TR EMERITUS

A hapless George Yeo said in Parliament yesterday that he was "puzzled" by Romania's latest diplomatic note to Singapore that former "charge d'affaires Silviu Ionescu continues to enjoy diplomatic immunity for the hit-and-run case of Dec 15." In a reply to a question from PAP Irene Ng on the case, George Yeo said: "....it seems to imply that Romania is now claiming that Dr Ionescu was engaged in official duties at the time of the accident and we do not understand how this can possibly be the case." The Ministry of Foreign Affairs had said earlier that based on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Rights, Ionescu was not protected by diplomatic immunity for his deeds and he loses immunity for private acts once he leaves his post in the host country. Mr Yeo added that the red notice issued by Interpol has been "suspended" due to "disagreement" over the intepretation of the article without further elaborating. Former Romania diplomat to Singapore Silviu Ionescu was implicated in a double hit-and-run road traffic accident which killed a 31 year old Malaysian man. For some inexplicable reasons, he was allowed by the Singapore authorities to leave the country three days after the accident. As Foreign Minister, Mr Yeo did not comment on the case until a month later in which he told the media "what happened was very bad." However he was quick to urge Singaporeans to rally around his good friend Jack Neo when he was caught with his pants down in a scandalous affair with a 22 year old girl. There is nothing much Mr Yeo can do about Romania's latest flip-flop except to "pray" that Romania will care about its "face" half as much as Singapore: "Romania is a member state of the European Union which prides itself on its reputation as a community of values. Bucharest understands that more than Romania's own reputation is at stake and that it must live up to the EU's high standards," he said. Given Ionescu's belligerent stance against the Singapore government and Romania's procrastination on the matter, it appears that he may not be returning to Singapore soon after all.   Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

Dear Mr Teo,   I refer to the Straits Times report of your speech at the Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum dated 6 Apr 2010.   Your reported answer to worried young couples who asked you how they can afford a flat with prices going through the roof is to look at the Sengkang and Punggol flats right before their eyes.  These flats that are supposedly nicer than a generation ago now house families that went through the same pains during the last property boom ten years ago.   But does the purchase of a Sengkang or Punggol flat ten years ago answer the question of affordability?  With a possible 30-year loan to service, that question cannot be answered until 20 years later.  For by then, these young couples would no longer be young any more and they would be asking you another question: 'Do we have enough to retire?'   So you see, your answer is quite simply no answer.  Sure you can 'buy' a flat by taking up a mountain of debt.  But that does not mean that the flat is therefore affordable.  Because you would ultimately have to repay the loan and if you spend your entire life servicing your housing loan, what would you be left with for retirement?  If you have to sell your flat back to the government for retirement funds, doesn't that show that you never earned enough to really get to keep the flat to begin with?  Doesn't that show that the flat was actually not affordable in the first place?   The young couples who bought during the last peak of 1995/96 would have ended up paying a lot more than those who bought later, between 2000 and 2006.  The Senkang flat bought in 1995/96 will not be worth more today than a similar one bought between 2000 and 2006 even though the former cost a lot more.  In other words, the young couples who asked you that question a decade ago paid more for nothing.  So if they were to ask you today why have they paid more for nothing, what are you going to tell them?   You said if we keep our expectations realistic, public housing will be affordable.  But expectations have not changed, prices have.  The same Senkang flat that was $200,000 three years ago is now $300,000.  You expect us to expect that to be realistic?   You said that generations after generations of Singaporeans have been able to afford flats.  What you mean is that generations after generations of Singaporeans have been made to sign a lifetime contract to pay for flats.  It is only now that the early generations have finally paid up their flats but are finding themselves with no money for retirement.  For the later generations, their time will come. They too will find themselves with no money for retirement.  Because generations after generations have paid all their moneys all their lives to the HDB and the government who have in turn lost them in billion dollar gambles like the UBS.   I can say quite honestly that yours is a lousy answer that hopefully doesn't mean that you are a lousy minister.     Thank you     Ng Kok Lim  Read More →

作者:费言 一对年轻的中国夫妇在乌节路开餐馆，没半年就倒了回中国老家去，许文远部长说： 『我被他们的年轻、无畏和创业精神所打动。但是他们还年轻。我希望他们不会因为这次的失败而沮丧。毕竟创业做生意，从来不适合那些胆怯之人。』 就和那位花几万元到法国巴黎学烹饪，然后快乐大呼非常值得的环境部常任秘书一样，许文远的心情总和我们这些愚民不一样，总是看到光明积极的一面，总是轻松快乐的。 如果换成是我，大概会赶快叫他停止装修少花钱，告诉他千万别在新加坡开店开餐馆。尽管也有许多餐馆在新加坡赚了大钱，甚至开了许多连锁店。 在新加坡，每个月都有十几家餐厅关门和开门，也许这并没有什么新鲜的地方。不过，这对中国夫妇回到陕西老家后，也许会在早报网或其他中国网上发表“吐口水文 章”，把新加坡形容为一个世界上最不适合做生意的地方。这也没什么了不起，毕竟他亏了整百万在新加坡，花30万装修了餐厅，已经还了半百万的店租，积极赞 助我们的经济发展，让他吐吐口水也应该是值得的。 记得很久前就在网上劝新加坡人，不要做帮忙捐助屋租的开店敢死队。 每天，有多少倒霉的人的店、或者饮食摊位关门大吉呢？每天，又有多少无法寻找到适合的工作赚工资养家的人，希望看间小店，开个小摊做点小生意，以便养家糊口？ 新加坡咖啡店的奶咖啡，标准价目前一杯一块钱，等于马币两块四，我问老板，你这一块钱赚多少呀？你们也赚得太凶了吧？ 他说:"我最多赚你两毛钱！除掉两毛咖啡牛奶糖原料本钱，其他的中国工人工资、劳工税、公积金、屋租、水电、消费税。。。。大概六毛钱要再还出去。这些钱去了哪里？都捐给政府去外国做慈善去了。。。如果新加坡样样都那么便宜，政府那来的钱还部长那么高的薪水呀？” “我现在请的，还是便宜到不可再便宜的中国工人哦。。。一个月八百块钱，工作12个小时哦！我买100杯咖啡，不就赚你20块钱，20块钱在新加坡能做什么？能买洋楼吗？” 记得在春节年除夕的前一晚，到附近咖啡店吃晚餐。 有个卖肉骨面的摊位，父亲煮面，小女孩捧面，是两父女吧？已经是接近年除夕了，生意看来还是冷清惨淡。 我的心较软，看见人家没生意，总希望帮他们吃碗面让他多几块钱收入，不管好不好吃，老是挑生意差的摊位吃东西。叫了$ 4.5的碗肉骨面，没想水准还不差，挺好的呀，怎么会没生意？ 新年过后几天，我记起要吃那摊不错的肉骨面，走过去一看，已经收挡关门了！这家咖啡店，关门空置的摊位就有两三个。那一对摊位倒闭的父女，不知道已经如何了？开摊位亏了多少钱？以后日子怎么过？小女人孩有经济能力上学吗？还是退学去帮人家的摊位捧面捧咖啡了？ 许文远说得好：毕竟创业做生意，从来不适合那些胆怯之人。他毕竟是当部长的人才，他就不像我们这种妇人之仁的人，看到人家倒闭关门，就大惊小怪，就苍然涕下。为什么他总看到光明和积极的一面，而我们老是看到悲哀痛苦和绝望的一面？ 我倒觉得，就如做生意不适合那些胆怯的人一样，找人做部长也不适合那些要求低薪水的人，胆子不够大的，心不够黑，心不够硬的人。 部长的薪水太低，或者因妇人之仁而心太软，会导致他们时常心情郁闷，觉得自己不如别人成功，尤其在跨国公司的总裁面前抬不起头，也经常觉得自己对不起人民。这样的人，会没有足够的闲钱和心情，偶尔可以出国去花几万块钱去学烹饪，让自己的心情经常保持轻松愉快。 给部长和治国人才太低的薪水，或者太高的工作与精神压力，这是很危险的作为。治国的大人或部长，如果无法经常保持愉快轻松的心情，会导致他们郁闷和烦躁而精神不稳，或者常因请到低水平低薪的“妇人之仁”部长，而对刁民愚民产生同情的不切实际想法，就会很容易犯错和作出严重错误的决定。 那种后果，可不是我们现在看到的那么简单了，那可不是如投资UBS或花旗银行亏掉几十亿那么小儿科，或者跑掉几个恐怖分子，崩塌一些工程那么粗浅，到时，他们可能会比中国和邻国的官员更加贪污，无所不贪，会比印尼或菲律宾的官员更加贪污无能和渎职，一条船要淹死个三五百人都是等闲事，搞到亡国都有份，到时你们后 悔就来不及了。 更糟糕的是，当这些治国奇才因为薪水太低跳槽不干，或者被什么跨国公司，挂牌公司挖走了，我们就找不到人才治国了，只好随便找阿狗阿猫来当部长，后果不就更加不堪设想了吗？ 唉。。。 每次喝咖啡的时候，心情总觉得郁闷，因为那杯咖啡里面，大概会有六毛钱捐给政府去外国做大生意做大慈善，养大官和部长！ 看到许多商店关门摊位倒闭的时候， 心情也郁闷，因为大部分的地价、屋价、屋租、店租、公积金、消费税。。。的收益，也都是进了政府的口袋，虽然也算是进了国库，但有必要搞得如此极端地国肥民瘦，国富民穷吗？ 有什么办法呢？千万别让部长们在郁闷与烦躁的心情下治国呀，要不然，后果不堪设想呀。。。。。。 来源：大马论坛  Read More →