GE 2015 – 2 confirmations

Let me revisit this shocking GE that knocked everyone out of his comfort zones. The results were not expected by all quarters. There were shocking disappointments and shocking disbeliefs in the camps of the losers and winners. The results of GE2015 confirmed two broad issues. The first is a near total rejection of the opposition camp. The mucking around of standing for election for the sake of standing for election is not going to be treated kindly by the electorate. Be serious, the electorate is not going to elect one or two persons to parliament to satisfy their egos. The electorate is looking for a serious contender, a real alternative party that can form the next govt should the time comes when the ruling party is no longer wanted. Getting one or two persons to parliament is meaningless. Getting a few people to parliament is useless. Come up with a strong party with a slate of good candidates that can mean business. No more merrymakers and party poopers.

The electorate is not writing off the opposition parties but wanting something that is real and effective, to present a real alternative to the ruling party. I have written about this and calling all serious minded politicians of all camps that want to see Singapore well and to serve the interests of the Singaporeans to get their acts together, discard all their inhibitions and historical baggages and party idiosyncrasies, personal pride and egos, come together on a new slate, with the best men and women available to form a new party or coalition for the next GE.

The second confirmation, if you want to agree with me, is the endorsement of the PAP, what the PAP has been doing and its policies. The GE was in a way saying that they were all or at least 69.8% were in support of the PAP and its policies. So the PAP can continue to do what it thinks is good for the people and country. The PAP can continue with the influx of more immigrants, towards 6.9m or more. The PAP can continue with the foreign talents are best to replace the lazy and no talent citizens. The PMETs can be trained to become taxi drivers, security guards or go overseas to earn their livings. The policies on the CPF, housing, high ministerial pay, high cost of living etc etc are all good and should continue.  The GE 2015 results said the electorate supported the PAP’s policies.

This is the second confirmation. More and more of the same, more scholarships for foreigners, more top jobs for foreigners, the people are happy with what is happening, the people are happy with the ruling govt.  We are heading in the right direction towards more good years till SG100. Just do what you think is right.

Benjamin Lim: A boy died, a father’s cry

I reproduce part of Benjamin’s father’s open letter posted in the TOC here. It broke my heart. I don’t care how many people are happily celebrating their CNY. Benjamin’s family are going through hell now reflecting on the agonizing and harrowing moments poor Benjamin had to go through it, all alone, trembling in fear, in the hands of strangers that have full authority over his freedom and the fate of his life. Let this never happened again to any child in this country.

‘There are now reports and statements from the relevant authorities that procedure will be subjected to review in regard to police questioning of minors without the presence of an adult. As Benjamin’s father, I felt this is necessary, but it came too late. It is necessary because we pray that the same treatment my son received from the police, will never ever happen again to another child.

The school, in my opinion, should never have handed over my son to five police officers during recess hours without having to wait for the arrival of family members. I hate to think of the amount of fear he had at that moment, how helpless he was then. To be escorted to the car park from the principle’s office, one student in uniform accompanied by a few adults in civilian clothes with police ID cards, how discreet this could be? I felt the embarrassment and the shame my son was subjected to.

As Benjamin’s father, it broke my heart when I later found out that my son was brought to the principle’s office with one bun on his hand; and a drink on the other from the school canteen.

I cannot understand why the teacher; or office staff did not allow my son to at least finish his food at the canteen before s/he brought him to the principle’s office. It was reported that my son was allowed to finish his breakfast before being taken to the police station. But that was after the interview. My boy had his last meal in the school, a cold bun.

Those adults that were with him at that moment, the police officers and staffs of Northview Secondary School, may I take this opportunity to tell you that my son would prefer to have his meal when it is hot.

When Benjamin finally left the police station at 2.50pm, he told his mother and sister that he was not given anything to eat, nothing to drink throughout the 3 or more hours of engagement with police investigators in the police station. At his age, my son gets hungry very fast after one meal. Just a cold bun and a drink, and we cannot be sure if he did finish the bun because he was under pressure then. Benjamin must be feeling hungry, thirsty, throughout the few hours he was with the police investigator. I can imagine the anxiety felt by my son throughout the ordeal.

As Benjamin’s father, it is now my duty to seek justice for my son. We do not know if he has indeed committed the alleged offence of “outrage of modesty” of the 11-year-old girl. Until the coroner hearing, we do not want to speculate whether the offence has indeed taken place.

That said, as parents we cannot forget and we cannot forgive the way my son was treated, from the school to the time he was in police custody. I have this to say to the school authorities. We as parents we entrusted our children to you. You have a duty to ensure that our children are appropriately taken care of, reasonably protected and have their interest in your priority.

To the police, I have to tell you that by sending 5 plainclothes officers to one secondary school in 2 unmarked police vehicles are never discreet. You are there to look for one secondary 3 student. You are not there to apprehend an adult suspect with full ability to escape or capable in single combat.

To Benjamin’s friends and team mates from the National Police Cadet Corps, thank you for the lovely cards and your encouraging words to SGT (NPCC) Benjamin Lim. To his colleagues from McDonald’s, he loved his job and he was grateful to be part of the team. If the branch manager would allow, please give your consent for him to keep his staff’s ID card.

Last but not least, on behalf of the family, I thank everyone for coming forward to show their support to Benjamin. We have created an email account dedicated to Benjamin, benjamin26012016@yahoo.com.sg. Friends and members of public are welcome to write to us.’

It is so painful to read the letter and to imagine what went through the mind of a 14 year old boy, alone, helpless, no one to turn to, gripped in fear, at the mercy of strangers in the name of the law of the country. Benjamin must be hoping that papa or mama was there with him, or at least a caring teacher to hold his hands, to support and comfort him during the harrowing hours in the police station.

This traumatic ordeal is going to haunt many people through the lunar New Year festivities.

Why so much deference to the PAP?

I quote this comment from Low Thia Khiang from the Statestimes Review, ‘“I have seen how the PAP works. And of course the rejection is because we don’t allow political parties to use common areas. You use the PA – the People’s Association, you use grassroots advisers – come on, let’s be honest about that.

…We understand the political reality. We understand that the struggle for functional democracy by a loyal opposition must be fought from within the existing system, under the law legislated by Parliament, even though we disagree with them.”

says Workers’ Party Low Thia Kiang, who lamented about the state of Singapore politics in Parliament today (Jan 29).’

I am not sure if this was the exact words of Low Thia Khiang quoted verbatim. I find the phrase ‘loyal opposition’ so creepy. What is there to be loyal or not loyal to be in the opposition? Opposition parties should only be loyal to Singaporeans, and that includes the PAP.  There is no need to be loyal to a ruling party. What does Low Thia Khiang meant by calling himself ‘loyal opposition’? What if he is not a ‘loyal opposition’? Should the opposition parties by ‘loyal opposition’ ie loyal to the ruling party or loyal to the state?

Is this phrase superfluous, unnecessary, a sign of weakness, meek? An opposition is an opposition and should disagree when it disagrees with the ruling party. The disagreement should be based on the national good, national interest and the people’s interest. It could be just a different way of looking at things and wanting to do things differently, no one knows which is the right way or wrong way except to look at it from the interest of the people as first principle.

So, when oppose just oppose lah. There is no necessity to claim to be ‘loyal opposition’.  What do you think? Tiok boh? No need to be ‘khek kee’ mah, as long as one is not saying or doing anything wrong to the country and citizens.

SGX: What is the elephant?

I will borrow a favorite question from a blogger here, ‘Why did the chicken cross the road?’ To find out what is an elephant. I have several questions that I would like to ask, not expecting an answer from the SGX, so better address them to MAS and to Heng Swee Kiat better still. Hopefully then people will see the light.

How much does it cost a fund to set up an operation here to trade using super computers? Initial cost of $50m to $100m and an annual overhead of $30m? How much would be the returns for such an operation to be profitable and sustainable? I reckon a return of $50m per annum would be the bottom line. Could such an operation deriving profits from skimming arbitrages and front running on inefficiencies in the market make this kind of money and be worth the high set up and operating cost? Why would computer traders invest so much capital and overheads to make a few dollars? Cannot be right? How many of such computer traders are here with their super computers plugged into the SGX system to feed on live data to trade against the rest of the innocent investors?

Assuming there are 10 such computer operators, could be 20 or more, with each expecting a return of $50m annually to justify the cost of investment, it would mean they would have to scoop up $500m from the market. This cannot be achieved by just arbitraging or front running. What other advantages did the computer traders have over the other traders to be able to rake in millions in guaranteed profits and not reveal to the public? What about information like keying into the system to tell the super computers that someone is shorting? Would the supercomputers be computing on how to take advantage of such information to make profits?

The computers are having price sensitive information, like who buys what or sells what at what price and at what volumes that ordinary investors did not have. Isn’t this insider trading? Isn’t this front running? Aren’t these a violation of SGX’s principle of providing a level playing field for fair trading? Are these acttivities criminal?

Now what would I like to ask Heng Swee Kiat and the MAS?

1.     How many super computers are plugged into the SGX trading system?

2.     What are they doing, what price sensitive information the computer traders would have that other investors did not have?

3.     Are computer traders, with their access to the SGX system and data and trading to profit from such information a violation of SGX trading rules and regulations and a crime?

4.     What are the records of the profits of the computer traders

5.     Would MAS/Heng Swee Kiat ask SGX to explain to the public/investors how the super computers work, the live data they are mining from the SGX system and how are these used to profit from the system? If the computers are not plugged into the SGX system, if the computers are operating independently within the premises of computer traders, they have all the rights to confidentiality of their computers. But the computers are now plugged into the SGX to take advantage of the system, their operations cannot be confidential anymore. There is a need for more transparency to see if there are cheating the system and the investors. The public/investors have all the rights to know what they are up against. It is only fair.

I hope these questions can be brought to the Remisiers Society and to the attention of MAS and Heng Swee Kiat. Make these questions public, get the media to raise it for public awareness and to educate the public on what is going on and whether there is any violation of the SGX’s trading rules and regulation, whether it is criminal to begin with.

Get the elephant out of the system if you want a fair system, a level playing field.

Benjamin Lim: A life gone through apathy and bo chap

I reproduced a few paras from a post, ‘Where is compassion’ in TRE by a Zarina Jaffar, a teacher on Benjamin’s tragic and unwarranted death.

‘To Benjamin’s parents, no words are enough to release you from your pain. Your boy is a good son. Society, rules and order are cruel towards him. May Benjamin soul rest in peace.

To the Policemen, Principal, Vice Principal, Counsellor, what you fail to do when Benjamin is alive, put it right in his death. His parents need closure. There is no need to give excuses and get defensive. A wrong can never be right if it is wrong. Give the much-needed closure that Benjamin’s parents now and the answer they are seeking. That is the most honourable things you guys can do now, but the burden of guilt will always be yours to deal with.

To the Ministry of Education, please take a personal interest in this case and assist Benjamin parents to come to terms with their loss.

To the society, let’s show our love and support to Benjamin parents in their hours of needs especially with the upcoming Chinese New year. I similarly lost a loved one eight years ago. But the pain of what Benjamin parents is going trough, none of us will ever understand.’

To those people who directly or indirectly contributed to Benjamin’s death, may this episode haunt their conscience for the rest of their lives.  He was only 14! And the insensitive Today paper has an article with this title, MPs, expert laud police review of interview process involving minors’.  Why review now when it should not have happened?  A child must be protected and the law is there to protect a child. And it was quoted that the police are now considering whether adults are appropriate to be present during interviews of minors and whether the proceeding should be video recorded. Unbelieveable! Still living in the medieval age.

And ‘According to an ex police officer who did not wish to be named, the police currently do not allow other parties to be present during interviews because it might hamper investigations. The police knew something is drastically wrong with the procedures. Would they also investigate what actually happened that led to the boy’s death? A healthy normal boy went to school, after being brought to the police station by 5 policemen, returned home and jumped out of the window. Dead. Gone forever. The family lost a son out of the blue.

Shanmugam, what have you got to say? This happened in your watch.