One crime too many

It is time to justify the presence of foreign workers in our midst. Yes, fewer of them were arrested on a per 100,000 number count. So they are safer than Singaporeans. There were 435 Singaporeans per 100,000 as to 286 foreigners arrested. Statistically speaking, foreigners are safer and we should actually replace Singaporeans with foreigners and our crime rate will be lower. Wait a minute. We are talking about number of criminals arrested. How many crimes were still not solved and were committed by foreigners? Can we have an absolute figure on the number of crimes committed by foreigners and the nature of such crimes? The reports in the main media gave the impression that crimes by foreigners, given their numbers, are tolerable and acceptable. And many Singaporeans also think so. Anyone ask the victims and their families of such crimes whether they are acceptable or not? The Serangoon Garden residents obviously think not. One crime committed is one crime too many. One serious and vicious crime committed means many people will suffer for it. Somehow I got the impression that Singaporeans are comfortable with crimes and they do not mind being victims of crimes. Or is it that they think the crimes will not happen to them?

A day without LKY

I posted about this a few weeks back. The news that LKY's heart is fluttering is troublesome even on a Sunday morning. Would his heart dare to attack him? My earlier post was on the transition of power and of a Singapore that can continue to hum quietly and efficiently without LKY in the govt. And we have all the time in the world for that to happen with him retiring to a non govt position. But LKY is around and in the govt, for an uninterrupted period of half a century. The thought and fear of what Singapore will be like without him is going to be very uneasy. Modern Singapore has never had a day without LKY. Now this can happen without notice. The possibilities are endless and the uncertainties are unhealthy. If only LKY had backed out from the govt 10 years ago, life will go on as per normal with or without him when his time is up. Now the suspense is just beginning. Nothing is settled until the so called fat lady sings.

First break into the world of free speech

Not bad for a first appearance at Hong Lim Park by TOC and a spectator size of 150. TOC reported the number to be 150 to 200. Whatever, I would not call it a crowd. But given the high cost of public transport, it is lucky they got the number. They should get a better crowd on a weekday lunch time when the office workers are around. But the midday heat may be too much heat for the speakers and spectators. This is a first for a civil group to stage a mini rally in a public place and the first for them to do so without needing a police permit. It is also a first for the main media to give them a bit of publicity with a generous photo showing a speaker and 10 spectators. Everything starts with a small step.

You want medals?

You want medals, we give you medals. This is more or less what our Paralympians were saying to Singapore. First Laurentia Tan gave us two bronze medals. Now Yin Pin Xiu gave us a silver medal and a world record. So did Theresa Goh with another world record of her own. Yin Pin Xiu is lined up to deliver a gold. The irony of life comes in the most unexpected places. When Singapore was hungry for an Olympic medal and willingly splurged on its sportsmen and women in the tune of a $32 mil annual budget, the medal harvest came where the expectation was low. With only a budget of $3.2 mil, a fraction of the main budget of the Singapore Sports Council, the Singapore Disability Sports Council is bringing home 3 medals and maybe another gold in the waiting. This may be the secret of our success. No need to pay so much for a medal. We can find our sporting heroes and heroines in the fields of the disadvantaged.

Road to a better transport system

Without fail, whenever there is a fare hike, the message is always about an improvement in the service and quality of the transport system. If every time it becomes better, we would have been better by 10 or 20 times over the years. This time the good thing is that the message is only about a better transport system and not about a world class transport system. What's the difference? A better transport system means you have to pay a bit better to get the better system. A world class transport system means you would have to pay world class fare. I hope it will be kept that way. A better system should be good enough. Hong Lim Park should be busy this evening with The Online Citizen making an appearance to talk about our transport system. I hope they will do a comparison of the quality and service of the transport system 20 years ago and what it is now and look at the difference in the fare over the same period. Are the increases in fare deserving of the improvement in service and quality? Another area they may want to look into is the land and infrastructure cost of the train system. How much land were given to SMRT and at what cost, and how much were invested in the infrastructure? And were these returned to the state or people or did they just become the asset of the current shareholders? The issue of public transport as a national service and not just a private business to generate profit to shareholders must be the key issue to be thrashed out. Why should an essential service that can cripple the whole economy be privatised just for profit? Or would it be better to operate under a different premise, to facilitate freer and cheaper movement of people which will benefit the whole economy? Should the system be returned to the state as a statutory board and the bull concept that only privatisation can make it more efficient and effective be dismissed? Would the activities at Hong Lim Park resulted in more revelations of what our transport system is all about or would it be another roadside selling 'koyote' session?