Pedra Branca, our island

Reading through several days of the reports in the msm on the Pedra Branca court battle in Hague, I am fully convinced that Malaysia's case was spurious. They were just grappling with straws to build their claim over the island. The msm has presented every aspect of Singapore's legitimate claim and every rebuttal or dismissal very convincingly. Reading the media, one wonders why Malaysia even bothers to take up the case and waste so much time and expenses to go to Hague. It is not only losing the case, but putting up a poor case will discredit themselves in the international platform. I kind of feel a bit embarrass at the supporting evidence and arguments put up by Malaysia. But all these are based on the reports in our msm. Malaysia's position was reported in bits and pieces, in an incoherent manner. Neither were there a decent coverage on how Malaysia rebut or dismiss our claims and positions. It would be interesting to read how Malaysia present its case in full and see if they really make out a good case for themselves. I will search the Malaysian msm for their version of the story. The other astounding impression is the comments made by the Singapore team. Their morale was high, they have made a good case, and they were cautiously confident, guarded and prepared for any surprises Malaysia may throw out. They went there to fight a 50:50 case and may lose. Hmmmm, I thought and have lived with Pedra Branca as an intrinsic part of our territorial integrity. It is ours, never in doubt, like ownership of a landed property. And if there is any spurious claims against it, my position would be quite different. I may present the case with all the legal documents. But at no time would I concede that it is a 50:50 case. I may even put in place some measures for damages and cost and make it very clear in all manners and conduct, that it is a wild claim and need to be dismissed with cost awarded to me. To take the position that it is 50:50 is already conceding that our ownership is also tentative.

Battle for the right to live here

The battle to live in this little paradise has started. At the higher end, the talented level, Singaporeans will have to compete with foreign talents for every inch of turf they want to step on. And they are going to lose. For the foreign talents are going to beat our local talents till their nose bleed. So the only alternative is to look for a jobs overseas, pack up the family and go. At the lower end, the softie Singaporeans are going to compete with the hungry and toughter foreign workers. And they will be bashed against the wall. No fight. The hawkers in food courts are being replaced gradually. The mei meis in spas, health centres and Geylang are also being evicted by more willing and aggressive foreigners. Soon, very soon, the new owners of Singapore will be all new citizens, not born locally. We cannnot compete. And sadly, that is a fact. The good news is that Singapore will prosper to greater height by the foreign talents, the new Singaporeans. And we may see Singaporean maids and workers overseas. Possible?

NUS and NTU ranking drop

The Times London Higher Education Supplement has ranked NUS and NTU at 33 and 69 respectively compared to 19 and 61 the previous year. This call for alarm. Our rankings have dropped! Though the reports still considered the two universities as world class, they are dropping and will drop out of the top 100 soon. Jialat. Actually, when looking at the criteria and how the rankings were done, it is a western biased and pseudo intellectual ranking that is as good as a straw poll from people on the streets. What is so great about being ranked high by using digits on number of foreign students or faculty staff or staff student ratio? What is important should be the quality of the staff, their academic achievements and also the quality of the students produced. What is the point of ranking as number one when the students are all but average?

Would we have our own subprime loan crisis?

By the look of things, our stringent financial controls, and the CPF savings, we should not have any subprime loan crisis. So we should be spared because of our prudent policies. Spend only when one can afford it. Don't anyhow spend and don't spend beyond your means. For this, the medical services must take note and not force people to consume more expensive wards and services beyond their means. Medical costs must be brought down quickly. I digress. Superficially we may think that we will not have subprime loan crisis. But if we recall the way the prices of HDB flats were pushed to these levels without the income to match the increase, many people are actually living beyond their means. The worst hit are those that sell their first or second HDB flats and upgraded thinking that they could afford it. But they forgot that their incomes are not upgraded at the same rate as the price of flats. And all it needs is a little financial crisis, losing their jobs, and they will be cooked alive.

Another saga?

While begging has taken a different form and scale, corporate governance for such organisations are changing at an unusually slow pace. Thanks to NKF that more is being done to clean up the management of such charitable organisations. When professionals take over the art of begging and transform it into a business concern, they somehow forgot to transform the management of the organisations and its funds by bringing in the same quality of professional management. So, while the process of introducing professional financial management to charitable organisations, we are going to uncover many unsightly things, so to speak. The public must be prepared and braced up for such an eventuality as more organisations are dissected up for the full view of the donors. We may need a campaign to psychologically prepare the people so that they are mentally able to withstand the tsunami coming their way. More psychiatric clinics and pyschiatrists need to be roped in to help the people so that charitable organisations are not disadvantaged and donations do not stop coming to them.