Singapore a New Concept City State and a New Consumerism

I am not sure if this is the concept plan for the future of Singapore as a rich, prosperous and vibrant city state. But if anyone is to look at the policies being implemented, it is like clockwork precision in its execution. The concept is to buy anything and everything that the city state needs.

It goes like this, the state needs sportsmen and sportswomen, just buy. If the state needs professors, just buy, engineers, doctors, scientists etc, just buy. If there is a need for bankers, just buy, IT specialists, just buy. Needs billionaires, this one no need to buy, just seduce them to be here for free.

On a bigger scale, if there is a need for any specialty engineering equipment or processes, or companies, just buy. Needing tunnelling expertise, just buy, building of marina barrage and undersea tunnel expertise, new stadium, just buy the companies lock, stock and barrel. No need to grow indigenous companies too. SMEs just remain as SMEs, low tech, low skill to service the high tech, high skill big companies brought in to do the major works.

If this is the concept plan, there is really no need for universities, no need for polytechnics. There is really no need for schools too. Why bother to have schools and tertiary institutions to teach and educate students when there is no guarantee of the products, and it takes a long 15 to 20 years? Just buy. Close down all the schools and tertiary institutions.

Actually there is no need for babies, no need for citizens. Just buy the best from the rest of the world. What about the bought expertists and citizens growing old, can sell them and get rid of them? Or how best to get rid of them when they are no longer useful?

Tell them that they can only get their CPF if they give up their citizenships. If they don’t, selling their properties may not help much either as a huge sum of money will be retained as minimum sum in the CPF. Want your money, please quit and go live somewhere. All residents having out lived their usefulness shall vacate this city, take their CPF and go.

In this way, Singapore can become a New Concept City State where all its manpower needs and technology or engineering and professional needs can be bought. It can save on not having any need for schools and education institutions. It may not even have needs for maternity hospitals as no children need to be born here.

Oh, uniformed police and soldiers can also be bought. No need SAFTI and training grounds too.

And the population will be kept at a young and commercially productive age range. No children and no oldies. It will be a truly vibrant city state of vibrant and economically active and productive people. What citizenship, obsolete idea.

Kopi Level - Yellow

MP versus CCC Chairman – Who is bigger?

In the AHPETC vs NEA case in court, it seems that an MP holding a mini fair or event must get the approval of the Chairman of the CCC. I quote from an article in TRE,
 
‘AHPETC: Holding “mini-fair” or “event” does not require permit
AHPETC, whose chairman is Aljunied GRC MP Sylvia Lim, is disputing NEA’s argument. Its lawyer Peter Low pointed out that it was a “mini-fair” or an “event”, and hence did not require a permit.
 
He also said he would seek clarification from the NEA on why it was necessary to get the Bedok Reservoir-Punggol Citizens Consultative Committee’s (CCC) approval when applying for such a permit especially when it is chaired by a PAP grassroots leader….’
 
The question here is that an MP/Town Council needs to get permission from a grassroot leader to hold an event in his constituency? Who is bigger, I don’t mean bigger in physical size, but who should have the authority over such an issue. An MP is the people’s elected representative, a member of Parliament, a law maker, elected by the people for the people. What is a Chairman of a CCC? A civil servant working for the NEA or a political appointee appointed by the ruling govt to look after grassroot activities on a volunteer basis?
 
What power should be vested on a volunteer worker, an unelected grassroot leader in order that an elected MP must seek his approval to hold an event in the constituency the MP is elected, by the people?
Anything wrong with such a reporting or controlling procedure? In a democracy, the people is the master, and the MP is a representative of the people. Who is the Chairman of a CCC or the CCC representating? Do they have executive power over the people and events in the constituency? Are they govt employees vested with the power of a civil servant?
 
Any legal experts can help to explain the intricacies of these relationships? I look look and see see and still catch no balls. What is the right procedure or what is the proper legal procedure or what is the correct administrative procedure? I really blur like sotong now.
 
MP must go seek approval from a CCC Chairman? Tiok boh? If ask approval from NEA officers can understand because that one is govt mah. And NEA officers are employed by the govt to manage and regulate such matters mah. NEA officers can say ‘I chenghu mah’. Can CCC Chairman say he chenghu or not?
 
Sorry ah, I layman only asking question for clarification to know what is going on.

Kopi Level - Yellow

SGX Ranking Number 1

If I were to conduct a survey on the SGX ranking among the international bourses like the way our universities were ranked internationally, I would rank SGX as Number 1 also, the best of the best. And I can say that with very good justifications.
 
1. SGX is managed by the best foreign talents money can buy.
2. SGX has acquired one of the most expensive and sophisticated computers to ensure that it has the ample capacity to continue operating even if the volume goes up by ten or twenty folds, with no hitches or glitches.
3. It has the best regulatory policies to prevent fraud and cheating or malpractices.
4. It has provided the most level playing field for all players big and small. Fair play is the second name of the SGX.
5. SGX is linked to nearly all the big international bourses around the world and fund managers can trade the world’s stock markets through SGX. So convenient. The Ah Peks and Ah Mahs and the HDB aunties also can do the same.
6. Big funds are allowed to plug their super computers to the SGX computers to ensure that they can trade smoothly and efficiently and at super fast speed. The small traders can also plug their super computers into the system if they have one.
7. SGX even ensures that the exchange will trade non stop, no lunch break, so that trading activities can be high and continuous, longer trading hours, etc to facilitate the traders and investors the maximum hours to make profits.
8. Transparency is first class and retailers shorting the market must key into the system so that every player will know that there is a short position.
9. Bid size and board lot size were reduced to a minimum to facilitate even very small retail players to trade, to increase liquidity and market penetration.
10. And if any big funds or computer traders ended in a short position, have no fear as they could easily borrow scrips to settle their trades. There is a scrip lending facility to help traders in case they have over sold positions.
 
I could have added more of the great features of the SGX that other bourses would be envious off. It is truly the best, most sophisticated, transparent and efficient stock exchange, and with good regulations and world class management.
 
There is a slight problem though. There is a dearth of traders in the market. The trading houses are as quiet as a church in recess. Otherwise I would give it a perfect score of 100. The SGX is like a very well decorated Christmas tree, shining brightly, with its full décor, after Christmas, and lying in a corner of the room, waiting for the lights to be switched off.
 
What a pity for such a fine stock exchange with everything going for it.

Kopi Level - Yellow

Hong Lim Affair – Got illegal assembly or not?

 This has been quoted in TRE by a commentator using the nick VTO VTO.
 
PARKS AND TREES ACT (CHAPTER 216)
 
Identification card to be produced
6.—(1) The Commissioner or any authorised officer or park ranger, when exercising any of the powers conferred upon him by this Act shall, if not in uniform, declare his office and, on demand, produce such identification card as may be issued to him for the purposes of this Act or any other written law.
 
(2) It shall not be an offence for any person to refuse to comply with any request, demand or order made by the Commissioner or any authorised officer or park ranger not in uniform, who fails to declare his office and refuses to produce his identification card on demand being made by that person.
 
I think anyone reading the above will be very clear as to what a park officer must do if he is to cancel a permit given by the Park. Many people have viewed the video clip of the encounter between the NPark Director and Han Hui Hui and how or what he produced to identify himself when demanded by Han Hui Hui. Did he comply with the Park’s regulation? If not, can he cancel a permit without doing so?
 
There would only be an illegal assembly if the permit was cancelled. Some view that no permit is even needed as provided by the Public Order Act, POA, sanctioned by Parliament and the Constitution.
 
What do you think?

Kopi Level - Yellow

SAF Volunteer Corps – SAFVC

The SAFVC was inaugurated yesterday to allow volunteers from new citizens, first generation PRs and women to serve in the SAF. The concept is right. The more people serving the SAF the more hands we have to use. It also provides an option for those eager beavers who want to serve but complaining that they are not given a chance. It also puts to test those hypocrites who have been crying out loud to serve and not the opportunity is offered to them to make good what they were claiming to do. Anyone wanting to serve this country in uniform now has a chance to do so. The real McCoy will step forward and the fakes and pretenders will step backward.
 
On paper it is a good thing to have a SAFVC. But given the nature and composition of our population, there are high risks involved. We are not a homogenous nation of people, we are a very young country and did not have the benefits of a long history and a strong glue to hold the people together as one united people. People can change sides like chameleon changing colours at will.
 
The most dangerous enemies of an army come from within. It is almost impossible to protect and defend against someone from the inside, living and sleeping together, singing the same national anthem, taking the same pledge and professed to be willing to defend and die for the same country and people. As for our very own citizens, we see them grow up, we know them and their background. Still we do not know them fully. Now we are taking new citizens into our armed forces as volunteer soldiers. How much do we know them and their family background?
 
The other problem is that we should not end up like the Americans, training and equipping people who eventually turned against them and fighting against them, armed by the Americans. Would we be doing the same, training and arming people, potential terrorists, who would turn against us one fine day?
 
Of course the SAF must have all these thought out and all the precautions and safeguards are in place. Hope it would not be as safe as the safeguards for the LPA when an absolute stranger, a foreigner, could end up holding an LPA for a very senior and lonely citizen at the verge of dementia, very vulnerable and very rich.
We cannot afford any slips in matters of national security and defence. The lives of our soldiers are at stake. Did we make a slip and lost two scholars in Sydney? Let’s hope and pray that this SAFVC thing will be well conceived and all potential loopholes for mischief are plugged. It can be turned against us, the people and nation if not carefully managed.
 
Are the benefits of the SAFVC more than enough to justify the risks involved?

Kopi Level - Yellow