Kenneth Jeyaratnam – Substance politician

Kenneth wrote an interesting article posted in the TRE titled, ‘KJ: Whose ‘egregious conduct’ should be punished?’ This is the kind of quality discussion that is sorely needed in today’s local politics, and is what Hsien Loong was talking about. We need more serious and robust discussion on what is happening to our country and where we are heading instead of petty politicking. Kenneth is maturing and showing great substance in the issues he is talking up as a politician of substance. Yes, politicians must be measured by substance, by the serious issues they raised and prepared to engage. Judge the politicians by what they are doing and what they are saying, got substance or no substance, it will all show up quite clearly.
 
It would be good that politicians of substance be elected into Parliament and Kenneth is one of the good candidates that deserved to have a seat and a voice in Parliament. His Reform Party is still a small party and it may be difficult for him to put up a strong team to contest a GRC. His other choice is to take on a single seat ward. There are also suggestions that he may want to team up with the stronger opposition parties to put up a strong combined team to take in a GRC.
 
Kenneth may want to seriously consider speaking to Chee Soon Juan or his father’s former party, the WP to collaborate with them. Think of the greater good for Singapore and the people. Hope Kenneth can put up a good team or go for other options to get into Parliament.
 
There is a sore need for more politicians of substance to be in Parliament to serve the people and country. The people need to be represented by good politicians with hearts in the right place and the next GE is about the best time to do so. The people must choose wisely, for their own sake and for their children’s sake.
 
Yes, we need substance politicians and many of them. We don’t need duds to fill the numbers in Parliament.

Redbean Soup Update

Hi all,

The printer has confirmed the book should be ready on first week of July.
Thank you for your patience.

Redbean

Amos Yee – punishment versus correction

 

 

Offenders and criminals are rightly and expectedly punished by the rule of law when the law is broken. States need law to maintain order, security and rule of conduct for the proper functioning of a society. The rule of law provides a platform for people to coexist under a given set of rules that would make life bearable, orderly and to a great extent predictable.

 

The punishments meted out by the courts are measured and proportional to the crime committed. But before handling out a punishment, there is always the thought of corrective actions, to help the offenders not to commit the same offence again. But in some serious cases, the punishment is severe with no thought of reforming the offender. Death penalties are passed down in crimes where lives were taken or drug offences that are serious enough that corrective or reformative actions are found unnecessary.

 

So there are at least these two considerations when punishment are passed down, to correct and reform if possible, but if the crime is too serious, the court would do away with the corrective actions, and sentence the criminal to death.

 

In the Amos Yee’s case, it is not serious enough to want to just punish for the sake of punishment like serious crime. The thought is about reformation, about turning the boy offender around. And corrective actions can come in many shades and colours, from a pep talk, a warning, to reformative training and jail. What is then appropriate in the Amos Yee case would depend on how serious was the offence. In this particular case, I think many people have great differences in opinion. Some would rubbish this as the rant of a wayward youth and could simply be ignored. Some treated this very seriously and wanted the maximum punishment to be meted out. And the in betweens could vary between the two.

 

What is thus appropriate to be handed down to Amos Yee, a jail sentence or a long detention in a reformative centre? The prosecution is adamant on a long reformative training under detention and justifying it as reformative and corrective training. They are going to reform the boy.  The intent is so noble. Would it work? Would the boy be reformed after the stint in the reformative centre? Or would it lead to rebellion and harden the boy’s attitude towards authority?

 

Obviously a jail sentence would be just a punishment and would not do much good in correcting the boy. But would reformative training be more effective or be worse than a jail sentence? What’s next if the reformative training is ineffective and counter productive, recommend for an extension to keep the boy in detention again until he is reformed?

 

The effectiveness of reformative training for such a case is questionable.  No one can be assured that a reformative training would work and not to hurt or destroy the person under training. The result may be negative and just the opposite. This case would need the wisdom of mature adults to think through it carefully with the good of boy in mind. The corrective action or punishment must befit the severity of the offence.  What would a sincere and kind wise man or woman recommend for the good of the boy?

What would the people in the Kindness Movement recommend?

Loh Boon Chye – A Singaporean CEO in SGX at last!

 

 

It is good news to know that a Singaporean has been appointed as CEO of SGX to replace Magnus Bocker. Hope with his appointment, the flirtation with foreign talents is over and those infected with the foreigner is good disease will not look for another foreigner in the days ahead. The damage done to the Exchange over the last few years is so severe that Loh Boon Chye would have a hard time trying to breath life back into it. And hope they will give him time to understand the inherent problems in the system and to tear out a few chunks of cancerous growth that has cost the Exchange to go into a comma for so long. It would be painful and the Exchange would get worse before returning to its former glorious days.

 

Anyone thinking that the recovering of a dying exchange can be healed in a year or two would be hallucinating and deluding himself. And any small scratches on the surface would not do any good. Hope Loh Boon Chye could get a good grasp of the cancerous growth in the Exchange system and recommend what is necessary to save the Exchange before it is eclipsed and be irrecoverable. Perfunctory or cosmetic changes would not do.

 

It would take a lot of guts and persuasion for the new CEO to revamp the Exchange and return it to becoming what it was meant to be, a stock exchange and not a casino. Perhaps Loh Boon Chye may want to talk to other stakeholders to get a better grasp of the severity of the cancer instead of talking to the converts that are part of the problem. Talk to the people who know and not those who are asking for the return of a lunch break for the sake of a lunch break or those who think cutting commission, reducing bid size or smaller board lots would save the day. They could not tell the difference between a cold and SARS or MERS.

 

The Exchange is in dire straits and needs immediate attention to identify the real cause of its precarious state of being. There is no time for more wayangs and pretensions if the Exchange is to be saved. All the computers plugged into the system must be unplugged immediately as their modus operandi is detrimental to the fundamentals of a stock exchange. They seek short term profits that are contrary to the long term good of stocks and the Exchange. The Stock Exchange must return to its original role of supporting the growth of companies on a long term basis when fund managers can return to talk about fundamentals and long term investment to grow with the companies.

Education – A time and place for everything

National Remembrance Day, half mast, PM and ministers’ condolence messages, support from friends and relatives, kind words, all these meant nothing to the parents that were flown all the way to Kota Kinabalu to identify the bodies of their children and to bring them home, lifeless. This is a tragedy that cannot be described in words. The loss is devastating to the parents and loved ones.
 
Would anyone, any school, wish to continue with such a programme for their 12 year olds or 16 year olds? What is the role and function of a school, a primary school, a secondary school? Is leadership training part of the curriculum, a responsibility of the schools?
 
There is a time for everything, a time to be a child, go to school, be a playful teenager, NS, tertiary education, get a job, settle down and start a family. Schools should not over extend themselves to do things that are beyond their scope of responsibility. Sending children overseas for whatever educational activities should not be the function of primary and secondary schools. Leadership training at 12 is a farce! Go and do well in the PSLE first. Leadership training in an overseas trip is a bigger farce! 2 years in NS may not make any difference in making leaders of NS men. Challenging the 12 year olds to their limits is high falutin. No need to say more.
 
The MOE must re examine the role of education at different levels and keep the eager beavers under control. It is good to want to conquer the world, to be the best of everything. But do it at a proper time. Do not try to over achieve and go astray with fallacious activities not suitable or appropriate for the different age groups. There is no need to prove beyond what the schools are set out to do. Going the extra mile is always good if done within limits and without endangering the safety of the children.
 
Educators are expected to be professionals and to know the limits of what they can do and should do and what is unnecessary and superfluous. Do not expose the educators to do things that they would regret for the rest of their lives. No amount of kind words can bring back the children that were lost. The parents would live a life of painful memories and regrets of their loved ones prematurely taken from them. Can you imagine the grief?
 
I am lost for words to console the victims’ families. The loss of lives is so unnecessary. We don’t have earthquake but have so many earthquake victims to mourn and a day of remembrance for it. So unnecessary.