SGX promises more dialogue with remisiers

This was the title of an article by a Wong Wei Han in ST on 30 Jan 16.  After reading the content of the article I was wondering whether I should cry or laugh at the silliness of the dialogue. Just the title itself makes me sick. The once in 50 years dialogue would lead to more dialogues. Is more dialogue the solution to the remisiers’ problem? Yes it is the remisiers’ problem. The moribund stock market is the remisiers’ problem. It is definitely not the MAS or SGX’s problem for one good reason. They did not see any problem with the stock market. The stock market is doing very well.

Can you imagine what happened at the dialogue? There were ducks and chickens quacking and cackling but there was no meeting of minds. The frustrated remisiers were there not just for a dialogue per se. They were there not just to complain or vent their frustrations. They were there telling the MAS and SGX that something must be done quickly to save the dying market and industry.

But what happened? The MAS and SGX must be thinking these remisiers must be desperate. There is nothing wrong with the market and nothing needs to be done. And if there is any problem it is the remisiers’ problem, no business, low income and cannot make a living. What has that got to do with the MAS and SGX? Ok, MAS and SGX will be compassionate enough to lend a listening ear. They will have more dialogues if that is what the remisiers want. Ok, happy now?

And the article did narrow done to one big problem that was causing the remisiers the pain and the loss of income, the highly unpopular Minimum Trading Price (MTP). Wow, they finally discovered that this was the problem. ‘The MTP requirement is forcing many companies to consolidate their shares, which has wiped out hundreds of millions in shareholder value and further pressured the already bearish market.’ I am not going to ask who allowed the prices of main board stocks to be split into super penny worthless shares. The good news, this is the problem and if this problem is solved the market will recover and all the remisiers will be happy again as their business will be back. I am very sure this is not the elephant that I was talking about. Anyone sees the elephant yet?

And not all remisiers are so daft. ‘Other remisiers agreed that while the discussion was not in depth and no concrete solutions emerged, the dialogue itself was a welcome gesture.’ So, what are they expecting the MAS and SGX to do when they cannot see anything wrong with the market? Or what would the remisiers want the MAS and SGX to do? What is the elephant?

‘In a statement to The Straits Times, SGX’s rep said: “We are aware there are many long held misconceptions about our market, and we wanted to assure the remisiers that their views and suggestions are heard, and have been, or are being addressed.”’ I see, it is all a matter of misconceptions, nothing serious. Just explain the misconceptions away and all will be fine. Have more dialogues.

If you see a doctor and the doctor did not see anything wrong with you or think that you are not sick, only a misconception, there is no need for any remedies what?  This is what comes out of the dialogue. The ducks said no problem. The chicken said got, then what is the problem? MTP?

More than 100 remisiers and several top MAS and SGX officials spent 3 hours in a dialogue and what came out of it? Has anything been achieved, anything concrete waiting to be done?  One positive result is that there will be more dialogues to explain away any misconceptions…’He (Mr Loh) promised that he will pay attention to our (remisiers) problems and to have more frequent dialogues with us. It’s premature to say whether our (remisiers) issues will be resolved. There is nothing wrong with the market. It is the remisiers and the remisiers’ problems ok?

Luckily no one says ‘No one owes you a living.’

So sad, so sad, so sick....

CAN: Special safe guards needed for criminal cases involving minors

February 2nd, 2016 | Author: Online Press

Singapore based NGO, Community Action Network (CAN) has issued a statement expressing its concern over  the death of 14-year-old, Benjamin Lim who died of “unnatural causes” on Tuesday late afternoon after being interviewed by the police without the accompaniment of his parents.
Below is their statement in full
Community Action Network (CAN) would like to highlight the fact that as a signatory to the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC), Singapore should amend the Child and Young Persons Act (CYPA) to reflect the country’s ratification of the CRC, especially where the defined age of the child is concerned.
It is also clear that we need to implement special safe guards in place for criminal cases involving minors to ensure that those who find themselves assisting with the police in an investigation as a suspect, do not feel intimidated under any circumstances which may lead to trauma.
CAN is of the opinion that the tragic incident involving Benjamin Lim Jun Hui, a 14-year-old who died of “unnatural causes” on Tuesday, could have been prevented had everyone involved in the investigation of this case showed sensitivity towards the fact that they were investigating a minor.
Last but not least, we find it absurd that while public spaces are heavily surveilled with security cameras, interrogation rooms are not fitted with any cameras to allow for transparency of the interrogation process, which may be useful in an incident like this.

Endorsees: Shelley Thio, Roy Ngerng, Jennifer Teo, Woon Tien Wei, Rachel Zeng, Lynn Lee, and Jolovan Wham from Community Action Network together with individual endorsees, Vincent Law and Jevon Ng

The Community Action Network is a Non Governmental Organisation (NGO) based in Singapore concerned about freedom of expression, and civil and political rights.
Background of the case – The secondary three student  was taken to the police station for investigation by five plainclothes police officers from his school on Tuesday morning and was interviewed for over 3 hours. Benjamin had been alleged to have molested an 11-year-old girl on Monday afternoon which he denies. Shortly after returning home with his mother and sister from the police station, he locked himself in his room and jumped out the window.
Read the full story on The Online Citizen.

I just have to reproduce this piece posted in TRE. Would the truth be uncovered to this premature death of a young boy? When a society is sick, the adults are also sick. Don't be deceived by the appearance that all is fine. All the fuck talk about compassion, caring society, about highly trained and educated personnel, how could it lead to this unnatural death out of the blue? This is like handcuffing little kids for petty crimes and misbehaviours and accepted as normal.

Najib is untouchable at home, but not abroad

‘KUALA LUMPUR: The Office of the Attorney-General (OAG) of Switzerland on Saturday (Jan 30) said it will hand a formal request for assistance on 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) in the coming days, according to a spokesman for the OAG. 

"The request for mutual assistance will be handed over to the Malaysian authorities in Kuala Lumpur in the coming days; i.e. a representative of the Swiss government will transfer the OAG's mutual assistance request in the coming days to the respective Malaysian authority in charge," said Andre Marty. "This procedure is well established based on international mutual assistance law."… CNA

It is interesting to note why Switzerland, an innocuous and supposedly politically neutral country, is so interested in the 1MDB case. Why the sudden interest in Malaysia and Najib? Who do you think is behind this development and indirectly is telling Najib that he is not going to get away. Someone is pulling the strings and wanting to settle scores with Najib. Is this the prelude to a regime change?

Najib could be safe at home, but out of the country, like his money, there are many vultures waiting to feast on him.  Someone or some forces are bent on doing Najib in. This is the price to pay for sleeping with the devil.

Take care. Rosmah would be powerless outside Malaysia.

Elected President – Confirming a badly thought out scheme?

When this scheme was pushed through in Parliament, it was touted as the cure all remedy to prevent a rogue govt from dipping into the national reserves. At that time it was the best thought out plan to guard against a rogue govt. In the last few days, everyone in Parliament were condemning this as a loosely thought out scheme with many loopholes that needed to be patched. It is not funny for such an important institution in the Constitution to be aired in Parliament as something flimsy and flawed.

Did anyone then notice anything wrong with this scheme? Why suddenly it was like ‘alamak’ this Elected President scheme is so dangerous and must quickly be changed or else in the next GE we will have a rogue as a president.  Which rogue is likely to become the next Elected President? Or was it that Kishore had an enlightenment, or was it that he woke up from the wrong side of the bed and knocked his head, then God spoke to him, that the Elected President scheme can end up with a rogue president? Was this Elected President scheme designed to prevent a rogue govt from robbing the reserves, and now the scheme itself is also feared to produce a rogue president?  And they want a group of appointed men and women to guard the president? Do they need to guard the group of wise men and women just in case they also become rogues? At this point in time they could not see far into the future. Maybe Kishore would wake up another day and shout, die die, the people guarding the Elected President can also be rogues. Then how, form another committee to guard the wise men and women?

Why was this Elected President a scheme deemed necessary then? I remember that they needed the authority and power of the people to be vested in the President, someone that is elected by the people will have the authority to deal with the elected govt.  Is it not funny that they now proposed to have a few appointed men, not elected by the people, dunno where they got their authority from, to control the Elected President, to veto the President?  Can a few not elected men or women check on a President elected by the majority of the citizens, the 35% is an exception and a bad example. It could be a President elected by 90% of the people! Got logic or not? This is worse than having non elected MPs acting as MPs to control elected MPs or to vote against elected MPs in Parliament.

By the way, why they never think of minority interest then? Why now, must explain or not?  And would this compromise the Elected Presidency? The minority MPs had rightly pointed out that they did not want a minority president that is not worthy, not meritocratic but put there because he is a minority. This is the same reasoning as getting a degree from our university by competing fairly with everyone, not being given a place and a degree because one is a minority. That would compromise the person and his degree if done that way. So, how to deal with this concern and reservation of the minority interest?

I hope after this amendment there will not be more Kishores down the road to cry wolf and said got more problems with the Elected President scheme and more amendments must be made. The rogue idea is really getting everyone very nervous and having nightmares, cannot sleep. Naughty Kishore, better not come up with more bright and scary ideas in the future. He is not known to be the only thinker in this city state for nothing. When he thinks, the unthinking and not thinking will take everything he said as gospel truth. It will happen, in the next PE!

It would be better for Kishore to come up with a complete solution instead of what were being proposed that appeared to have more holes than plasters.  The final result will be full of plasters patching over all the holes.  And it would also be better for Kishore to do the explanation as well to make it sound scholarly and coherent and from a disinterested party.

PS. Under our stringent criteria, it is believed that rich and high position men will not be rogues. Only poor and less able men will likely to be rogues. George Bush Jr and Obama would not even qualify to stand for election as an Elected President without executive powers here.

Is the NCMP another scheme due for more tweakings?

The Lee Li Lian snub of the NCMP seat revealed quite a number of problems, that the scheme was not well thought out, just like the Elected President scheme. There are so many lose ends that were flying loosely in the air and it takes a Lee Li Lian to expose the inadequacy of the thinking process towards the NCMP scheme. There is no need for a Kishore to wake up and exclaim, ‘Gosh, the NCMP scheme could lead to rogue MPs being put into Parliament.’

First point, the scheme did not cater for a case when a candidate refuses to accept the offer of a NCMP seat. The provision was to let Parliament to use its discretion. Now they did not know what to do? Who should the rejected seat be offered to and on what grounds? Can the party of the candidate offer another replacement from the same party from the next best candidate? Or should the party appeal or request to the election office or whoever is authorized to make such a decision?

With the provision of a number of NCMP seats, would it be an automatic process for the office or whoever, to offer the NCMP seat to the next best qualified candidate? Or should it be left as vacant when an offer is turned down? If this be so, what if all 12 candidates offered turned down, no NCMP?

Another point, if the best performing losing candidate happens to be a GRC, should not the offer of NCMP be to all the candidates in the best losing GRC?  Why one only? Isn’t a GRC a version of ‘one for all, all for one’?

Another consideration, is the minority interest a matter of concern here?  If a whole GRC team is offered, then the minority candidate issue would not become an issue. If it is offered to one instead of a GRC team, does it not compromise the intent and purpose of the GRC? Don’t simply brush this aside as a non issue in the case of NCMP.

There must be proper procedures to take care of as there are many variable known possibles. And a case like a candidate refusing to accept a NCMP seat is most possible and should have been taken care off before it becomes an issue and wasting so much time in Parliament for people to ‘chut pattern’ or ‘cho kah chiu’ and making everyone looking so lost and angry. It leaves so much room for politicking.

So, when would a COI be appointed to look into this NCMP scheme to patch up the holes?