TCMS software can be bought off the shelf

When Sylvia Lim asked Boon Wan whether one month termination period was sufficient for the new management to take over a town council and introduce a new management system, Boon Wan offered her two possibilities. One was to ask for an extension of the existing system and alternatively just buy a standard software in the market. Based on his experience, such software is quite common, could be generic and many companies are using them.

I think this is a reasonable advice as a town council management system is nothing extraordinary that you need to customise it which will mean costing a bomb. By the way, what is it that is so special to want customisation? And even if customisation is needed, is it something so difficult to modify or add on to a generic software package? Boon Wan has a good point there. His experience will tell him that a town council management system does not need any leading edge or frontier science software technology to function. Aljunied should just buy off the shelf.

Of the whole debate on the AIM saga, this is the most important and valuable point raised by Boon Wan.

If Aljunied GRC would to buy off the shelf, and with a little customisation, I think, off the cuff, it should not cost more than $140k and with customisation maybe $200k at most. I cannot imagine an off the shelf software would cost that much. Ok throw in a couple of millions for safe measures. Definitely cheaper than the $23.8m paid in the past and the $16.8m that is going to be paid.

Why must town councils go and ask for tender to develop a brand new town council management system instead of buying off the shelf and do a little customisation? Such a system normally can last for centuries and, if need be, a little modification will do the job as the functions are quite standard and generic in nature.

Why doesn’t all the town councils just buy one off the shelf and every other town council can use it? Sure will have a lot of savings. It would be a good idea to call off all the tenders and just buy one that is easily available at a fraction of the cost. Boon Wan could help the Town Councils save a lot of money by issuing a directive on this if still in time.

Perhaps there should be a new review committee to look into the necessity to tender and develop new town council management software and why a simple thing like buying off the shelf was overlooked. This looks like a case of group think. Like the kids driving their minis, and because one modified it, everyone also wants to modify without looking at the necessity or alternative options. Dunno how much money could be saved if Boon Wan’s suggestion is accepted?

The Town Councils or Parliament should acknowledge this great money saving suggestion from Boon Wan.

The Shane Todd case

Anyone will sympathise with the parents of Shane Todd for losing such an able son. The emotional stress and grief must be terrible to describe. The Singapore Govt has bent backward to the American request and diplomatic pressure to reopen this case for reexamination. Let’s hope that everything is proven to be above board and everyone, our police, the new investigators, will review the case professionally and do not indulge in politics or whatever baggage or agenda they are carrying. Hopefully there is none.

This case is unprecedented and no country would allow it to go to this stage. The Americans better appreciate what Singapore has done and stop making all kinds of insinuation or unnecessary comments that are unhelpful to the case.

The reopening of this case has put the whole Singapore Police Force and the judiciary under the spot light and should they be found to be negligent or unprofessional, it can be very damaging and politically stressful to the country and individuals concerned. The Govt has consented to put its reputation under scrutiny by a foreign govt. Let this be the last incident of this nature to happen to this country. This case should never be allowed to be a precedent for the future. It affects national sovereignty and integrity and no country, not even the Americans should be allowed to trample on our sovereignty and integrity under whatsoever pretext.

We cannot be pressurized by a case of ‘WMD’ to let the Americans frisk and search us to prove our innocence. The Americans cannot be allowed to do this to us or to any country. Pray this case will prove beyond any doubt the capability and integrity of our officers and our system. It will be dreadful if found otherwise.

While the Govt should put an end to any such request in the future, and ensuring that our officers are beyond reproach in professionalism, we must put it to the Americans that they owe us one for it. Hopefully there is no need to use this reciprocity and both countries will continue with a friendly relationship among equals with mutual respect, and not one that would use threats or ‘WMD’ to con its way to interfere in our internal affairs.

Freedom of navigation and passage in South China Sea

The latest pursuit and killing of a Taiwanese fisherman is a little revelation on the piracy and danger posed by the Filipinos to freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. And this is an ally of the Americans who have been screaming about freedom of navigation and free passage in this area. And for the arrogance of the Filipino coastguards to behave like gangsters of the seas, like pirates, they must have borrowed their gall from the Americans. The latter must be backing them to go chasing Chinese and Taiwanese fishing boats and turning the South China Sea into a trouble spot.

Why are the Americans keeping silent to this hostile act in the sea? What is the real role or agenda of the Americans? You don’t see any other country committing such piracy acts in the sea except the Filipinos. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Many Chinese and Taiwanese fishing boats have been arrested, some shot and killed for many years. And those arrested would have to pay a ransom to these uniform pirates to get their release, fishermen and boats.

The Chinese have put their foot down and will arrest or shoot the Filipinos if they dare touch their fishing boats again. Now it is left to the Taiwanese to do likewise to get rid of this scourge in the South China Sea. Don’t count on the Americans. They are behind the Filipinos to create trouble to justify their military presence here. They want the South China Sea to be turned into a trouble area that needs their protection to keep peace when they are behind stirring shit for the ships passing through.

See how quiet are the Americans over this shooting, and so many earlier shootings and robberies in the sea? It is time for China and Taiwan to arrest and shoot at these pirates of the South China Sea and assume the policing role for the safety of ships and fishing boats in the surrounding seas.

AIM at a terse exchange

The AIM saga finally came to Parliament for a cleansing. And the debate between the two sides strayed from just about the correctness and propriety of the process to personal agenda and motivation. The second part is best summarized by what Boon Wan said, ‘This is self righteous and – pardon me for saying so – arrogant’. I will deal with this later.

The first part of the argument is all about how correct were the procedure and processes of running town councils and the implications arising from the sale of AIM to a $2 company owned by PAP members. The facts are well known to the public. There were suggestions that many more things can be done to improve the current system. The Review Committee also did make recommendations for changes, of course for the better.

The WP are not happy with the existing system and suggested that there were ‘foul play’ akin to fixing the opposition parties or trying to make life difficult for them at the expense of the residents who ended up as collateral to a political bickering which in the words of Boon Wan, are petty.

Boon Wan stood up to defend PAP’s position that all that was done was for the good of the residents, for efficiency and continuity. The residents’ interest is all the PAP was concerned and the system was designed with that in mind. And this is acquitted by the findings of the Review Committee that everything was in order and no one made money out of the deal.

So we have two conflicting positions and some will agree with one and some with the other. Lina Cheam was quoted to disagree that no one made money out of the sale of AIM. But looking at the righteousness of the $2 company, set up to take care of the residents’ interest, making money out of the deal must be the last thing in their mind. They did it as a public service, not to make money.

Who is right or wrong, maybe there is no right or wrong but a matter of perception of who is uglier and who is prettier, is very subjective. The Review Committee had found nothing wrong and the Govt had accepted that finding. So there is nothing wrong officially. But other parties and the masses may have different views and different judgement. Does it matter?

The part about being righteous and arrogant is like someone’s raw nerve being exposed. It hurts, and the exchange was not very pleasant, quite personal I would say, pardon me. There were questions of who is whiter than white, who is more arrogant and who is a patriot. If the debate continues this way, soon they will be wrestling in the longkangs, with gloves removed and nails out scratching.

Is the whole AIM debate about righteousness or arrogance? Is it about fixing or undermining the opponent? Can such an issue be depoliticized? The call for depoliticizing institutions like Town Councils and other public institutions became a sore point. The politicizing of these institutions is, in the eyes of the public unacceptable and undesirable. But would righteous people and arrogant people think otherwise, that politicizing these institutions are part and parcel of politics? Or can these institutions be depoliticized or they should not?

Whatever the recommendations and the eventual character of Town Councils and other public institutions, it is likely to be decided by righteous and arrogant politicians. And the people to judge about who is more righteous and more arrogant must definitely be the people watching the show.

What do you think?

Race and racism continue to be the thinking in Malaysian politics

One week after the GE, after BN survived a close shave, losing the majority in popular votes but still winning the election to form the next govt, the UMNO controlled media, Utusan Malaysia, is still attacking the Chinese minority for voting along racial lines. What happened in the election was that many Chinese votes went to DAP instead of MCA. So this is unacceptable voting along racist line.

What happens if the Chinese votes go to MCA instead? Would this be voting along racist lines too? What is the difference? MCA is part of a Malay majority BN, so voting for MCA is not racist as MCA supports BN’s Malay dominance govt?

The DAP supports a coalition PR that in a way is also a Malay dominant party with Anwar as the leader and the potential PM. And PKR and PAS are mainly Malay parties. DAP is thus a small component of PR, supporting two Malay parties, one a staunch Islamic party. So why is voting for DAP racist and voting for MCA not racist?

The playing up of the race card by Utusan Malaysia may be more than meets the eye. If this stirring of racial emotion is not stopped, it can turn into a fire. While Najib is talking about a reconciliation, the tone and issues highlighted in Utusan is taking a different direction. Who is in control of Utusan Malaysia to dictate the direction it should take? Is Najib in control and allowing this trend of argument to perpetuate and driving a dividing wedge along racial lines in Malaysian politics? Or someone is taking control of the media and running it differently from Najib’s line and the direction he wants to take?

Whatever, for whatever purposes, hopefully the race card is taken out of the picture fast. Allowing it to foment and to simmer is not healthy.