TR EMERITUS

(Update at 6pm: My legal Morocco Mole (MM) got it almost right: [ LINK ]. By going for summary judgment, PM is saying Roy’s defence is BS. MM told me that PM’s lawyer was going to strike out defence. Going for summary judgment is more aggressive.) Here’s a constructive suggestion to PM that will make him appear magnanimous and yet deter future libelers and slanderes. Below is my suggestion on what PM should ask Roy to do in return for accepting Roy’s published apology: 1. I recognise that the Article means and is understood to mean that Mr Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore and Chairman of GIC, is guilty of criminal misappropriation of the monies paid by Singaporeans to the Central Provident Fund. 2. I admit and acknowledge that this allegation is false and completely without foundation. 3. I unreservedly apologise to Mr Lee Hsien Loong for the distress and embarrassment caused to him by this allegation. and waiving damages damages. PM should make Roy listen to Tharman’s CPF speech in parly on Tuesday 10,000 times, continuously (with breaks for toilet and meals) in an un-airconditioned room. At the end of the session, he must be able recite the speech word for word without any mistakes. If he can’t, he has to listen to the speech until he can recite it word for word. And then he must write out the speech in longhand 100,000 times. That should be sufficient deterrent to others who want to defame PM. They might have to undergo similar treatment. But then Maruah would object that this would amount to torture or cruel, unusual punishment. But then Maruah is the kind of organisation to object if the govt placed a middle-class activist in a cell with aircon, tv and internet access: guy must have personal toilet with a bidet. But let’s be serious: what does a macho, man-biting talented footballer have to do with a gentle, unemployed gay S’porean star blogger with itchy fingers. Both are celebrities. Both are braggadocios, despite their undoubted abilities (one with his footie wizardry, the other with word spinning). Both are full of self-confidence. And they enjoy changing their stories to fit their ends. Suraez “The truth is that my colleague Giorgio Chiellini suffered the physical result of a bite in the collision he suffered with me,” said Suarez in a statement. Suarez has previously said he lost his balance and did not bite Chiellini. The media reports that he changed his story after being told that Barcelona would not buy an unrepentant Suarez. Roy After PM sued him for defamation, he was pretty quick to say on 23 May: I recognise that the Article means and is understood to mean that Mr Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore and Chairman of GIC, is guilty of criminal misappropriation of the monies paid by Singaporeans to the Central Provident Fund. 3. I admit and acknowledge that this allegation is false and completely without foundation. 4. I unreservedly apologise to Mr Lee Hsien Loong for the distress and embarrassment caused to him by this allegation. Now (OK 17th June) he wrote: “You know, when I wrote the article, it was never my intention to say that the prime minister had misappropriated the money. And I have never said this.”  What about the apology Roy? And his defence is now that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has “no cause of action” against his client based on Article 14 of the Constitution which gives Singaporeans the right to freedom of speech and expression**. Err so why did he apologise in the first place? He now says he had no intention to libel and didn’t and anyway PM can’t sue him. (Furthermore, * His lawyer Ravi also denied allegations of malice on Ngerng’s part and also denied that the prime minister is entitled to aggravated damages.) And given that the apology was not accepted, an apology that he could have continued using in his defence, and he has changed his defence, why hasn’t he come out to say the following is “inoperative” or “tak pakah”? As it is I recognise that the Article means and is understood to mean that Mr Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore and Chairman of GIC, is guilty of criminal misappropriation of the monies paid by Singaporeans to the Central Provident Fund. 3.       I admit and acknowledge that this allegation is false and completely without foundation. 4.       I unreservedly apologise to Mr Lee Hsien Loong for the distress and embarrassment caused to him by this allegation. still stands and it is why PM’s press secretary is legally correct to say I refer to the article “A butterfly on a wheel” (June 13th). You referred to an “alleged ‘serious libel’” by Roy Ngerng. This is not an allegation. Mr Ngerng has publicly admitted accusing Lee Hsien Loong, the prime minister, of criminal misappropriation of pension funds, falsely and completely without foundation …, despite a “Marxist Conspirator” saying AG should take action against her. Although a lawyer, she is talking rot. Saying that the apology is no longer applicable, given that PM has refused to accept it will make sense of Ravi’s comments that the case is sub judice. As it stands, M** Ravi’s comment does not make sense because, it seems that so long as Roy doesn’t withdraw his posting of 23 May, the legal position is that he has admitted that he has defamed PM and that the only issue before the courts is that of damages. My Morocco Mole in legal circles says that the PM’s lawyer will be making an application to strike out Roy’s defence that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has “no cause of action” based on Article 14 of the Constitution which gives Singaporeans the right to freedom of speech and expression*. One ground is that Roy has apologised. On the issue of whether the suit prevents S’poreans from discussing the CPF issue, a claim Maruah makes, Roy’s sifu, Uncle Leong, has written extensively on the issue, making most of the points that Roy claims he has discovered and exposed. Actually Uncle Leong has been telling us about these “discovered” dfacts fir yrs. Yet Uncle Leong has not been sued or lauded like Roy because he has avoided making allegations of theft. His articles are factual. Why Uncle Leong is sifu? Roy came into prominence in 2012 (I think) when he co-authored with Uncle Leong a series of articles on the CPF system. Before that series, Roy was a no-body. Related posts: http://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/05/05/who-is-right-pm-heart-truths-consumer-survey/ http://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/constructive-suggestions-for-anti-pap-paper-warriors/ — *Derbyshire principle” that his myopic (or inability to count?) gf and sidekick chickened out of trying? When TRE relaunched, PM’s brother sued and Ravi wanted to defend TRE on the basis of Article 14. Richard Wan (elite school boy and scholar) found another lawyer to kai seow. TRE lived to fight another day. **No jokes pls like that the “P” in “P Ravi” stands for “Politican”. It stands for Philemon.   Cynical Investor [Source]: Thoughts of a Cynical Investor (http://atans1.wordpress.com).    Read More →

Health Minister Gan Kim Yong (Photo: Parliament website) Reading the recent Parliament discussion on our Medishield reserves and its loss ratio got me thinking…and writing. Insurance Loss Ratio From an insurance point of view, a loss ratio is defined as the ratio of what an insurance company pays in benefits and associated expenses (such as adjustments) to what is collected in premiums, expressed as a percentage. It was highlighted in Parliament that the loss ratio of Medishield last year was around 44%. Meaning for every $1 of premiums collected, 44 cents was paid out. Solely based on this figure, the premiums would appear high. It could easily be halved from current levels and the Medishield scheme would still be very healthy with a loss ratio of less than 90%. Health Minister Gan Kim Yong explained that the 44% was not the correct figure to look at. A better comparison would be with the incurred loss ratio as it also took into account future liabilities (of incurred claims). The example given was that someone with kidney failure will need to make dialysis claims not only in the first year, but for the rest of his life. If you factor in all these potential future claims, the incurred loss ratio for Medishield over the last five years was actually 96%. I did a mental thought experiment and was not very convinced with the use of this incurred loss ratio. Before I share my thought experiment, just a small disclaimer. While I’m fairly well versed with health insurance, I’m no actuary. Hopefully, someone more qualified can help to expand on these ideas and correct me if I’m wrong. One Person Medishield Let’s look at an extreme case where Medishield only covers one person and every year, this person pays $1000 in premiums. His kidney fails and he needs regular dialysis, of which Medishield pays $900 every year. The means that the loss ratio is 90%. If the premiums and Medishield claim for the dialysis does not change for the rest of this person’s life, the Medishield scheme would still be completely solvent as it only pays out 90% of premiums collected. This is no need to factor in for any future losses as the system basically takes care of itself year after year. Now let us look at the incurred loss ratio for the same example. First of all, we need to estimate what is the potential future liability of this kidney dialysis patient. Say we use 9 years of future claims. The total incurred losses (current + potential) now becomes 900 + (900 x 9) = $9000 and the incurred loss ratio works out to be a staggering 900%. To keep the incurred loss ratio at 90%, the annual premiums for this person will have to be increased to $10,000! My calculation of the incurred losses did not take into account the present and future value of money. If I did, the losses and premiums will be lower. With regards to the use of  incurred loss ratio to determine the level of premiums, I don’t like it for a few reasons: A lot of premiums is collected upfront and Medishield ends up having a lot of money to invest, which might not be its core expertise. It is not easy to determine future liabilities and brings another uncertainty to the calculation of the incurred loss ratio. With Medishield Life going to be a compulsory scheme, there is even less of a need to collect too much surplus as it is possible to adjust the premiums accordingly whenever overall claims go on a sustained uptrend. As a nationwide scheme, the pool is also huge and total claims will be less volatile and predictable. Private health insurance providers that have a smaller pool will have claims that are more volatile and cannot easily raise their premiums without the risk of their customers leaving and making their pool even smaller. Personally, I think Medishield premiums are priced too conservatively in accumulating reserves. The Medishield Life Review Committee has recommended greater transparency on their reserve requirements. That, together with its premiums pricing principles, will help the public  to understand and appreciate the scheme better. Martin Lee *  The author blogs at  Martin Lee @ SG. This article can be found at http://www.martinlee.sg/medishield-reserves-loss-ratio/  Read More →

Ambassador & Dean of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Barry Desker I refer to the 13 Feb 2014 Straits Times article “Why the past matters” by Mr Barry Desker. According to Mr Desker, people in Singapore did not see themselves as one people in 1942 and at most cared only for their families, clans or ethnic groups. Mr Desker would be pleased to know that back in 1935, a Chinese firm was already giving out scholarships that came specifically without the race criteria while in 1937, the YWCA already represented women across 20 racial groups. These are some of the examples of people in Singapore caring beyond clan and ethnicity prior to 1942. • CHINESE FIRM'S $10,000 JUBILEE SCHOLARSHIPS The Colonial Government has received, through Mr. Gaw Khek Khiam, J.P., chairman of the directors of the Ho Ho Biscuit Factory, Limited, of 33, Chin Swee Road, Singapore, a cheque for $10,000 from his company for the foundation of a scholarship or scholarships at the Singapore Trade School ... The donors have also expressed the desire that no racial criterion shall be applied to the selection of scholars, the only suggested qualification being that they should have been educated at Malayan (preferably Colony) schools and be the children of parents who have resided in Malay for a number of years. [The Straits Times, 30 April 1935, Page 11] • 20 RACES REPRESENTED IN LOCAL Y.W.C.A. The Y.W.C.A. was not a charity; it was just a woman's club which developed character and gave younger women opportunities to enjoy a fuller life. Although it was a Christian organisation the membership was not restricted to Christians. The officers and voting members were, of course, Christians. The work in Singapore was of an international character, no fewer than 20 different racial groups being represented in the membership. Besides finding work for those girls who are unemployed, the Y.W.C.A. also looked after women who were strangers to Singapore. [The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser (1884-1942), 22 April 1937, Page 3] According to Mr Desker, Singapore society only came together gradually over the last 50 years to create a sense of nationhood and identity that goes beyond clan, race, language or religion and of emerging ties linking Singaporeans based on Singlish and eating roti prata or satay. 50 years ago is 1964. Is Mr Desker saying the Chinese and Malays only started eating roti prata after 1964 or the Chinese and Indians only started eating satay after 1964? That would be most silly indeed. Mr Desker would be pleased to know that Singapore society was already coming together beyond clan, race, language or religion prior to 1964. • Racial Harmony In Malaya To those who know their Malaya from one end to the other, no less than to the casual visitor, it is a constant source of wonder how so many different races and communities live and work together in the utmost harmony ... we repeat, that the different communities live and work in harmony because the British system of justice and administration enables them to obtain fair play. There are no discriminatory or repressive laws, there are few, if any race prejudices in the bazaars and counting houses, there is nothing to prevent the humblest coolie from rising to great wealth - many indeed have done so ... [The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser (1884-1942), 26 July 1935, Page 8] • MALAYA'S RACIAL HARMONY IMPRESSES "It is a pleasing feature of life in Malaya that there is not merely a complete absence of friction but much cordiality in the relations between the different races inhabiting it. It is quite common to find Malays, Chinese and Indian all living the same street in perfect harmony and apparently, with some degree of intimacy." The Mui-Tsai Commission Report Chapter VIII. [The Straits Times, 1 March 1937, Page 13] • SINO-MALAYAN AMITY IMPRESSES GEN. WU It makes me happy to see the Chinese and other peoples here co-operating so well with each other. [The Straits Times, 15 November 1940, Page 11] • The Malayan Melting-Pot The Sultan of Perak ... "I wish to say to you that Chinese and Malay in the past eighty years before the coming of the Japanese lived side by side in absolute peace. The Chinese lived in the midst of Malays without any trace of fear, and the Chinese also fearlessly and peacefully pursued his vocation in any Malay settlement ... Here in Singapore we are constantly impressed by the easy, natural and friendly relationships existing between Eurasians, Straits Chinese, Straits-born Indians and others who went to school together and now meet each other in adult life ... Boys - and girls - of the local-born communities who sit side by side in the classrooms of Raffles Institution and St. Joseph's and St. Andrew's and the A.C.S., learn to become unconscious of racial differences, to meet on common ground, and to accept each other simply as Singaporeans - not as members of this racial community or that. Naturally this process is more penetrating in the secondary schools than in the elementary ones, because the influence of the school is exerted for a longer period and in years of higher mental awakening ... [The Straits Times, 25 May 1946, Page 4] • S'pore an 'example' of race harmony Singapore has set an example to the world of racial harmony, said Mr. T. P. F. McNeice, President, in reply to Mr. C. F. J. Ess, at the meeting of the City Council yesterday. [The Straits Times, 29 September 1951, Page 5] • Duchess praises 'one people' idea The Duchess of Kent, the first Royal Freeman of the City of Singapore, said yesterday that its people were engaged upon a project of far-reaching significance - the casting into one mould of elements derived from many different cultures. "This plan in itself testifies to the good will and good sense so characteristic of the people of this island,' she said. [The Straits Times, 2 October 1952, Page 1] • Police help island troop to learn sailing Singapore's 84th Pulau Tekong Sea-Scout Troop is certainly helping to strengthen the bonds of friendship among Malays and Chinese on the island. It is undoubtedly a Sino-Malay affair for half of its 20 members are drawn from each race. Even the four patrol leaders in the troop are equally divided on a communal basis. Members of each patrol, however, are mixed. [The Singapore Free Press, 17 July 1953, Page 12] • Our racial harmony inspiration to bishop An American Negro bishop said in Singapore yesterday that complete racial harmony among students and teachers in Colony schools was an inspiration to him. He said it proved his theory that if you get people of all races close enough together for them to smile at each other racial pride and prejudices will vanish quickly [The Straits Times, 30 September 1954, Page 4] • A Chinese bank to train Malay The Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation has awarded a one-year scholarship to Inche Mohamed Yasin bin Abdul Rahman, a member of the Johore State Council, to study general banking with its head office in Singapore. This is the first time the bank has awarded such a scholarship to a Malay. [The Straits Times, 3 February 1955, Page 4] • 'See yourselves as just one people' Governor's advice to teachers The people of Singapore must not think of themselves in terms of their racial and language loyalties, but as Singaporeans, the Governor, Sir William Goode, said yesterday. Schools must be Singapore schools, not English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil schools ... In 1953, he said, English was the only medium of instruction at the college, but today they worked in English, Malay and Chinese. "In this way too the different races in the Colony can be welded into a united people with a common loyalty and a common pride in Singapore and a united determination to work for the good of Singapore." [The Straits Times, 12 October 1958, Page 7] • U.S. TEACHERS 'IMPRESSED' Eighteen American teachers (above) from 11 states left for Bangkok by CPA this morning after a four-day stay here ... Prof. Mulder said they were impressed by the racial harmony they had observed in Singapore and had come to know the state much better. [The Singapore Free Press, 16 July 1959, Page 10] • TELLING THE PEOPLE So many races, but one nation If a world list were compiled of countries enjoying high degree of inter-racial harmony Singapore would undoubtedly occupy a leading position. Here people of various races work, play and live together happily as one nation. They help each other in time of difficulty. They rejoice in each other's happiness. And they share each other's grief. Such is the respect, understanding and goodwill between the Malay, Chinese, Indian, European and other races living here that visitors in Singapore have often praised the State as an example for the rest of the world to follow. The latest visitor to express this view is Mrs. A. Qugley, formerly of the Chicago Tribune, who passed through the State during a tour of the Far East. She said that "the people here must be extremely proud of themselves for the "really great" racial harmony that was evident [The Singapore Free Press, 6 July 1961, Page 6] Mr Desker wrote of our vulnerability as a city state despite our prosperity and enviable standard of living now. But city states like Rome and Venice have outlived the empires to which they belonged to. Larger nations like Japan and Ukraine are also susceptible to feeling threatened by even larger nations like China and Russia. Vulnerability is thus not a function of being or not being a city state but a function of our military capability vis-à-vis those of our neighbors as well as the prevailing political climate. In both military and political terms, Singapore is not as vulnerable as our city state status suggests. Mr Desker urged Singaporeans to remember the Japanese invasion, communist subversion and communal riots that undermined our stability and well being and tested the unity of our forefathers. Mr Desker can also urge Singaporeans to distinguish those who resisted the Japanese and those who worked for them. He can explain that the great majority of the Leftists were not communists but were true patriots and nationalists who fought British colonialism and agitated for our independence. Mr Desker can also add reasons to our communal riots like the one below: • That PAP appeal: 'It is political trickery' Until the PAP and its supporters came into the political arena, the Chinese as a whole had worked and co-operated not only with the Malays, but also with other racial groups. For the PAP, after planting the seeds of dissension and distrust, now to call for tolerance is political trickery of the highest order. There can be no racial harmony based on political double talk, of tolerance in word and intolerance in deed. Racial harmony can only be built on goodwill, co-operation, good faith and mutual trust. [The Straits Times, 2 February 1959, Page 5] Thank you Ng Kok Lim Straits Times, Why the past matters, 13 Feb 2014, Barry Desker AT NOON on Saturday, the blast of air raid sirens will be heard again. It is a reminder that the fall of Singapore to the Japanese imperial army occurred on this date, Feb 15, in 1942. This year, for the second year, the Singapore Armed Forces will hold the Total Defence Commemoration Ceremony at the War Memorial Park on Feb 15. As part of this event, recruits from the 3rd Battalion Singapore Guards will be handed their rifles in a weapon presentation ceremony at 6.20pm. This recalls the exact time of the surrender of allied forces to the Japanese at the old Ford Motor Factory on Upper Bukit Timah Road. For a generation of Singaporeans now passing away, the Japanese occupation was the single most significant formative experience of their lives. The sense of helplessness, the fear of a new set of colonial overlords, the loss of close relatives and the dislocation of families resulted in many a story being told over dining tables as Singaporeans were growing up. People in Singapore did not see themselves as one people in 1942. At most, you took care of those nearest and dearest to you. Beyond the family, clan and ethnic loyalties were probably most significant. By contrast, over the past 50 years, there has been a gradual coming together of Singapore society. There is a sense of nationhood and an identification which goes beyond clan, race, language or religion. Ties are emerging which link Singaporeans wherever they are, even if it is Singlish, celebrating Chinese New Year with lo hei, eating roti prata or satay and complaining about the educational system. But shared perspectives go beyond food or celebrations. We are now a more resilient society, with the ability to withstand challenges and to respond effectively. Today, many Singaporeans have little exposure to riot, revolution and mayhem. It is difficult to believe that Singapore formed part of a region which was seen as the Balkans of Asia, a cockpit of war and conflict in the 1960s. The Vietnam War spilled over into Laos and later Cambodia, while Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Burma, as it then was, were confronting major communist insurgencies. A turbulent neighbourhood NEVERTHELESS, Singaporeans are reminded from time to time that they live in a turbulent neighbourhood. The events of the past few days are one such reminder. Singapore reacted strongly to Indonesia's decision to name a naval vessel after Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said, two Indonesian marines who were executed by Singapore in 1968 for the MacDonald House bombing of March 1965. Three people were killed and 33 injured. While the Indonesian armed forces appear to be seeking to limit the fallout resulting from the naming of the ship, there have been populist moves by politicians seeking to build their base as the April elections approach. The MacDonald House bombing was the most serious incident in Singapore during Indonesia's Confrontation with Malaysia, an undeclared war from 1963 to 1966 which saw several hundred casualties across the archipelago. It included Indonesian paratroopers landing in Labis and seaborne landings in Pontian, as well as cross-border raids in East Malaysia. Singapore also faced a series of bomb attacks mounted by infiltrators. The Indonesian decision on the naming of the ship was a surprise. It revived painful memories of an Indonesia which sought deference from its neighbours and was prepared to use force to implement its desires. Singaporeans thought such memories had been banished by Indonesia's role in building Asean. In the 1960s, Indonesia sought to stride the global stage even as it antagonised its neighbours. Its leaders from Suharto onwards, however, have sought to increase their regional influence by more peaceful means. Today, Jakarta's insensitivity towards its neighbours could have a costly impact on Indonesia's desire to play a role as a rising middle power in global affairs. Most Singaporeans thought the MacDonald House bombing had receded into history, especially after then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew sprinkled flowers on the graves of the two Indonesian marines. He did this at the Heroes Cemetery in Jakarta in September 1973 during his first visit to Indonesia since independence, a move which led to Mr Suharto's first state visit to Singapore in 1974. What this latest incident reveals is that in times of stress in bilateral relations, old grievances come to the fore. In Indonesia, social media sites in recent days have gleefully referred to Singapore as a little red dot. They accuse Singapore of benefiting from Indonesia's travails and allege that Singapore provides shelter to corruptors and capital fleeing the country. Bilateral relations have been smooth, but there is always a risk that Indonesia's highly competitive political system could lead nationalist politicians to stoke popular sentiments for domestic political gain. For 30 years, when Indonesia was under the leadership of President Suharto, Singapore enjoyed excellent relations with Indonesia. But with today's more democratic system, Indonesian leaders have to take greater account of public sentiments. Inevitably, this will lead to periodic tensions in bilateral ties. Fortunately, they have generally been well managed by Mr Suharto's successors. While Singapore has prospered and now has an enviable standard of living, the island remains vulnerable as a city state. Creating a sense of security is vital as it underpins Singapore's economic prosperity, social equilibrium and political stability. Events such as the commemoration of Singapore's surrender in 1942 remind us of Singapore's past experiences and raise awareness about the challenges that Singapore could face in the future. In the same way, the response to the ship-naming incident highlights that just as Singapore is expected to be sensitive to its neighbours, there is also a need for them to be alert to issues which have caused unhappiness to Singaporeans in the past. As we approach the 50th anniversary of Singapore's independence, Singaporeans should remember the troubled history of foreign invasions, communist subversion and communal riots that undermined our stability and well-being, and tested the unity of our forefathers. With confidence born of a growing sense of shared values and identity, Singaporeans should also reflect on how much better prepared the country is today to face the challenges of the future. The writer is the dean of the S.Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University. He was Singapore's ambassador to Indonesia from 1986 to 1993.  Read More →