’s fin soup is shunned.  The practcie to salvage ans sell shark’s fins give value to discards from the fishing industry of the world, benefiting both the poor and the rich countries.”   “I feel that making Asian Chinese, the primary consumers of shark’s fin soup, as the scape goat will not stop the Westerners from continuing the commercial fishing of sharks. Even if we stop eating shark’s fins soup, the killing will not stop. Sharks are caught, killed and eaten daily.”   So, what is so special about the Shark’s fin soup? A bowl of shark’s fin soup can sell for as much as $100. Because of its perceived value, serving shark’s fin soup at private functions is a way of honouring one’s guests and signalling one’s wealth and status. Chinese people frequently express the view that no self-respecting host would ever leave shark’s fin soup off the menu, particularly at weddings and other important social functions, for fear of losing face.  Do you agree to this perception?   This expensive delicacy has been revered in China for centuries. Mainly used in such exquisite dishes such as shark’s fin soup and shark’s fin omelette, shark’s fin is prized for its slippery and glutinous texture that results in a thickened soup without the use of cornstarch, similarly to bird’s nest, another Chinese top delicacy. Touted as a “tonic food” and an “aphrodisiac”, the Chinese believes shark’s fin strengthens the internal organs and retard aging.   On the contrary, nutritionist had analysed the nutritional value of shark’s fin and found it to be of little nutritional value.  Strictly speaking, shark’s fin is actually the cartilage, the flexible soft tissue of the fin. The top or dorsal fin has the highest quality and costliest, followed by the tail fin and lastly the side or pectoral fins. Basically, shark’s fin is graded by its length - the longer the cartilage, the better the quality and can range from an inch to more than a foot long. While shark’s fin is tasteless, some believe it has an amazing ability to bring out and enhance the flavour of other foods cooked with it.   However, laboratory tests in Hong Kong and Thailand have uncovered levels of mercury in some shark’s fins that far exceeded recommended safe levels.  Therefore, when consumed in excessive amounts, mercury (a neurotoxin) can cause extensive damage to the nervous system and to the fetuses, in the case of pregnant women.   Some say, “Sharks are more dangerous dead than alive?”  How ironical… Are we prepared to face a major disaster? Singaporeans have enjoyed 4 decades of peace and harmony.  Our honest and incorruptible government, together with the diligence and adaptability of our people, has propelled Singapore from a third world to a first world nation.  Singapore is also blessed with a sheltered geographical locality, relatively free from any major natural disasters.  Many younger Singaporeans have never faced any major disaster or social unrests.  The most recent event that had put Singaporeans to the test of national and psychological resilience was the SARS in 2003.  Even then, we did encounter some unhappy incidents, which had brought out the “ugly” side of human nature.    The recent cyclone in Myanmar has brought about a possible death toll of about 100,000 to the already impoverished nation.  Other major catastrophes in recent times included the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami (death toll about 300,000), 2005 Kashmir earthquake (death toll approx 87,000) and the 1999 Vargas mudslide in Venezuela (death toll estimated at 20,000). The World has changed after the September 11 terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in New York.  3000 innocent lives were lost.  The event also posed tremendous challenges to the American social resilience as evidenced by the countless vengeance attacks on the affected races.  The United Kingdom was not spared either.  The 2005 London bombings killed 52 commuters, injuring 700 others and caused disruption to the city’s transport system (severely for the first day) and the country’s mobile telecommunications. The series of suicide-bomb explosions constituted the largest and deadliest terrorist attack on London in its history.    Singapore is also a prime target for the terrorists’ clandestine activities.  An attack on Singapore soil with significant casualties is possible.  Singaporeans must continue to be vigilant and resolved to prevent the terrorist from being successful in doing harm to us.  The government, including key agencies such as the ISD and the SPF, will continue to safeguard our national security and to prevent any terrorist network from operating within our soil.  However, each and everyone of us must play our part too. Many community efforts, such as the Community Engagement Programme (CEP), Emergency Preparedness (EP), National Education (NE) and the IRCC (Inter-Racial Confidence Circle ), also serve to build national resilience, trust and understanding between different races and religious groups.  Many ministries are also preparing themselves to handle any crises or emergencies.   Our racial and religious harmony must never be taken for granted.  Many initiatives have been put in place to ensure that Singaporeans continue to work, live and play as one people.  However, should a major calamity or a terrorist attack happen, can Singaporeans stand up to the test?  I certainly hope so…           Belt up, Children The seat belt laws have been in effect since 1993. Vehicles registered on or after 1 Jan 93 must have rear seat belts in addition to the front seat belts.  All occupants of a car must wear a seat belt. However, there is an exception - If the number of occupants exceeds the number of seat belts in the car, the additional occupants can sit in the car without wearing a seatbelt.  Currently, this rule does not apply to school buses and public transportation, other than taxis. Even with the seat belt laws, we do, very often, read about car accidents resulting in casualties because passengers flout the rule and omitted fastening the seat belts, the very gadget meant to possibly save precious lives in such situations.  To ensure compliance to the rule, Traffic Police’s focus has been more on educating the public on how seat belts save lives along with selective enforcement. In addition, EMAS signs like ‘Child Seats save lives’ and ‘belt up for a safe trip’ on the expressways serve as gentle reminders to motorists to belt up.  The debate on compulsory seat belts on school buses started way back in 2005 during the COS debate in Parliament.  MPs then raised the issue on having seat belts on school buses.  This was an excerpt from then Minister for Transport’s reply in 2005:  “In reviewing the need for seat belts, LTA has to balance a range of factors such as effectiveness, operational impact, and the cost of implementation.  LTA already has in place many measures to improve the safety of school buses. For example, they are required to undergo regular compulsory inspections to ensure roadworthiness and are subjected to a speed limit of 60km/h.  LTA also requires school buses carrying more than 30 children to have a licensed attendant to look after the children. An attendant is also compulsory for buses carrying kindergarten-level children.  These safety measures have resulted in a consistently low accident rate for school buses. They also help reduce the severity of injury in the event of accidents. Nonetheless, LTA will continue to review and introduce additional safety measures that are shown to be useful and cost-effective.  Making seat belts compulsory will impose substantial costs on school bus operators and users. Retrofitting seat belts and their anchorages will require the seats and their supports to be modified and this will reduce seating capacity. Based on the estimates by the bus operators, having seat belts can increase the school bus fares by as much as 40%. Parents are very concerned about how much they have to pay for the school bus fares. And I think an increase of 40% would be something which most parents would be alarmed about. However, if the schools prefer the buses serving them to have seat belts attached, LTA would be happy to agree to it. LTA will continue to work closely with the Traffic Police, the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the school bus associations to ensure that school buses continue to be safe for our school children.” However, with the recent spate of school bus accidents and the unfortunate and sad loss of little Russell, is it time to review the laws on seat belts for school buses to prevent similar occurence?  What about other public transportations like buses and MRTs? Foreign Workers in Singapore Foreign workers constitute about a quarter of the total labour force in Singapore, which is probably one of the highest in terms of proportion in Asia.  Foreign workers in Singapore has been closely associated with our economic development, and the demand has progressively grown with increased industrialisation and globalisation. In Singapore, foreign workers can be categorised into semi-skilled / unskilled and professionals.  The former work mainly in the manufacturing, construction and domestic services sectors. The majority of them come from countries such as India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Phillipines, Thailand and China. The latter are foreigners with professional qualifications working at the higher end of Singapore’s economy. Of the 236,600 new jobs created last year, 144,500 (or 61%) went to foreigners.  Some Singaporeans have commented that the presence of foreign workers have raised competition in the job market and deprived them of better paying jobs.  However, if we look at it objectively, amidst this booming economy with a tight labour market, Singaporeans alone will not be able to meet the high manpower demand.  In addition, there are many unskilled / low-skilled jobs where Singaporeans are unwilling to take up.  If we adopt a “protectionist” mindset and forbid companies to hire foreigners, we may not be able to attract big companies and MNCs to invest and set base in Singapore.  This in turn will result in less job opportunities for our own Singaporeans. Quoting what PM Lee said in his May Day Rally this year: “It’s because we have the foreign workers here, that’s why our economy has grown, that’s why the employers, …companies are here, and that’s why Singaporeans have jobs. You send away the foreign workers,… a few hundred thousand (of them), Singaporeans (won’t) go into those jobs, the companies will close or leave. I think the Singaporeans unemployment will go up, and hardship will go up”. This is fundamental and many countries are vying and competing for top talents to contribute to their economic developments. Interestingly but expectedly, in the Worker’s Party (WP) May Day message, they think otherwise and questioned the benefit of the surge in jobs created as a result of this foreign worker policy.  Is the WP fair in making this statement?  Mr Seng Han Thong, Assistant Secretary-General of NTUC even challenged Mr Low to lead by example by hiring only Singaporeans in Hougang Town Council to prove that what they have advocated is feasible and the right way forward.   Will the WP ”match their words with deeds” ?  Let’s wait and see… HIV/AIDS - The Modern Pandemic HIV/AIDS is presently a pandemic, with an estimated 33 million people infected worldwide, and having claimed about 2.1 million lives so far.  It was reported in the papers today that the number of new cases of HIV infection in Singapore last year hit a record high of 422, up from the previous year’s 357 cases.  Alarmingly, 9 youths between the ages of 10-19 were diagnosed as HIV positive last year, the most ever in a single year according to records dating back in 1985. HIV/AIDS had in the past, been considered a disease of homosexuals, affecting mainly men who had sex with men (MSM).  However, this is no longer the case as nearly two-thirds of newly diagnosed cases through sexual transmission involved heterosexual sex. Tough actions to curb the spread of the disease are needed to prevent further escalation in Singapore.  This would involve educating the public about the disease and its prevention, as well as enacting laws to protect the innocent and to encourage responsible sexual behaviours. The recent amended Infectious Diseases Act shifts greater responsibility to individuals whose sexual behanviour puts their spouses and partners at risk of contracting the disease.  The Act requires a person who has reason to believe that he has, or has been exposed to a significant risk of contracting HIV/AIDS to take reasonable precautions to protect his sexual partner, such as by using the condoms. Alternatively, the person can go for a HIV test to confirm that he is HIV negative.  Otherwise, he must inform his partner of the risk of contracting HIV from him, leaving the partner to voluntariliy accept the risk. Whilst the medical researchers  around the world are racing against time to produce a vaccine against HIV/AIDS, people must, meanwhile, do our part by exercising personal responsibility and social ethics to help curb the progressive spread of this incurable disease. Are the statistics on the prevalence of HIV/AIDS accurate? My guess is that it is only the tip of the iceberg… Dialect Culture On Monday, Today newspaper followed up on one of my speeches during Budget Debate (http://www.todayonline.com/articles/249473.asp). The reporter unfortunately did not quote me accurately as I have not actually advocated for the teaching of the dialect languages in school.  On yesterday’s Live 93.8FM Talkback programme which picked this topic for discussion, one caller suggested having a Cultural Studies subject instead.  Indeed, that is exactly my point.  We have the fortune to have the colours and richness of many different races and cultures around us, and we should tap on it.  This subject should include the different cultures, be taught in English and open to all students. I cannot claim to know a lot about other cultures, neither am I an expert on my own Chinese culture, but I know that we will be missing a huge chunk if we do not include the dialect cultures. Some have suggested that this could be left to the parents, Chinese clans or individual schools to offer as elective programmes.  An example quoted in the Today article was Dunman High which offers a module “Pop Song Culture” teaching students about dialect pop songs of the 70’s and 80’s, and dialect food cultures.  Whileit is commendable Dunman High has taken the initiative to do so, its resources are limited compared to MOE’s if we want to be quite comprehensive on the coverage.  Ditto the clans and parents which would only more familiar with their respective dialects and cultures.  In my mind, quite a lot of research would have to be done to extract and document (in an interesting way) the relevant details of: the different ways of greetings for uncles, aunties, cousins etc (which is different for paternal and maternal sides) differences between the music, costumes and make-up of different dialect Chinese opera the history, legends and moral values behind certain popular Chinese opera lyrics eg Cantonese opera piece Di Nu Hua. various dialect dishes: Teochew porridge, Hokkien mee, Hainanese chicken rice etc history behind Tew Chew Street, Canton Street, Hokkien Street etc wedding custom practices of the different dialect groups I really think these are interesting and relevant knowledge that we can apply in our daily lives.  It is a pity if such information is limited to the archives and museums.  The schools have a much wider and systematic reach to our younger generation.  And we should make an effort now before we have no one left in Singapore who knows the dialects and the cultures.  It will be very sad if my grandchildren do not know that they are Teochews, or thought that Teochews are hawkers selling Teochew porridge! Below is the speech I made in parliament.  It is in Mandarin but for those who do not read the language, I have covered all the main points above. 新加坡是个多元种族的社会。我建议教育部编写新教材，来增进大家对各种族的兴趣、认识和了解。  取个例子，一种米养百种人。我们可以通过马来族的椰浆饭、印度同胞的Nasi Bryani、华人的扬洲炒饭让学生接触不同种族的饮食文化。 华族文化还可以更广泛地从各种方言籍贯取材。我们或许不必要求学生把方言当一种语言,掌握说听读写,但他们至少可以学习辈份称呼的不同叫法，好像叔叔伯伯、姑姑阿姨，而不是一口uncle, auntie就可以随便交代整个家族。  地方戏曲也可以成为教材。潮剧和福建戏的龙套戏服、化妆发饰、配乐伴奏的区别在哪里？我们甚至可以细读粤剧《帝女花》的唱词，从中还能知道一点历史。富有籍贯色彩的还有婚礼习俗、歌谣俗话、道路街名，例如潮洲街、福建街、广东街。希望我们的下一代不会以为福建人就是炒福建虾面的小贩、卖鸡饭的就叫海南人。  教材不需要太深入，点到为止，就可以让内容生动活泼起来，激发和培养我们对自己种族和其他同胞的兴趣，丰富大家对多元社会的认识，促进种族之间的和睦共处。               Accountability, Responsibility & Culpability The escape of JI terrorist, Mas Selamat Kastari, was a very unfortunate incident. It was one good wake-up call for the Whitley Road Detention Centre (WRDC) administration, but also a good lesson for all, those directly or indirectly involved in this incident. Immediately after the news of the escape was made known to the public, DPM Wong, who is also the Minister for Home Affairs, made a public apology to Singaporeans at parliament for the slip up.  There was never an indication that the government will shirk its responsibility and right from the very beginning, DPM Wong had promised to give a full account of what happened.  And he did. There has been a wide array of talks and calls for accountability - who is to be blamed; whose heads should roll; and that the government must be held responsible for the incident.  Of course, this would have to be addressed, but the most important priority immediately after the incident, would be to search and apprehend the fugitive.  It was also imperative to determine the reasons or laspes that led to the escape, so that similar incident will not happen in the future.  For this, a COI was formed to establish the facts and to recommend changes to make the system more robust.  There were, of course, cynics who commented on the composition of the COI and doubted the impartiality of the members.  However, looking at the credentials of the COI, these are tested and proven characters with high integrity and capability.  There should never be a doubt that a thorough and conclusive investigation be done and a proper account put forward to Singaporeans. And they did.  Moreover, the COI involved the ISD and the WRDC where very sensitive information and processes are involved in the gathering of intelligence for the fight against the terrorist networks.  Such details are highly sensitive and any inadvertent leak or breach may compromise our national security with catastrophic consequence. PM Lee, in his ministerial statement, has put in perspective the overall approach on government’s accountability and responsibility in handling situations and major lapses, such as the Mas Selamat incident.  To me, this is very reassuring, as it clearly illustrates the level-headedness and even-handedness in meting out punishment for any wrong-doing or laspes in duties.  We should not propagate a culture of witch hunting and “ceremonial change of guards”, as PM aptly puts it, whenever a problem occurs.   But rather, we must “get to the root of the matter and solve it properly”, so that we learn from our mistakes and not repeat it again.  As for punishments, we must look at each incident in perspective, determine who is culpable and whether there is any negligence or perfidy.  A line has to be drawn in determining culpability.  It cannot and should not be the case where every level in the chain of command, up the highest level, be punished for any laspe occuring at the execution level. The Mas Selamat case is a good example.  There are existing SOPs (such as maintaining line of sight, one-for-one exchange for the detainee’s attire etc) whereby the officers-in-charge are supposed to adhere to, but unfortunately, did not.  Do we expect the minister to go personally to WRDC regularly to ensure that such SOPs are followed? Coming from an aviation background, I have read about air crashes and the accident analyses of their causation and contributing factors.  Broadly, they can be categorised into mechanical and human factors.  And not surprisingly, majority of the accidents were due to human factors. Even then, accidents happened because of systemic failures /  weaknesses or just plain simple bad judgement on the part of the pilots.  What I am trying to say is that whenever human is involved in the equation of things, there is always a possibility of human error.  However, knowing that such a potential weak link exists, checks and balances are put in place to minimise errors from cropping up.  Even then, this will not be 100% fail-proof.  The MHA and ISD have taken appropriate remedial and disciplinary actions for this incident.  Based on the facts, a line has to be drawn to determine who are the people culpable for the lapses.  Yes, the Minister is ultimately responsible for his ministry’s policies and operations, which was why a COI was necessary to account for the lapses and to be answerable to the public.  Just like the PM is accountable for his cabinet ministers.  But, does that mean that the minister is culpable for all the mistakes that his subordinate commits? This cannot be.  Even in the corporate world, I seriously doubt the CEOs will and should step down whenever any of his subordinate makes a blunder.  Everything must be seen in perspective.  Even the opposition leader, Mr Low Thia Khiang, when asked point blank by PM whether DPM Wong should be held culpable and resign because of this incident, his rational mind prevail and did not say yes. The Mas Selamat episode was a very unfortunate incident.  It should not have happened, but it did.  The “verdict” is out.  Much has been said.  Remedial actions have been put in place and disciplinary actions meted out.  Many lessons can be learnt from this incident, and hopefully, those involved will be more resilient and resolved in ensuring that such incidents do not happen again. EQ vs IQ Which is more important in success or failure in life? EQ or Emotional Quotient is the measure of one’s ability or skill to perceive, assess and manage the emotions of one’s self, of others, and of groups, and then to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions. IQ or Intelligence Quotient is basically a measurement of one’s cognitive skills to learn, to understand and to apply the knowledge logically and analytically towards a situation. This measure of intelligence can be quantified by taking an IQ test.  An IQ test measures different types of abilities, namely, verbal, memory, mathematical, spatial, and reasoning. This test has a preset standard based on a representative group of the population. In layman’s language, IQ gets you through your education whereas EQ gets you through your life.  Do you agree on this simplistic generalisation? The debate about the validity and importance of IQ and EQ continues in professional circles and testing groups.  Besides looking at academic qualifications, many companies now screen any potential employees using some form of EQ test. In the search for good leaders, which quality is of greater importance?  Interestingly, researches have shown that emotional intelligence may actually be significantly more important than cognitive ability and technical expertise combined.  In fact, some studies indicate that EQ is more than twice as important as standard IQ abilities.  Further, evidence increasingly shows that the higher one goes in an organization, the more important EQ can be. For those in leadership positions, emotional intelligence skills account for close to 90 percent of what distinguishes outstanding leaders from those judged as average. Is it, therefore, necessary to impose some form of EQ tests, just like what most big corporations do, on potential political candidates? 自己人 During my Meet People Sessions, I see many residents who have either fallen out with their families and needed a place to stay, or those whose family members cannot/do not want to help with their financial difficulties.  There are a few elderly people whose children have gone overseas and ‘conveniently’ lost contact with their parents. This prompted me to write in Lianhe Wanbao last Sat about the thinning relationships among family members and relatives nowadays.  Seriously I hope this is just a skewed reality that I am seeing and that there is still care and concern in our society. 自己人   Q 说儿子要她搬，因为媳妇不喜欢她。 U的姐姐要把屋子卖掉，并把他赶走。 E没钱还水电费，虽然四个子女已经长大成人，但是都无法给他家用。   每个星期五，都会有几个居民碰到类似问题找我帮忙。这些案例都有一个共同点：虽然有家人，却不能靠他们。   Q的儿子好象忘了，母亲是自己的，一辈子就只有一个。 U 的姐姐可听说过“本是同根生”这句话？ E可以养大四个孩子，现在四个子女却不能奉养一个老人家？   从前，家庭成员比较多，可以同住在一个屋檐下，一起吃大锅饭。相信也有婆媳不和、兄弟姐妹纠纷等问题。但是大家就算无法和睦相处，也尽量相敬如宾，至少彼此容忍让步，最重要是可以互相照应。血浓于水，家人万一有困难，一定挺身而出。   现今的社会，大多数是小康之家，人人似乎都比较珍惜自己的空间。一不高兴就翻脸闹不和，不然就是自扫门前雪，结果亲情变得淡如水，更不用说雪中送碳。   家家有本难念的经。有些事情肯定会麻烦一些，大家得辛苦一点。怎么说，毕竟是自己人嘛。   如果自己人都置之不理，把责任和义务推给别人、丢给政府，难道这就合情合理？   《联合晚报》 2008年4月12日             Ultimate Price of Rice - War? I read with deep trepidation the report from IMF that the continuing rise in food prices could possibly result in the risk of war.  “Food prices, if they go on like they are doing today … the consequences will be terrible,” International Monetary Fund managing director Dominque Strauss-Kahn said. “Hundreds of thousands of people will be starving … (leading) to disruption of the economic environment.”  “As we know, learning from the past, those kind of questions sometimes end in war,” he said. If the world wanted to avoid “these terrible consequences,” then rising prices had to be tackled. Skyrocketing prices on rice, wheat, corn and other staple foods like milk is a cause for concern. This is not affecting Singapore alone, as it is a global phenomenon. Unfortunately, developing nations are particularly affected, where the poor has to spend the bulk of their meagre income on the bare necessities for survival.  In recent months, rising food costs have lead to social unrest in several countries such as Haiti and Egypt. Thirty-seven countries currently face food crises, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization. In Singapore, the government is doing all it can to alleviate the hardships faced by low and middle income families due to the rising cost of living.  The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has also taken measures to curb rising pressure on consumer prices.  The central bank announced recently that it will allow the Singapore dollar to strengthen at a slightly faster pace, as inflation may rise faster than previously predicted.  This would help mitigate to a certain extent, as Singapore imports many of its basic necessities, including food products. In addition, NTUC has also announced recently a $4 million worth of assistance for its 80,000 low-wage workers under the new discount voucher scheme.  Many VWOs, such as the Singapore Buddhist Lodge, YWCA and Apex Club of Singapore etc, are also doing their part by distributing free meals to needy Singaporeans.  The Grassroots organisations are also stepping up their assistance to their needy constituents via the Comcare fund. The government will continue to monitor the situation very closely.  Appropriate assistance and measures will be introduced to help those in need.  Singaporeans must also do their part in exercising financial prudence in their expenditure.  With the government, working in concert with its partners and fellow Singaporeans, we will be in a better and stronger position to tackle this trying situation.  New Media - A Formidable Political Dimension? The diabolic aftermath in Malaysia’s recent general election have raised a flurry of questions on the role of new media and the internet in politics.  The sharing of information has become so effortless and news can be disseminated to many netizens worldwide just with a touch of a button. Our neighbour has learnt a hard lesson and, as a spinal response, has now mandated that youth candidates contesting some posts in Malaysia’s ruling party will be required to set up blogs.  This was a surprising turnaround for the governing politicians who until recently did not think much of political blogging.  According to the ST report, the UMNO youth secretary-general commented that “all candidates must have blogs”. ” If not, they are not qualified to be leaders.”  Even UMNO youth deputy chief Khairy Jamaluddin, who once compared bloggers to monkeys living by the law of the jungle, has a blog now. There is no doubt that the new media landscape is evolving in cyber-quick time.  PM Lee, in his keynote address at the LSE Asia forum, cited the free flow of information on the internet as providing one of the challenges that a society faces in this knowledge age.  People are hungry not only for information, but also expect the flow of information to be “instantaneous” and updated real-time.   Will mainstream media, therefore, become irrelevant and unimportant? However, there is also the common perception that the Malaysian blogosphere as having a more substantial number of credible, highly motivated writers, while Singapore only has a handful of prominent political bloggers.  As Zheng Xi of the TOC aptly sums it, ” The blogosphere in both countries are worlds apart.  By comparison, we are amateurs.” Do you agree with this observation? Indisputably, the new media is increasingly becoming more important as an avenue for politicians to reach out to the people.  Constructive cyber-comments are extremely helpful and the interactions between politicians and netizens would facilitate effective and informative 2-way communication.  Perfect Leaders - Nature or Nurture? What exactly are the desired qualities of a perfect or ideal leader?  Are good leaders borned or are they groomed to possess the necessary traits to lead effectively? What is more important - intelligent quotient (IQ) or emotional quotient (EQ)? Are grades really that critical in identifying potential leaders? PM Lee in today’s ST interview, gave his take on the qualities the PAP government is looking for.  He said, ” Obviously, grades cannot be the sole basis for choosing leaders.” Other attributes and values include “proven ability, judgement, integrity, commitment to serve, empathy for Singaporeans, as well as emotional quotient, or EQ.” “Because being a leader is such a demanding job. Leaders have to think critically and creatively, solve problems and master the issues they are responsible for.” “Also, younger, better educated Singaporeans rightly expect more of their leaders.  They want their political leaders to be more than just well meaning, decent persons, but persons who are also more capable than others, and who can get things done better than others.”    In my opinion, there are no perfect leaders. And as such, both nature and nurture do play a part in producing leaders. That is why good leaders are always trying to improve themselves through self-study, training, education, mentorship, making mistakes (not deliberately, of course) and then learning from them, etc.  In addition to IQ and EQ, good leaders should also possess: A vision of the future (where are we going). The ability to inspire followers to achieve that vision The desire to self-improve for themselves and their followers, and Empowering their followers to get things done ie. delegate responsibilities through empowerment  The following quote aptly sums up what good leadership entails: ” I lead best when I help others to go where we have decided to go. I lead best when I help others to use themselves creatively.  I lead best when I forgot about myself as leader and focus on my group…their needs and their goals.  To lead is to serve…to give…to achieve together.”   Building Social Cohesion, Respecting Diversity During a recent Town Day of Marine Parade GRC, I spoke about building social cohesion and respecting diversity as we move forward in pursuit of greater progress in the future.  Following my speech, many people approached me to discuss further about this issue and how we as Singaporeans and residents of Singapore can work together to further enhance this city-state of ours.  I would like to share my thoughts with you and perhaps listen to your views regarding the matter.  These thoughts were mentioned in my speech to the residents who attended the Town Day.    As Singapore becomes more globalised and cosmopolitan, the shape and composition of our society also changes. As such, residents in Singapore not only comprise Chinese, Malays, Indians and the other minority racial groups but we also have amongst us a more cosmopolitan mix of residents hailing from all over the world.  During my block visits and grassroots events, I often meet residents from other countries which we do not normally encounter in our constituency many years ago. These are our new citizens, permanent residents (PR) and foreigners who are here to work and study. They now constitute the social fabric of the cosmopolitan Singapore society.  On the day of the event, the audiences were entertained by the Diversity Parade and performances.  This was the part of the event that caught the attention of the people.  Many of my residents mentioned that they were touched and felt emotionally attached to the performances.  This is because, the composition of people that made up the Diversity Parade and performances was meant to represent the social fabric of Singapore today. They were made up of the young and old, old and new Singaporeans, permanent residents and foreigners. Together, they form the diverse talents and needs of Singapore today.  Kaki Bukit Division represents a part of Singapore where these diverse groups of people live, work and play.  As we progress together, it is important that we create platforms to maximise the potential of these people so that together as a society we could contribute towards the social, economical and political development of Singapore.   A more cosmopolitan mix of residents living in Singapore implies a greater need for a more concerted effort in integrating the different communities. This integration should however be based on the inculcation and demonstration of our shared values that have been weaved to hold us together throughout our nation building process.  I believe that the internalisation of our shared values such as respect and harmony would play an important role in fostering understanding and promoting harmonious relationships among the different communities living in our city-state.   Within Kaki Bukit Division, Marine Parade GRC, my grassroots leaders and I are continuously seeking opportunities to create platforms to enhance the cohesions between the young and old, as well as the less well-off and more successful Singaporeans. Schools within the vicinity of Kaki Bukit Division are supporting our efforts in this endeavour. Through their Community Involvement Programme, students have been reaching out to the elderly and the needy within our constituency. During the recent Youth Dialogues with students from schools within and nearby the Kaki Bukit Division, we received a strong, unanimous and concerted message from our students calling for them to be more involved in the community and the desire to be more active citizens.  I am most pleased and heartened to note the ‘big heart’ of our compassionate youngsters to wanting to contribute deeply towards society.  Besides the youths, we also have successful Singaporeans who have come forward to help the needy.  Many of these grassroots leaders and friends not only contribute their time to society, but also source for funds, sometimes from their own to help society. This is a fine example of the care and compassionate attributes that our society possesses and I sincerely hope that we can pass this on to our future generation.  The questions which come to my mind are: 1)    Are our future generations or youths able to continue this good work of our predecessors and seniors?  I feel that we should provide more platforms and opportunities for the young to contribute to society wherever and whenever they can.  What do you think and how can we do this? 2)    What can we do together to further enhance social cohesion and respect diversity among Singaporeans and residents of our-city state?   “Foreign Talent” as PM The recent cabinet reshuffle has cast widespread media interest on Singapore’s search for the next generation of leaders to lead Singapore into the future.  Many senior politicians as well as political analysts have applauded and supported the latest changes as progressive and cautious. PM Lee in his exclusive interview with ST and Zaobao has given us an insight into his thoughts and rationale for the changes.  It is clear that getting the right people into the government and searching for his potential successors are of upmost priority and urgency in his mind.  In Singapore, the quest for honest and capable leaders has become so ingrained into the system, almost becoming like a “obsession”.  This is extremely important to safeguard the interest and successes Singapore has achieved thus far. Interestingly, in today’s TODAY newspaper, there was a discussion on the possibility of “foreign talent” PM.  There was also a suggestion by Prof Mehta that the ban on dual citizenship be lifted so as to  “broaden the pool of potential political leaders”.  Dr Bilveer Singh, NUS, also remarked that ” Prime Ministership is about talent and spirit.  A foreigner may be talented but I doubt he can be Singaporean enough.  A state is not a MNC.” Are Singaporeans ready to accept our political leaders who are Singaporeans but also hold foreign passports?  Are we able to accept our future PM to be a “foreign talent”? Mas Selamat memorabilia While the whole Singapore is on a massive manhunt for fugitive Mas Selamat, some people have taken it on in a different spin, by producing and selling memorabilia with Mas’ face on mugs, T-shirts, caps, bags etc. Some people have criticised it as distasteful, insensitive, making a joke of a serious matter and cashing in on a national threat.  Others thought it is creative, entrepreneurial and helps to heighten awareness of the search. Both have its valid points and I think it is good that people are expressing their views and making their stands.  Instead of dividing the society, I think this will lead to better understanding of an alternative view and the acceptance and appreciation of a diversity of opinions among people.  This is all part of a more involved civic society.  I understand that there are two groups of young students who have gone into the memorabilia business.  I am sure they will learn a lot from this episode, and it is not just about business (apparently they are making good sales).  They will learn about coping with the reaction to their actions, and either stand firm with their conviction or decide to take a different tack.  Whichever way, I am sure they will become wiser and more street-smart. It is all part of growing up and personal development.