TR EMERITUS

Together with Ministers S. Iswaran and Zaqy Mohamad, DPM Heng Swee Keat visited the SPH news centre on Monday (11 Nov) to obtain a first-hand look at how media outlets in the group operate. Speaking on a Facebook post, the PM-designate said that "the role of mainstream media remains the same - to be a trusted and reliable news source for audiences". He added that this was particularly important as "fake news is proliferating globally and has been often used as a tool to divide rather than unite people" He concluded in his post: "I hope that SPH will constantly innovate to remain competitive and relevant, while staying grounded to what their core values are - embracing change and upholding integrity." ST US bureau chief in 2009: Editors have been groomed as pro-government supporters and government exerts pressure to ensure that articles follow government's line In 2009, a wikileaks cable revealed an admission by Chua Chin Hon - who served as the US bureau chief for Straits Times - that the paper's "editors have all been groomed as pro-government supporters and are careful to ensure that reporting of local events adheres closely to the official line". Chua also added that "the government exerts significant pressure on ST editors to ensure that published articles follow the government's line". According to a Wikipedia entry entitled "Media of Singapore", a telephone poll of 1092 respondents found that 56% agreed that "there is too much government control of newspapers and television" while 48% felt that "newspapers and television are biased when they report on Singapore politics, political parties and elections" Meanwhile, Singapore ranked 151th place in the latest World Press Freedom Index. This places it behind countries such as South Sudan (139th place) and Afghanistan (121th Place). What do you think?      Read More →

I have taken the trouble to "gatecrash" two PAP MPS. The first one was held by Mr. Chee Hong Tat at Blk 122 Toa Payoh. The PMD delivery riders had initially planned to visit Dr. Ng Eng Heng's MPS at Blk 178 Toa Payoh Central but he was nowhere to be found. Thus, they switched to Mr Chee's MPS. When I reached the venue, Mr Chee was just repeating that he will reflect the riders' views to Ministry of Transport and asking riders who need any help to see him at his MPS one by one. The riders got a bit impatient and frustrated because they want some assurance from their MP that he will do something about the situation. I stepped in and spoke, saying that most of the riders were not seeking any financial help from him and wanted to make their own decent living. They only wanted to know what plans does he have in mind as their MP. Is he going to raise this issue in parliament? He has no answer to that and totally clueless on what to do with the situation. Instead, he went on to accuse of me of "making political points". I replied that this was with regards to the livelihood of all the people there. (Admittedly, this is politics.) Not surprisingly, many riders there were utterly disappointed with their MP. Maybe I shouldn't be too harsh on him because he is not the Minister-in-charge of transport. But at the very least, he should assure his constituents he will represent their anxiety in parliament! That is actually the least he could do. After that, I went to Anchorvale CC for a bigger dialogue session with Dr Lam Pin Min. Dr. Lam was ending his speech on why the decision of banning PMD from footpath was made when I arrived. He was responding to question when he kept saying that all other measures "suggested" to license and train riders "cannot guarantee 100% no accident". He was going round and round about how the "ideal situation" of zero-accident cannot be met. Thus, MOT has no choice but to ban PMDs from public footpaths. I had heard him for 10 minutes and decided to respond. I said there is no "ideal situation" in this world. We have car accidents on the road everyday but do we ban all the vehicles on the road? There was an uproar. I made the point that either you believe PMDs will bring benefits to our society or not. If not, then ban it. If yes, look at measures to get it used safely. He insisted that he values PMD but I told him, what he said doesn't tally with what he did! Anyway, he wanted me to allow him to answer to his residents first, so I obliged. I stood there and listen to his answers to the questions from the floor without interrupting. He went on and on about how the $7 million grant will help the food delivery riders to continue their work and earn their living. Only when he had done with all other questions, I wanted to raise the last point - but apparently he refused to answer my question. I asked all the riders at the dialogue whether they want me to ask the question? There was a resounding "YES" from the audience! I thus asked my question despite knowing he won't answer. I told him that while he thinks he is doing good by giving out the $7 Million grant to food delivery riders to change from e-scooters to e-Bikes, but what he is actually doing is to put their lives to higher risk of getting hit and injured by cars on the road! There was an uproar from those present. If he really cares and talks about safety so much, why would he want to do that? He is banning E-Scooter now because he cannot have that "ideal situation" of Zero Accidents. But would he ban Ebikes again when there are fatal accidents again? Of course, he didn't reply. What could he have replied any way? PS - This may really be a silly night but I did not "Heckle" Dr. Lam contrary to what Mothership reported. He is a Minister of State for goodness sake! I didn't use "derisory" words against him at all - just a matter of questions which he could hardly answer.   Goh Meng Seng      Read More →

I disagree with Heng Swee Keat when he said that telling the people in advance that GST will go up from 7 to 9 percent is integrity. I want to make it clear that I am not saying the increasing of the GST from 7 to 9 percent is right or wrong. What I am saying is that telling the people in advance that GST will go up is merely mentally preparing the people for the eventuality at best and arrogance at worst. To me, integrity has not part in it, not even a semblance of it. Fellow netizens have shared funny but relevant examples and I will mention 2 of them. If I told you that I am going to fart and then I farted in your face. Is that integrity? Or if a bank robber tells the bank teller that he is going to rob the bank and then he pulls out a gun. Again, is that integrity? It is very, very crucial that our citizens must have the ability and the willingness to think critically because for our country, it can be a matter of our collective survival or irrelevance. I believe that too many simple-minded and hardcore PAP supporters are too eager to agree with whatever their leaders say even before they open their mouth. That cannot be good or healthy for our country. Think clearly and objectively.   Simon Lim      Read More →