The Govt cannot be sued?

In the latest incidents when two NSmen were killed while on training, someone pointed out that Ng Eng Hen, Defence Minister, said that the SAF/Mindef or the Govt cannot be sued for such accidents. In these two cases, both victims lost their lives because of breaches in safety procedures, which meant the incidents were more than just accidents. There were negligent or misconduct or serious violations of protocols involved. Is it therefore true that the Govt/Mindef/SAF cannot be sued for such incidents when they are more than accidents? I also read that though the officers involved could be court martialed, the police are also investigating and may commence to prosecute the officers involved. Does this mean that only the officers can be sued but not the organisation or Mindef/Govt? Aren’t the officers appointed by Mindef/Govt and the latter should be ultimately responsible for the officers’ conduct or wrongdoings? If Mindef/Govt is not responsible, does it mean that if the officers were found guilty, it is only between the officers and the victims to settle their grievance and compensation? Also, the NSmen are conscripted by law, by Mindef/Govt for national service and their welfare and well being must be the responsibility of Mindef/Govt? I think there must be a miscommunication or misquote of what Eng Hen had said. It is, from a layman’s understanding, that Mindef/Govt must be ultimately responsible for what happened to NSmen under its authority and administration. And that the people could seek redress and justice from the Govt in cases of injury or death and compensation.. It is frightening to know, if it is true, that Mindef/Govt is not responsible for the death of NSmen in active service. Where is the responsibility, who is responsible and where should the buck stop? Anyone can enlighten on the legal responsibility of Mindef/Govt when NSmen are injured or killed in active service? Responsibility and accountability are key to the actions and performance of an organisation. If an organisation is not accountable for any mishap or wrongdoing, you can expect that only lip service would be rendered at best. Only when someone’s head is on the chopping block would real actions be taken to be tip top and zero tolerance for accidents and negligence or failure to perform.

Unnecessary death of NSmen

In Parliament yesterday, Eng Hen spoke about the death of two NSmen while under training. Pte Dominique Lee died from inhaling smokes from smoke grenades. Third Sergeant Tan Mou Sheng was pinned down by a jeep. Both accidents were unnecessary and caused by lapses in safety procedures. “Any commander who ignores safety regulations, whether wilfully or negligently, puts his soldiers at risk and is not fit for command,” said Dr Ng. “These two deaths could have been avoided if safety instructions had been followed”. Is that all Eng Hen could say? How much compensation is enough to the parents of these young NSmen for the loss and grief of their precious sons? No amount is enough for such unnecessary death. Mindef was not born yesterday. The SAF is a highly professional army with more than 50 years of history and training accidents to remind and caution every officer in the field not to make silly mistakes. And silly mistakes are still being made with the lost of lives. Unbelieveable! Unacceptable. What is in it for the NSmen to risk their lives for? Relating the account of Pte Lee's mother, Felicia Seah, when the death was told to her was heart wrenching. The Minister should be on his knees to beg for forgiveness. This is not a case of sorry not enough. Explanation also not enough.

What a joke?

Heard from a couple of young and highly qualified overseas Sinkies about their experience with housing and quality of life. They left because they were not allowed to buy direct from HDB and the alternative was to cough up a million or so to buy private properties. Doing so would mean an empty bank account. They could act stupid and pay double for a resale HDB flat in the open market. Some people think these young professionals got no brain and would allow themselves to be armed twisted to pay double for some lousy HDB flats while others are paying half the price from HDB. Only immobile and daft Sinkies without the choice would just pay up. They did the wisest thing, scoot to Europe and the USA, got themselves better paying jobs and cheaper housing and cost of living. The joke, delegations of officials have been travelling to these cities to invite them to return to Sin. After chasing them away with a system that is designed to rob them, they are going back out there to coax them to return to be conned? What would these discriminated Sinkies say or do? Their answer is simply, go and catch spiders, oops, catch FTs from the third world countries. They can forget about them coming home. For what, to support the private property market with a million or two? And to continue to be activated for in camp training, travel by public transport or pay up for COEs? What kind of quality of life awaiting them when every cent they earned has been carefully programmed to go to housing, cars, medical and bringing up children? No, this is no joke. This is the new reality.

Mean Testing is history? Boh liao!

Can anyone confirm that mean testing for hospital admission has been scrapped? This outrageous policy was so unsound and ethically unacceptable that it was a grievance from the start. It could have continued as a tough policy and nothing can be done about it for as long as someone tried the tough act and refused to budge. Now, has anyone really budged and got it removed? And if so, shouldn’t it be announced so that the people can be at ease during admission and have a freer choice as to how much money they are willing to pay? It is unacceptable that such a high profile policy that was implemented with so much fanfare but evicted without notice. My bet is that it is still in force, at least until an official statement is made on this. The grapevine and gossips that it is no longer in practice are not reliable. And getting this monster out of the way is not enough. With hospital bills that can bankrupt any average Sinkie, more must be done to bring down hospitalization cost, provide more C ward beds, more generic medicine that do not cost a bomb. The rich can continue to opt for their special branded or high end medicine and pay for it. Would someone in the ministry or hospital care to clarify that this mean thing has left us for good?

Wow, my article in TOC

For the first time, my article finally appeared in TOC. I regard this as an honour. Though my articles have been frequently appearing in other sites like TRE and Singapore Daily and some others, never has it appeared in TOC to my recollection. TOC must have a set of very stringent rules for articles to be reposted there next to the main media. I swear none of my articles will find it fit to appear in the main media except for those when I was writing for the New Paper. Instant citizen, instant wealth’ has seen the light in TOC. It must be a damn interesting article, the best of all my articles. One regret, they did not acknowledge me as the author though my name was written clearly below my article reposted in TRE. TOC acknowledged the article was first posted in TRE. (TOC thanks TR Emeritus for allowing to republish the article. It first appeared here.) Anyway, I am high over the moon now that my article finally appeared in TOC. Thank you TOC for the great honour. TOC is welcomed to publish my articles anytime. I am going to frame this article.

My mother very powerful

The ‘My parents very important people’ reminds me of the episode of ‘My mother very powerful’ that happened a few months back. It was a boxing round between the MOE and the mother of the boy whose hair was cut by his teacher. It was actually a petty little disagreement that should be put to an end quickly. The whole episode was like the history of Singapore, that grew from a third world country with absolute power in the authority to affluence and the growth of individual or personal rights that is beginning to see how the masses are unable to cope with the rights handed to them. With rights, a little affluence, a little education, the trend is towards abusing this right and power. The schools and authority have been used to exercising their rights in the education system. The abuses of the past are relatively much lesser today as the teachers themselves too are embracing the new liberty and applying lesser oppressive methods in disciplining school children. There will still be the few nut heads that would abuse their position of authority just like those abusers of maids and workers. People with such mentality should not be in the teaching vocation. On the other extremes, the parents should know that the school and the education system have its own regulations and acceptable norms of behavior. Going to school is an implied acceptance to follow the rules and regulations of the schools unless they are oppressive and unreasonable. The MOE should be very clear on what is allowable and what is not. These should be defined clearly and observed by its staff and convey to the parents. The parents and their children should accept and abide by these rules. If the parents and their children cannot accept the rules, simply just quit the schools. The principles and teachers need not have to resort to violence and manhandling of children, which in most cases are naïve, immature and innocence. Talk to the parents about the problems and let the parents decide if they want the child to remain in the school or to find a more suitable school somewhere else. What is the problem? What is so difficult? Teachers no need to pull their hair or get emotionally upset. No need to abuse their authority as guardians of the school children. Parents need not threaten to sue teachers. And if they do, the MOE should put all their resources behind the teachers should there be such a threat to take them to court. But make sure that no teachers abused their authority or crossed the line. Some will of course, as no one knows how sick a normal looking person is until he exposes him/herself. Teachers, lawyers, doctors, all can be sick but waiting for the right moment to show their true selves. What is troubling are the values the children will be imbued with, thinking that they are somebody and can get away with anything they want, because their parents are important or powerful. They can stomp at anyone like cockroaches.

My parents are very important people

This elitist uncaring face attitude is not going away. After the public lashing and the dressing down in Parliament a few years back, it is resurfacing again. Two teenagers camped in a nursing room at Woodlands Regional Library and refused to allow a young mother to nurse her baby. They even showed her the middle finger and wrapped up the insult with the ‘My parents are very important people’ message. Until today, no one knows who they are. Though their photos were all over the internet, there seems to be a kind of self censorship in place. In the last elitish uncaring face, the elitist child’s face, name and parents were public knowledge. In this case the parents must be really important. Mypaper carried an article of the incident with the two elitist boys’ photo but with their faces pixilated. With a handheld computer game gadget in hand and some drinks on the table, they must be there having a good time for quite a while. And wonder how many nursing mothers were turned away because they thought their parents were important and they could occupy the nursing room as their personal playroom. Would this be the last of such elitist uncaring face incident or this is really the beginning? Interesting to know what the parents must have taught them.

2000 scholarships worth more than $30m

It was reported that the Singapore Govt gave 2000 scholarships worth $34m or $36m to foreigners. I did not get it whether it was for a year or for how many years. Whichever, it is a significant number of scholarships given to foreigners. The point I would want to know is how many scholarships did the Govt give to children of its citizens annually? This kind of comparison is getting increasingly of interest to the citizens when good money was seen to be thrown to the wind or to the undeservings while the parents of Sin children would have to empty their life savings, some selling their precious homes, to finance their children for overseas studies. It doesn't look like a fair or sound deal. A misallocation of national resources, misplaced loyalty of sort.

Sexual offences the most serious and prevalent crimes

I think this is a blessing of Sin City. When sexual offences, or more of sexual misconducts, are the number one crime in the City, it means that the City is really safe and relatively free from other serious crimes. And think about it seriously, sex offences are acts of pleasure, at least in all the cases mentioned in the courts recently. These are not violent crimes like rape when the victims would have to suffer pain, nightmare and needing psychiatric care. The type of sexual offences did not really have anyone being tormented and will suffer for a long time to come. Everything will soon blow away. It will be serious problem if murder, kidnapping, violent street fights, arson, rape etc are the top crimes in the island. In the reported cases, the victims were actually the offenders and willing parties. Count your blessings, Sinkies, when the courts only have to deal with offences of passion, not crimes of passion it is another way of saying life is good and fun. Yesterday’s Parliament sitting could change the trend of crimes in the City. The first step has been taken to reduce the punishment for drug offences. Death penalty is passé. This could possibly lead to more easing of the drug abuse laws and drug taking may become a lifestyle choice and no longer an offence. The City will then have one offence less in the statistics. The City could be free of crimes if all crimes are decriminalized or legalized. It would then become the first city in the world that is crime free and the police can be ‘demobbed’ and reduced to patrol the highways to regulate traffic flow and as mediators in neighbourhood quarrels.

Happy Deepavali to all Indians

A happy Deepavali to all Indians and Singaporeans celebrating this day. I dunno when they will change this to Divali in deference to the new citizens and FTs and to make them more at home. We shall celebrate Deepavali for as long as we can.

Who are the real trouble makers in the South China Sea Part THREE

Who are the real trouble makers in the South China Sea?

PART     THREE
Dialogue and cooperation the only solution to the South China Sea issue
In recent years, with the rising arms race in the South China Sea region, the countries concerned are vying to purchase advanced weapons and equipment and are intensifying maritime military activities such as military drills and control, posing a threat to regional security. Despite some noises and incidents that raise tension within the region, the overall situation of the South China Sea remains stable and manageable.
All parities concerned should actively seek to solve related disputes through dialogue and consultation. They should refrain from escalating, complicating and internationalizing the disputes and avoid creating conflicts and tension within the region. This services the common interests of all countries including the directly engaged ones.
To maintain freedom and safety of navigation in the region and eliminate the negative impact of traditional and non-traditional security factors is very significant for economic prosperity in East Asia and its surrounding areas and global economic recovery at large.
South China Sea is one of the world’s most important sea lanes. China has always respected the freedom of navigation and overflight that other countries enjoy in the South China Sea according to international laws. It is also ready to work together with other parties concerned to promote international cooperation on maritime security in the region.
Yet, China opposes any outsider meddling with the South China Sea issue using the excuse of “maintaining freedom of navigation in the South China Sea.” What littoral states should do right now is to seize the opportunity of economic globalization and regional integration to participate in international economic cooperation and competition so as to enhance economic growth and regional stability.
Exercising self-restraint and seeking consensus while shelving differences is the wise step to take at present to address the South China Sea issue, while consultation, dialogue and pragmatic cooperation will be the only way to its final settlement. China has been fulfilling its commitments to regional stability and development with real actions. Other countries concerned shall also undertake their unshirkable responsibilities and duties.
An important part of dialogue and cooperation between China and ASEAN countries now is to carry out the Guidelines for Implementing the DOC and a series of follow-up actions. One element of the guidelines is to discuss and formulate a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC), toward which China’s attitude is open and active. Currently, the most pressing task is for parties concerned to respect and honor the spirit of the DOC, push forward direct negotiations and consultations, and enhance practical cooperation.
This is conducive to not only a peaceful and stable South China Sea but also the common interest of all parties. China stands ready to join hands with other countries concerned to settle related disputes by peaceful means, strengthen mutual trust, avoid misunderstanding, deepen cooperation and develop South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship and cooperation.
The author is director of the National Institute for China Sea Studies. The article was originally published in Qiu Shi, the official magazine of the CPC Central Committee. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Who are the real trouble makers in the South China Sea?China a main contributor to a peaceful and stable South China Sea China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and adjacent waters, as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This has long been recognized by the international community. Based on the principles of maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea and strengthening cooperation with neighboring countries, China has been exercising self-restraint and promoting dialogue and cooperation with the countries concerned in a constructive manner. China's contributions to the regional stability are there for all to see. China is playing a constructive role in safeguarding peace and stability in the South China Sea. Peace and stability in the South China Sea are closely related to the vital interests of China, who benefits from the safe and unimpeded navigation as well as the regional trade links and economic prosperity. China cherishes and is committed to safeguarding this hard-won situation. However, recently some foreign political figures, policy analysts and scholars condemn China's practices as "the big bullying the small, the strong domineering over the weak.” They even speculate that China is taking the delaying or dodging tactics so as to dominate the resolution of the disputes when a favorable time comes. Such accusations are totally groundless. China insists on solving international disputes through peaceful negotiations. China is ready to negotiate with the countries concerned to handle the South China Sea disputes in a proper manner in accordance with the universally recognized international laws including the principles and legal regime established under UNCLOS. Early in the 1980s, China proposed "shelving the disputes and seeking for joint development,” which showed its sincerity and willingness to a proper settlement of the SCS disputes. In December 2000, China and Vietnam after many years of negotiation, signed the Agreement on the Delimitation of the Beibu Gulf (Tonkin Gulf), leading to the delimitation of the territorial sea, Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) and continental shelf between the two countries. In October 2003, China joined ASEAN's Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and signed with ASEAN the Joint Declaration on Strategic Partnership for Peace and Prosperity, through which the strategic mutual trust was greatly enhanced. In July 2011, China and ASEAN adopted the Guidelines to Implement the DOC, which paved the way for further practical cooperation in the South China Sea. In November 2011, China proposed setting up a 3 billion yuan ($480 million) China-ASEAN Maritime Cooperation Fund in order to bring about multi-tiered and all-round maritime cooperation with ASEAN. With its positive actions and goodwill gestures, China has been playing an important role in safeguarding peace and stability in the South China Sea. It could be seen, from the facts of the equitable and reasonable demarcation of the Beibu Gulf with Vietnam as well as the self-restraint exercise throughout the Huangyan Island standoff, that China as a big country has never bullied the small ones. Some other facts should not be ignored either. The US emphasizes that it does not take a position and is neutral in the South China Sea disputes. However, a high-profile US government official intentionally used the “West Philippine Sea” instead of the internationally recognized name “the South China Sea,” and a US senator criticized the normal bid inviting action by a Chinese oil company and accused it as violating Vietnam’s territorial rights. Seeing all these, people cannot but question what kind of neutrality the US is displaying. Furthermore, on August 3, 2012, the US Department of State issued a press statement on the South China Sea. The statement showed total disregard of the facts, confounded right and wrong, and made unfounded accusations against China, intentionally complicating the situation and escalating the disputes in the South China Sea. When seeking the root causes for the unrest in the South China Sea since 2009, in contrast with China’s commitment to peace and stability, some countries have been provoking discord and disputes and stirring up trouble on purpose. This must be exposed to and condemned by international opinion. China is the Protector of a Peaceful and Stable South China Sea. China's sovereignty claim over the four island groups in the South China Sea has ample historical and legal evidence. Certain foreign media are hyping up the "China threat in the South China Sea," claiming that China is coming up with its own version of the Monroe Doctrine in Asia. Certain state leaders claim that China wants to turn the South China Sea into a “Chinese Lake,” and that they can not allow China to “exercise disproportionate control” over the South China Sea, so on and so forth. All those subjective assumptions are clearly not true. China’s modern history was one of miserable suffering from colonization and invasion rather than hegemony and expansion. China adheres to the road of peaceful development, unswervingly pursuing an independent foreign policy of peace and a defense policy that is defensive in nature rather than trying to expand its sphere of influence. Never seeking hegemony is China's solemn commitment to the whole world. China is a committed protector of the peace and stability of the South China Sea. It has never claimed sovereignty over the entire South China Sea, nor will it expand its current claim. The Chinese people love peace, and uphold the principle of good neighborly friendship. Yet, it does not mean that China will accept its territorial sovereignty or maritime rights and interests being infringed by foreign countries. China respects other countries, and is willing to settle territorial and jurisdictional disputes with its neighbors through consultations and negotiations on a friendly and equal basis. But China’s legitimate rights and appeals must get its due respect and assurance. China has always exercised self-restraint on the South China Sea issue, and has taken reasonable and irreproachable reactions to the challenges created by relevant states. Setting up Sansha city recently was the Chinese government's necessary adjustment of the local administrative agencies, the offices in Xisha, Nansha and Zhongsha islands which have existed since 1959. Such conduct is completely within China's sovereignty. As an outsider, the US is neither a South China Sea claimant state, nor a signatory state to the UNCLOS, and thus neither justified nor qualified to criticize China. Posted by Southernglory

Who are the real trouble makers in the South China Sea?

Who are the real troublemakers in the South China Sea

PART     ONE

Globaltimes.cn | 2012-11-6 21:17:06 By Wu Shicun

E-mail   Print

Recently, some foreign media claim that China has become increasingly "aggressive" in the South China Sea. They even falsely declare that China has taken "provocative actions" to escalate the tensions in the sea and blame China for the "instability" in this area.
These reports are obviously inconsistent with the facts. When it comes to disputes in the South China Sea, China is not the troublemaker. On the contrary, some directly concerned parties have frequently taken provocative actions and ignited incidents, while some non-parties keep instigating other countries in the dispute, trying to push the multilateralization and internationalization of this issue.
That is the true cause of the escalation of the situation. The international media should not confuse truth and falsehood, be biased in favor of the conflict instigator, or deliberately ignore the great efforts and contributions made by China for a stable South China Sea. 
Who’s the instigator of rising tensions in the South China Sea?
Since 2009, tensions over South China Sea issues have mounted. It is related to the impact of traditional and non-traditional security factors and also the outcome of the interaction between inside and outside powers in the region. In particular, the US global strategic focus shift to Asia triggered the reconstruction of the post-Cold War geopolitical landscape in Southeast Asia.
Taking advantage of this occasion, some directly concerned countries deliberately consolidate their claims, trying to push the multilateralization and internationalization of the South China Sea dispute with the help of outside powers. Moreover, some countries outside the region follow the US global strategy shift to Asia to increase their interference in South China Sea affairs, which further escalated the geopolitical competition in this area and finally pushed the South China Sea into becoming an international hot spot.
Some claimant states frequently take provocative actions in the South China Sea, which caused the tensions in this region. On February 17, 2009, the Philippine Congress passed the Baselines Bill, which includes Huangyan Island and some islands and reefs of Nansha Islands as Philippine "territory.”
In April and July 2009, Vietnam government officially appointed their chief executives of the Xisha Islands and Nansha Islands, and strengthened their de facto occupation on these islands through sending immigrants, organizing public tourism activities, and other measures.
In March and May 2011, the Philippines and Vietnam took unilateral actions to explore the resources in disputed areas of the South China Sea. This year, on April 10, the Philippines sent warships to harass Chinese fishing boats which were operating normally in the Huangyan Island lagoon. Moreover, the Philippines intentionally ignited the conflict through illegal actions like detaining the fishermen and conducting onboard inspection, creating a standoff.
On June 21, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted the Vietnamese Law of the Sea which places China's Xisha and Nansha islands under Vietnamese "sovereignty" and "jurisdiction.” The abovementioned and follow-up actions taken by the concerned parties in the dispute have not only infringed on China's territorial sovereignty and China's maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea, but also violated the principal consensus demonstrated in the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) signed by China and ASEAN countries in 2002 and relevant commitments made by those countries. This is the main cause of the escalating tensions on this issue.  
Outside powers intervene in South China Sea affairs, which further intensifies the tensions on this issue. On July 23, 2010, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a public speech on the 17th ASEAN Regional Forum Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Hanoi of Vietnam, declaring the high-profile intervention of the US in the South China Sea dispute. On November 19, 2011, US President Barack Obama proposed a framework for a multilateral resolution to the South China Sea issue on the sixth East Asia Summit in Bali, Indonesia.
Moreover, 2012 has seen more and more high-level US officials make public remarks regarding South China Sea issue, openly intervening in this regional dispute. In addition, US forces strengthened their deployment and presence in the West Pacific area, including the South China Sea. Under such circumstances, some other countries outside the region echo, follow or even work in concert with the US to intervene in South China Sea dispute through economic aid, bilateral military cooperation, participating in the oil and gas exploration in disputed areas, and other ways.
For instance, shortly after the Huangyan Island standoff, the US announced the plan to help the Philippines to build a new National Coast Watch Center; Japan, in addition, proposed providing more than 10 patrol ships to the Philippines to enhance the country's sea power. Obviously, these actions by US and Japan further complicated the South China Sea situation. 

Sin’s champalan Education System a flop

Now am I getting some attention? Our highly regarded education system, churning out robot like straight A students like a factory cannot be champalan, cannot be a flop. How can it be? Just hear me out why our education system is a big failure.

The flaws in our system are mirroring the flaws in our social economic system. Somehow the acts and intentions were there but the plot was lost. We wanted the best from our students. In the process we developed a highly stressful system that many students and parents are unable to cope with the pressure. Along the way some pressure were released to make the system less harsh. Then the wise parents and educators started to think about a holistic education system, the best in all fields to churn out the best all round products that money can buy.

What we ended up with are half baked students in everything. Academically good but not good enough to be trusted for top jobs. Good in sports but not good enough to win medals. Good in the arts but not good enough to be in fame. We forgot that not everyone is a diamond to start with. Some are rubies, jade, agate, moonstone or simply pebbles. No matter how they are polished, the agate, moonstone or pebbles will still be pebbles, maybe with a little better polished.

And the holistic approach is good in concept but bad in the results. Our students will turn out knowing a bit of everything, a wholesome education, a wholesome individual, but unable to compete with the best in their respective fields of academic excellence, arts and sports.

The less affluent countries simply do what they think is good for a child to excel in a specific field, be it academic, arts or in sports. Full effort, time and resources, were devoted to a narrow and clear goal, to be the best in the chosen field. There is no pretension to be everything. No such nonsense as wanting to be the best in all fields in one average child. Even an exceptionally gifted child will have problems becoming an Einstein, a Mozart, a Husain Bolt and a Bill Gates put into one. It is just impossible. No one has been so gifted in the history of civilization. But that is what our parents and educators are trying to do. I will take back my words if they really believe in a holistic education, an all rounder but average in everything and are happy with it.

The stress part is that with such high expectations, our students are really going through three educational systems in one go. There is the formal school system, the informal tuition system, and the parent imposed and paid classes in arts and sports. Are the children being stressed, or being cooked?

And the truth is in the pudding. See our education products in the real world. In the industries and professions they are not good enough compared to the FTs who did not go through a holistic and highly stressed system. In sports and the arts, there is nothing worth mentioning.

So, isn’t our champalan, bao ka liao education system a big flop, producing students that know a bit of this and that but excelling in nothing? We are trying to do so many things and expecting excellence without knowing the limitations of time and resources and the limits of an individual child. Many are just pebbles and will be pebbles. We need to face this hard truth and cater to the abilities of different children according to what they are naturally gifted to do best. Holistic education is good but has its price to pay. There are merits in specialized education and general education and not every child must be cast by the same mould.

A more deep seated problem in FT craze

The original concept of hiring FTs and foreign sportsmen and women was to use them as a catalyst to stimulate the growth of locals, to learn from them, to be better. And eventually, when our locals have reached a higher skill level and can compete in the international arena and win honours, the scheme could, I think, peters away. The intent was to train our locals, to raise their standards not to replace them with foreign talents especially in sports.



What happens to the quality of sportsmen and women in the few high profile sports like swimming, football and table tennis? You need me to tell you that they are now worst than before? Where are the Pat Chans and Joycelyn Tays and Junie Sngs? In football, where are the Fandis, the Quah brothers, the Rajagopals, the Samads? We can’t even beat a Malaysian state team when we were Champions in the Malaysia Cup, in many Southeast Asian tournaments. Are we improving or downgrading? How many international table tennis players, locals, have we produced?



The reality is that the dependency is growing like drugs. We are now more or less totally dependent on foreigners in these sports. The quality of locals is getting from bad to worst. This is a very serious matter as opportunities and resources spent on foreigners and not on locals would mean the latter would not get better. Soon there would not be any local talents left in these sports. The national football coach is another glaring example. We used to have Choo Seng Quee and some other local coaches. These are likely to have been buried and forgotten and nothing in the pipeline to replace the great foreign coaches who were imported to replace them.



What is more serious is in the industrial and commercial sectors. When we keep bringing in foreigners to replace the locals, we will soon be addicted to foreigners who will keep improving their skills and experience for the opportunities we gave them. Our locals that have been replaced will degenerate and become less skill and less experience less valuable and less marketable. It is a vicious cycle. We will end up with lesser skill locals and more skilled foreigners in our midst. It will come a time when we are highly dependent on foreigners and have serious problems weaning away from this dependency.



Having foreign talents to replace the locals have far reaching adverse consequences in the long term. Locals not given the chance, not given the opportunities will not be able to acquire the critically needed exposure and experience to move up the skill levels and professional competency. That is why though we are the biggest financial centre in Southeast Asia, our top bankers are always from foreign talents because we do not give our locals a chance.



Look at the political theatre, we have greenhorns and little boys and girls being placed in political leadership roles to learn the ropes. Not giving them such chances they will never be able to claim being there and done that. There is political training and renewal, but sadly this is lacking in the industries and in commerce and also in sports.



It is time to turn the clock around to train our own people, give them the opportunities to earn their rights to be at the top of their sports and professions. This is elementary, Watson! We are now bringing in inexperienced foreigners, train them, expose them, give them all the opportunities and resources to improve their skills and experience just to replace the locals. Is this not stupidity, what is? If we don’t give our own citizens the opportunities who will?

Own a piece of art by an inhuman artist, Mother Nature

Tapestry

Many collectors have built a collection of paintings and other works of art by great painters. None has ever own a piece of painting created by Mother Nature. Now you can own a piece of painting conceptualised and painted by the hands of Mother Nature.

The Exhibition is at NUSS Guild House at Kent Ridge till 21 Dec 12.

Sunday’s political trivials

Xi Jinping is expected to take over the leadership of China after the national Congress that is now in progress. There is a nice photo of him today in the Sunday Times, plus a few others in his team. In fact the ST has been introducing the Chinese leaders for the past weeks. A few distinct features can be drawn from the crop of Chinese leaders. These include thick black hair nicely combed and oiled, a white shirt and a govt issued casual zipped jacket on the outside.

According to ST’s China correspondent Grace Ng, these features have their specific meanings. Nicely oiled and combed hair signifies pragmatism, white shirt means rigid professionalism but tempered by a casual jacket probably meaning not too dogmatic and rather down to earth, a leader closely in touch with the ground. The whole package is simply a no nonsense and task oriented pragmatic leadership, nothing frivolous.

What is obvious is the thick black hair on the roof of these leaders. They must have taken the advice by LKY seriously, that leadership must be kept young and vibrant, not oldies that are stuck in the mud with their obsolescent ways of thinking and ideas. And they will maintain this profile throughout their 4 or 8 years in power. Quite a remarkable achievement, looking at Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao and the whole team. They hardly age at all. Maybe the task is easy in a communist state. Maybe they think less hard or no need to work so hard and thus were able to keep their hair black in tact. I am really surprise that they could retain their youthfulness while carrying such huge responsibilities and load on their shoulders. Their hair only turned white after they left office. Jiang Zemin and Zhu Rongji were two good examples. Perhaps they lost all the privileges and the good life in office, no more free medical and goodies that came along while in high office.

Our leaders used to have some similar features, black hair and a suit of simple white shirt and pants. I am not sure if they have the same meaning as the Chinese leaders. Let me hazard a guess. Thick black hair signifies youth. White shirt and pants are often associated with pragmatism and even incorruptibility. These were the characteristics of our past leaders and today it is a different story.

Our political leaders entered politics young and with a nice black crop of hair. Heng Swee Kiat and the two generals are good examples. But within a few terms they would all turn grey or white, looking very wise and dignified. And they would stay that way till they are retired.

The white shirts have changed to something more casual and colourful. The favourite colour is pink or red. And designer jacket is often seen in Parliament. Oh, one more thing, our leaders are mostly nerdy looking in the sense that many put on glasses. The difference is that the glasses could be fashionably thick framed like celebrities. This could mean a more affluent society where life is more enjoyable, living life to the fullest. There is no govt issue jacket to come along.

The grey or white hair or no hair must be telling. Working too hard or thinking too hard to run this unique little island to be the best in the world. This must have taken its toll on their crowning glory. A little dyeing could help to retain that youthful look if they don’t mind trading the look of wisdom that came with grey and white, or the classic balding professori image.

I think the Chinese leaders are having a good deal, less stressful, and an easier job to handle. Or perhaps if they were given a chance to stay as long as they want in power, they would also look like our leaders, ageing wise men. I deliberately left out women as they are still young and beautiful.

Would China and Japan go to war over Diaoyu Islands?

This was the discussion topic that had seen several reruns on CNA’s Perspective programme hosted by Pek Lian. The participants were Tommy Koh and Lam Peng Er, the latter is likely to be a Singaporean too, Victor Gao from China and Takaaki Kojima from Japan.

The issue of Diaoyu/Senkaku is quite clear. The islands were seized from China under the Unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1894 after China was defeated by Japan. They were war loots. The islands were supposed to be returned to China after Japan’s defeat in WW2. But the Americans was tasked to be the trustee, tried to return to Chiang Kai Shek, but he preferred the US to keep them in case he lost Taiwan to the Communists and had some where to run to. The US gave administrative control of the islands to Japan in 1972 after falling out with Communist China and the start of the Cold War.

In 1972, Zhou Enlai and Tanaka signed a communiqué agreeing to keep the status of the islands on hold, but also with Japan agreeing to abide by the post war treaties of Potsdam and Cairo. The sovereignty of the islands was thus kept in the back burner till it flared up again when Shintaro Ishihara hatched a scheme to buy it from another Japanese, thus sealing the fate of the islands as Japanese territories. China protested strongly against such a move.

On the pretext of easing tension, Japanese PM tried to con the Chinese with another sure win scheme, to nationalise the islands. Under both con jobs, the islands would be officially recognised as Japanese islands if they were executed. And China would have lost the islands by a fait accompli for not protesting.

The position of the two Singaporeans was simple enough. Please don’t go to war as it would hurt both countries. The neutral stance is understandable as they did not have any stakes to consider.

The Chinese position was also simple. The islands were Chinese territory and China would fight to keep them at all cost. China was willing to maintain status quo but Japan had pushed China to react and China would have to let the world know that these were undisputed Chinese islands. Not negotiable.

The Japanese position was also simple. It refused to acknowledge that the islands were seized from China and claimed that those were Japanese islands. And to further perpetuate its con job, even accused China for raising tension.

The Chinese would not fall victim to this con job. But Tommy Koh was conned all the way. He swallowed hook, line and sinker thrown out by the Japanese. He did not even want to dispute Japanese claim to the islands, and through his comments that was a settled issue.

And he tried to throw smoke to compare Germany and Japan’s remorse after the WW2 and urged both parties not to go to war. The official position of Germany and Japan, to acknowledge the war atrocities and aggression, was really a moot point and secondary in the discussion.

Tommy asked whether China would risk and waste resources and lives over a few pieces of worthless rocks. Or would Japan do likewise over these rocks. He forgot that China lost the islands to the Japanese and the Japanese was the illegal owner of Chinese islands.

Another point of naivety exposed in Tommy was his belief that the US did not want to see a war between Japan and China. Unbelieveable to think that he is a veteran in international relations! Yes, the US would not want to be involved in a direct war with China. An open conflict between Japan and China would be most welcomed. Whatever treaty it has with Japan, it would use it expediently to serve its selfish interest. It would be in a very advantageous position to calibrate its response, likely to start with lip service, then supply and sell more arms to Japan, and finally decide whether to commit arms and its military forces to the conflict, depending on the outcome of the war. The Chinese and Japanese would have to kill each other first before the Americans decide what to do, just like WW2. Let them cripple themselves, their economies, lives and resources. The Americans can march in as the victor at the closing chapters.

The island dispute is really about sovereignty, about national pride, about ownership. Why should China give up fighting for its own islands? Or why should Japan not return the islands to China without going to war?  Who is the net loser or gainer? Not going to war, China lost. Returning the islands to China, Japan did not lose anything and could lead to a real closure to WW2. Why would Japan want to risk going to war again with China by keeping a few worthless pieces of rocks, in the view of Tommy Koh, that it stole from China?

This is the real issue that would have to be settled between China and Japan now or later, not the apologies and gestures of remorse. Return the islands and everything would be back to square one and bringing about a full closure of Japanese aggression against China and the Chinese people. Is this so hard to understand? Why are the recalcitrant Japanese so persistent in holding on to war loots it took by forced and risking a war with China some time tomorrow? They are peaceful people? They started the war of aggression not only against China but the whole of East and Southeast Asia and against the US.

Sin is a great place for foreigners

'Olivier Desbarres, Barclays Capital’s Head of FX Strategy in Asia, is accused of going on a rampage outside his home and terrorizing workers early last month, The Times has reported.
In the video which has emerged online, a man that resembles the banker can be seen approaching the workers and screaming obscenities.

“I’m gonna go after you. I’m gonna burn your f**cking house down,” he shouts.

“You have no respect. You know what? You’re f**cking animals. Chinese f**cking animals… I have a life. I have a family. You break that, I will find your f**cking family. I can find it very easily – I’m a man with resources.”

Dressed in shorts and sandals, he is then seen grabbing up a large sheet of zinc panel and hurling it into the construction pit, narrowly missing two workers.'

I copy the above posted in TRE. I can only have great praises for this ex colonial master for putting the ‘Chinese f**king animals’ down in their proper place. And his bank, Barclays Capital has sacked him which is very unjust. He should be promoted to be the CEO. He has done the bank proud by standing up for his rights. And the low down workers deserved to be spat on for disturbing his peace.

Only in Sin could such ex colonial master relive their past glory and strut away with his ego intact. Their former subjects would take anything from them without protest. No wonder Sin is a top choice for foreigners.

How to make a daft Sinkie fart without thinking?

Is it superflous to even think that a daft Sinkie has the ability to think? It is very common to hear how daft sinkies parroted views or positions from the establishment repeatedly without knowing what they were farting about. Many don’t even know that what they were saying was actually planted into their pea brain without them knowing. It is all a case of repeating a position and after a while the lazy or mindless will just garble them out as the truth or the logical answer to a situation.

Take the example of the slightly better off middle class and their entitlement for admission into govt hospitals. The official position is that the lower class wards were highly subsidised and the better off should not enjoy the subsidies in the lower classes as they are better off. So they must opt for more expensive classes to spend their savings away. The daft Sinkies were told that if these better off people were to opt for lower class wards, they would be competing for the limited beds in these classes.

Very logical on first pass. Think again, why are these people opting for lower class wards and willing to go through the ordeal with less niceties and comfort? And why should the lower class wards be limited and not increase to cater for everyone who cannot afford to pay for luxury? Just because someone is earning a little more, he must be able to pay more and consume more, and his savings must be robbed. Many could have other financial responsibilities or commitments that they do not have the comfort of squandering their limited resources to enjoy a little luxury.

But the daft Sinkies could only think, sorry I shouldn’t use the word think, they can’t, they could only parrot that these people are depriving the poorer folks from the beds available in the lower class wards.

The same daft Sinkies would say the same thing about Sinkies who earn more than the arbitrary $12k imposed by HDB to disqualify them from buying HDB flats. HDB flats are for poorer Sinkies. The richer Sinkies must not compete with poorer sinkies for public flats.

In the first place the HDB flats are no longer cheap unless they are saying $500k or $800k is cheap. Surely $1.7m is not cheap. How many people earning a combined income of $12k can afford to buy a $1.7m public flats?

The second point, who are the people competing for public flats with the poorer Sinkies? Have they ever heard of new citizens? How many new citizens have been printed to join the queue for public flats, competing with poorer Sinkies? And because they were foreigners before, many could have been very much richer than the Sinkies disqualified from buying public flats.

Then there are the PRs in the resale market, pushing resale price to the roof, competing with the outcasts or mistreated Sinkies who happened to earn more than $12k in household income. These victimised Sinkies, not allowed to buy public flats are now forced to compete with PRs to buy resale flats. Many are young professionals who have no choice but forced by the govt to cough out all their savings to buy public flats or private properties against their interest, against the wisdom of being prudent and saving for a rainy day. And daft Sinkies would say where got forced?

Why should foreigners turned citizens be allowed to compete with poorer Sinkies and Sinkies not allowed to do so. And why should such a scenario happen when the govt could simply build to satisfy the needs of its citizens? No, the daft Sinkies could not see further than the tip of their noses. No, maybe they are just acting daft, paid to sing a song, or have vested interested to sing the song, against the interests of fellow Sinkies. Really, how many Sinkies are earning above $12k and still needed to buy HDB compares to the influx of new citizens competing with the poorer Sinkies?