Singapore Not Signing Convention on Cluster Munitions

According to the United Nations Development Programme, cluster munitions have caused more than 13,000 confirmed injuries and deaths around the world. Children are among the most common victims.

More than 100 nations have adopted the Convention on Cluster Munitions and are due to sign it next week in Oslo.

However, several countries, including Singapore, China, the United States and Russia, will not be signing this convention.

This following article appeared in the Straits Times, Thurs, 27 Nov 2008, Page B6.

S'pore halts export of cluster bombs

Jermyn Chow

27 November 2008

But it stops short of signing an international agreement on a ban

SINGAPORE yesterday announced an immediate halt to the export of cluster bombs, but stopped short of signing an international agreement to ban the munitions.

Dropped from planes or fired from artillery, cluster bombs explode in midair to randomly scatter hundreds of bomblets, some just 8cm in size, on the ground.

But many cluster bomblets can fail to explode, posing a danger to people trying to resume their lives after war.

According to the United Nations Development Programme, cluster munitions have caused more than 13,000 confirmed injuries and deaths around the world, the vast majority of them in Laos, Vietnam and Afghanistan. Children, who often think the brightly coloured munitions are toys, are among the most common victims.

That is why more than 100 nations have adopted the Convention on Cluster Munitions and are due to sign it in Oslo next week.

But several countries, including the United States, China and Russia, like Singapore, will not be signing the convention.

The agreement prohibits the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions, which the United Nations has said 'cause human suffering both during conflicts and long after they have ended'.

Explaining Singapore's position yesterday, the Foreign Affairs and Defence ministries said in a joint statement that a blanket ban on cluster munitions was impractical as many countries still see the need to use them for 'legitimate self-defence purposes'.

'Singapore remains committed to the responsible use of cluster munitions for self-defence and will continue to work with members of the international community to find a comprehensive solution to the humanitarian problems caused by its irresponsible and indiscriminate use,' the statement said.

It added that its immediate moratorium on exports of the bombs will ensure that they are not transferred to others who might use them irresponsibly and indiscriminately.

'Through this imposition, we help stem the proliferation of cluster munitions,' it said.

Singapore, which is said to be a producer of cluster munitions, took a similar position on anti-personnel landmines back in 1996.

While it did not sign the pact to destroy its arsenal of landmines back then, it imposed a ban on selling those without self-destruct mechanisms. The Republic then extended the sales ban to include all types of Singapore-made mines in 1998.

Likewise, other countries that did not sign the mine ban treaty then included the US, China, Russia, India and Pakistan.

'Singapore remains committed to the responsible use of cluster munitions for self-defence and will continue to work with members of the international community to find a comprehensive solution to the humanitarian problems caused by its irresponsible and indiscriminate use.'

Statement from Foreign Affairs and Defence ministries

Jail Term For 3 S'poreans Found Guilty Of Contempt Of Court

Channel NewsAsia ran this story today:

The three Singaporeans who have been found guilty of contempt of court in the kangaroo T-shirt case have been sentenced to jail.

Two of them, 19-year-old Muhammad Shafi'ie Syahmi Sariman and 33-year-old Isrizal Mohamed Isa, received seven days' jail term each, while 47-year-old John Tan Liang Joo was slapped with a 15-day jail term.

Even before sentence was passed on Thursday, the trio refused to apologise to the court.

On May 26, the three men were at the Supreme Court building wearing T-shirts showing a kangaroo in a judge's gown, while a hearing was taking place in the high court to determine damages Singapore Democratic Party leader Chee Soon Juan and his sister, Chee Siok Chin, had to pay.

The two were being sued for defamation by Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.

Maid Abuse Up In Asia, Mideast

Reuters ran this news story yesterday:

BEIRUT - MIGRANT and domestic workers still face beatings, rape and sometimes even murder because laws in Middle Eastern and Asian nations do not protect them from abusive employers, a US-based rights group said.

Millions of women from countries such as Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Indonesia and Nepal are housemaids in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Lebanon, Singapore and Malaysia - many of which exclude domestic workers from protection under their labour laws.

'There are countless cases of employers threatening, humiliating, beating, raping and sometimes killing domestic workers,' said Nisha Varia, deputy director of the women's rights division of Human Rights Watch from New York.


The report, published this week to coincide with Tuesday's International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, said, 'Most (Middle Eastern and Asian) countries exclude domestic workers from protection under their labour laws.' Human Rights Watch (HRW) said few domestic workers can utilise the justice system in the countries they work in and even those who manage to successfully complain rarely receive compensation.

One reason why housemaids' are at increased risk of abuse is because employers often control a worker's immigration status and ability to change jobs.

'Many employers exploit this power to confine domestic workers to the house, without pay, and commit other abuses,' HRW said in a statement.

'Governments need to punish abusive employers through the justice system, and prevent violence by reforming labour and immigration policies that leave these workers at their employers' mercy.' HRW also said governments should train law enforcement officials on how to appropriately investigate and collect evidence in response to housemaids' complaints.

'2008 marked a year of missed opportunities,' Ms Varia said.

'While most governments have started to think about some level of reform, many of these discussions have stalled.' HRW said in August that in Lebanon, where cases of housemaid abuse make newspapers almost daily, domestic workers are dying at a rate of more than one per week either by committing suicide or while trying to escape from their employers.

Temasek Bosses Take Pay Cut Of Up To 25%

TODAY ran this article today:

Amid calls for employers to lead by example during these tough times, Temasek Holdings announced on Friday that its senior managers had volunteered to take salary cuts of 15 to 25 per cent as part of a company-wide wage reduction.

At the same time, the company also plans to beef up its staff strength over the next two years.

“We anticipate a global recession in 2009 and beyond,” said Mr Robert Chong, Temasek’s managing director for human resources. He said that nearly 90 per cent of the wage saving will be borne by key managers.

While the company is tightening its belt, it said that as a long-term investor, the current turmoil will throw up “tremendous opportunities”.

It aims to increase its headcount by15 per cent over the next two years. “This is part of our longer term plan to have staff strength of about 500,” Mr Chong said in a statement on Friday night.

Temasek, which manages a portfolio worth $185 billion, has about 350 employees, :according to the most recent annual review on its website.

The voluntary pay cuts by Temasek’s top bosses could be followed by senior executives elsewhere.

A Pay Cut For Civil Service?

TODAY paper ran this article today:

A announcement will be made “before long” on whether Civil Service salaries, including those of top political leaders, would be adjusted in light of the economic turmoil, said Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

A third and final phase of the salary revisions in the civil service is scheduled to take effect by the year’s end, to bring salaries of Senior Permanent Secretaries and Ministers to 88 per cent of the benchmark pegged to the private sector.

In recent days, tripartite partners have called on corporate bosses to “lead by example” by taking “similar or deeper” pay cuts than the rank and file.

On Friday, responding to a reporter’s question on whether Civil Service leaders should do likewise, labour chief Lim Swee Say said the labour movement “would not be surprised to see a wage cut in the public sector”, given Singapore’s declining economic growth.

Under the current pay formula, a substantial portion of the annual pay of Senior Permanent Secretaries and Ministers is linked to the gross domestic product growth rate and structured as a GDP bonus.

At the briefing with Mr Shanmugaratnam and Mr Lim were Acting Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong and Mr S Iswaran, Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry.

When asked if the four would be willing to take a pay cut,Mr Shanmugaratnam responded: ”We are not here to grandstand ... The principles underpinning Civil Service pay as well as pay of political leaders and people at the top of the Civil Service are well known.”

Changes To Singapore's Employment Act

The speech by Mr Gan Kim Yong, Acting Minister for Manpower for the 2nd Reading of the Employment (Amendment) Bill 2008, 18 November 2008 at Parliament can be found @ www.mom.gov.sg.

According to the Ministry of Manpower website, the following changes (in brief) come into effect on 1st January 2009:

(I) Coverage of the Employment Act

Extend coverage to confidential staff.

Protect managers and executives earning a basic monthly salary of $2,500 and below against non-payment of salary and give them access to MOM Labour Court for salary claims.

Raise Part IV salary ceiling for non-workmen from a basic monthly salary of $1,600 to $2,000.

Introduce a new Part IV salary ceiling for workmen at a basic monthly salary of $4,500.

Re-define part-time employees from those who work less than 30 hours a week to those who work less than 35 hours a week.

(II) Employment standards and benefits

Apply paid sick leave and paid public holiday to all employees covered under the Act, and not just those covered under Part IV of the Act.

Reduce qualifying period for paid sick leave from 6 months to 3 months of completed service. Phase in sick leave entitlements between the completion of 3 months and 6 months of service.

Allow employees to obtain medical certificates (MC) from public medical institutions for the purpose of going on paid sick leave, and not confined to MC issued from employer appointed doctors (if there is one) for paid sick leave.

(III) Penalties for infringements of Employment Act

Increase maximum penalty fines for most offences under the Employment Act from $1,000 to $5,000.

Increase maximum penalty fines for most repeat offences under the Employment Act from $2,000 to $10,000.

Increase composition fine for offences from $200 to $1,000.

China Accused Of Abusing Workers

A CNN report about abused workers in China.

Government To Announce Plans To Stimulate Economy

Prime Minister Lee said Singapore's economic growth next year could be negative, and to help cushion the slowing economy, Budget Statement 2009 will be brought forward to before the Lunar New Year which falls on January 26.

The government intends to announce plans to stimulate the economy, support jobs and strengthen competitiveness.

Mr Lee said the government is working out the best combination of measures for the coming Budget with the aim of not just helping Singaporeans with the present downturn but also to build up strength for the future.

He was speaking at the annual People's Action Party conference on Sunday.

Mr Lee, who is also the party's secretary-general, said the Singapore recession may last a year, but beyond that there may be several years of slow growth before things get back on track.

Prime Minister Lee noted that it is fortunate that inflation has moderated. He said that for several months, sharp increases in global food and energy prices had led to high inflation in Singapore.

Mr Lee has asked for an update from the Trade and Industry Ministry on the electricity tariffs here. "I asked MTI, they said yes - by January, electricity prices should come down, (and) if you are lucky, below where they were in October this year," he said.

Mr Lee cautioned that the Singapore economy will not do as well as the last few years. But he added that through government leadership and help, and the efforts of Singaporeans, he is confident the country will pull through the global downturn.

Source: Channel NewsAsia

Our Very Own "Lipstick On A Pig"

Groundnotes wrote a commentary on PM Lee's recent speech where he said that political change in Singapore cannot come from the opposition but from within the PAP; and that a two-party system is not suitable for Singapore because we don’t have enough talent.

These two arguments have been made over the years ad nauseam in a variety of guises by various ministers and the rebuttal is always the same. But the sheer frequency and insouciance with which they resurface leads one to conclude that our leaders do not really pay attention to these rebuttals. They choose to believe that the PAP will stay corrupt-free and competent for all eternity, ever able to renew itself at will according to the challenges that lie ahead; hence the ability to look inward for change.

They choose to believe that out of 4m Singaporeans we will not be able to sustain a two-party system unlike other small countries, say, Denmark (5.8m), Finland (5.2m), New Zealand (4.1m) and so on. The weight of evidence against their arguments seems lost on these supposedly highly intelligent individuals.

Read the entire article @ groundnotes.wordpress.com

Responses to PM Lee's One Dominant Party Stance

Two letters published in TODAY, Voices, p. 24, address Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's view that a two-party system cannot work in Singapore.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

What if PAP should falter?
Letter from Gerald Giam

I REFER to “Adversarial two-party system not for S’pore” (Nov 17).

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong feels that the two-party system cannot work for Singapore and that we are much better off with one dominant party.

Mr Lee’s familiar argument is that because we are small and lack talent, if we split our talent into two groups, we will end up with “two second-division teams”. This is akin to saying that it is better to put all our eggs in one basket, than to have two baskets with fewer eggs each. I disagree.

While few would argue that the People’s Action Party (PAP) has performed commendably over the past 40 years, past performance is no guarantee of future success, as investment advisers always caution.

Mr Lee said that if ever the PAP becomes ineffective or corrupt, many opposition parties will spring up to take on the Government.

Therein lies the danger: If the PAP ever becomes corrupt, there will be absolutely no time for a viable alternative party to suddenly “spring up”, since political organisations take years to build up credibility.

Furthermore, a corrupt government with a firm control on the levers of power will tend to use that power to entrench itself, stifling any potential opposition from arising. This is because their corrupt leaders will know full well that they will face prosecution if anyone else takes over the government.

Singapore may then be left in a disastrous situation of having a bad government with no capable alternatives.

For a small city-state like Singapore with little margin for error in governance, this could spell an unrecoverable decline leading to our very obsolescence as a nation.

It is therefore in the national interest for a well-organised, competent and morally upright alternative party to emerge, so that should the PAP falter, there will another party to take over the reins of government at the next elections and ensure that our country continues to prosper without interruption.

Obviously I do not expect support for an effective alternative party to come from the PAP, since it goes against its partisan interests.

However, I hope more Singaporeans will realise that greater political competition can produce not just better governance now, but improved stability for our future as well.

******

Democracy a question of maturity?

Letter from Yak Chin Hua

I REFER to “Adversarial two-party system not for Singapore” (Nov 17).

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was quoted to have commented on the United States presidential election: “The opposition party campaigns on the message of ‘change’: Change, change, change. Never mind change to what — just change ... The new government comes in on that message and then they start to think change to what.”

I believe political leaders should not assert that an adversarial two-party system will not work for nations big or small.

The very preaching in favour of a one-party system contradicts the basic principles and the real beauty of democracy — that such a decision should be left to a politically-mature electorate to decide.

The same applies to political change.

The more important issue is whether the electorate is politically educated, mature and motivated to decide on whether they would want a two-party system and other political change. If the electorate is not ready to decide on this, it undermines the democratic system the political leader governs.

The electorate should be educated to decide on whether they want a two-party system and other political change, and not to get rid of it for the sake of supporting a modified one-party system, even if the latter is sure to succeed.

In this lies the beauty of the system of democracy. I cannot be sure if our political system and electorate match the maturity of the US adversarial two-party system.

PM Lee: Two-Party Model Cannot Work In Singapore

Channel News Asia reported this story today:

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said a two-party political model cannot work in Singapore.

Mr Lee, who is also the ruling People's Action Party's Secretary General, added that change must take place not between parties but within the PAP.

Addressing the party's activists on Sunday, Mr Lee explained why tackling the economic crisis needs both a policy and political response.

He said: "We cannot sail through this storm on autopilot. The government has to lead, watch the changing environment, implement the policies needed, mobilise Singaporeans and mount a national response to get us through. It's the party's business to provide this leadership for Singapore."

He added that the country is much better off with one dominant party, as long as the PAP provides clean and good government, and the lives of Singaporeans improve.

Mr Lee said: "If the party doesn't work, if something goes wrong with the party, you can be sure new parties will come, new contests will come. People will spring up to take on the government in no time at all.

"But it is not our job to build up the opposition or split the party into two, because it is hard enough to find one team to look after the country. How can we find two?"

Mr Lee said that as a small country, Singapore depends critically on an outstanding team of leaders to make up for the many limitations.

Hence, the country cannot afford to compromise the quality of the nation's leadership.

Mr Lee said that at every general election, the party brings in 20 or more new MPs and ministers.

The progress of leadership renewal in the PAP determines whether Singapore will continue enjoying stability and good government in the long term, he said.

Peace Vigil For Sri Lanka

Over a hundred people attended the Peace Vigil for Sri Lanka yesterday, an unprecedented public demonstration on this issue in Singapore.

Organised by World Without War, the vigil began with an introductory address by S. Sivabalan, after which organisers and attendees proceeded to light candles to signify their hope for peace in Sri Lanka. They also left their personal messages on the board provided.

Some observed silence throughout as a mark of respect for the deceased. For the full report and photographs of the peaceful demostration, please visit: worldwithoutwar.sg.

New Factory Notification Scheme

With effect from 1 Nov 2008, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) will put in place a new factory notification scheme. This scheme will affect new factories and two-thirds of existing factories. Under this scheme, factories will have to declare that they have implemented Risk Management (RM) programs before work can commence. The declaration will strengthen the requirement under the WSH (Risk Management) Regulations so that work risks can be better managed.

The new factory notification scheme streamlines the factory registration process and reduces business costs. Currently, factories are required to renew their licenses every year or every two years. They pay an average of $250 for a one-year registration fee. With the new scheme, factories only need to do a one-time notification which will be free of charge. This is expected to cut business costs by about $3.5 million annually.

Not all factories will be included in the scheme. Construction worksites, shipbuilding and repair companies, metalworking companies, wafer fabrication, petrochemical, chemical and pharmaceutical plants will continue to be governed by the existing factory registration process for the time being. Currently, these factories are already required to submit documents on their RM implementation. A review is currently in progress to further strengthen the implementation of safety measures at these workplaces.

MOM To Release Guidelines On Management Of Excess Staff

Channel NewsAsia reported the following:

Labour chief Lim Swee Say has expressed his disappointment in the sudden decision by DBS Bank to cut 900 jobs.

In a statement, Mr Lim said that the bank had not consulted with the DBS Staff Union on other alternatives to cutting costs. As a result, the perception on the ground is that DBS Bank decided on retrenchment as a first resort.

He added that this has weakened the trust between the management and union, and that the reaction on the ground is critical and highly negative. Mr Lim said that "trust takes a long time to build, but a short time to destroy."

His message came in an eight-paragraph statement to the media, which urged companies not to use retrenchment as the first resort.

The Manpower Ministry will soon release guidelines on how to manage excess manpower in light of expected increase in retrenchment in Singapore.

The guidelines will include what's called responsible retrenchment, where employers work with unions to explain the situation to workers before serving the termination letter.

The way DBS axed its 900 staff without consulting its union has drawn criticisms from labour chief Lim Swee Say.

He said retrenchment should be conducted in a socially responsible manner, a view which Acting Minister of Manpower Gan Kim Yong shares.

Hence, guidelines will be released in a few weeks on how to manage excess manpower.

For example, companies can inform the Manpower Ministry of job cuts.

Retrenched workers can be retrained or placed in new jobs through the Workforce Development Agency (WDA).

Companies can also leverage on the tripartite relationship, and seek the union's help in explaining measures like wage cuts or implementing shorter work week.

Mr Gan also said that more companies should implement a flexible wage system, adding that companies which have already done so in the last few years are now in a better position to weather the recession.

Call For Minimum Wage

The ruling Singapore government has always resisted implementing a minimum wage, arguing that wage levels should be left to the 'free market'.

This letter writer to the Straits Times asks for a rethink on this issue.

MR MANMOHAN SINGH: 'I refer to Monday's report, 'Gravedigging a dying trade'.

'The report said that gravedigging is a dying trade and that, despite automation, finding replacements is an uphill task.

'The reason for the lack of fresh recruits is not about whether any of the staff had encountered 'any creepy incidents'.

'The bottom line is the low pay.

'The report said that gravediggers are paid $22.50 per day, and earn a maximum of $31.20. At $22.50 per day, with a six-day work week, a worker earns less than $600 per month.

'His take-home pay is even less if one deducts daily travelling expenses and lunch which are likely to eat into a quarter of the pay.

'A security guard easily earns double the salary of a gravedigger. It does not need a rocket scientist to figure out why no one wants to do this job. That is why a developed country like Singapore should implement a minimum wage. That is how Singaporeans can be assured of earning enough to cover daily expenses and enjoy a reasonably comfortable living standard.

'The United States introduced a minimum wage in 1938, and lately, China did so in 2004.'

We Do Not Elect Our PM

After Barack Obama's historical election win to become the first African-American US President, the press and government in Singapore have been talking about whether it's possible that a non-Chinese can become Prime Minister. PM Lee said: "It's possible. It depends on how people vote, on who has the confidence of the population. Will it happen soon? I don't think so, because you have to win votes. And these sentiments - who votes for whom, and what makes him identify with that person - these are sentiments which will not disappear completely for a long time, even if people do not talk about it, even if people wish they did not feel it."

A forum letter, "We're more race-blind than we think", published in The Straits Times today, however, pointed out that the Prime Minister is not elected by the people.

I READ with interest Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's comments on Sunday about how Singapore's race relations interplayed with our domestic politics ('Non-Chinese PM? Possible, but not soon'). While I applaud the call to place our national interests over racial ones, I wonder if the choice really lies with the people or if our political structure itself entrenches such racial policies.

First, Article 25 of the Constitution designates the President as the one appointing the Prime Minister out of those elected into Parliament, who 'is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the Members of Parliament'. It would thus appear that the choice of a non-Chinese PM lies not in the people's hands, but in the hands of the President and our elected Parliament.

Second, Article 39A and the subsequently passed Parliamentary Elections Act provide for the creation of Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs) - and the law provides for the compulsory inclusion of a Malay or an Indian or 'other minority'. A reason offered in support of the system was given by then deputy PM Goh Chok Tong in 1988, who argued that such a system would ensure that Parliament would 'always be multiracial and representative of our society'.

Tris Pruetthipunthu

The Singapore 18: Prosecution Or Persecution?

The Washington Times published this on November 7, 2008:

The names Gandhi Ambalam, Chia Ti Lik, Chong Kai Xiong, Jeffrey George, Jaslyn Go, Chee Siok Chin, Govindan Rajan, Chee Soon Juan, Jufrie Mahmood, Jufri Salim, Surayah Akbar, Ng E-Jay, Seelan Palay, Shafi'ie, Carl Lang, John Tan, Francis Yong and Sylvester Lim aren't exactly household names -- but they should be. This week 18 Singaporeans -- the Singapore 18 -- are standing trial for purported crimes against America's 11th largest trading partner -- Singapore.

Indicted for violating the Miscellaneous Offences Act for assembling peacefully without a permit to register their concerns over escalating housing costs, they claim that they're innocent by virtue of their right under the Singapore constitution to enjoy the guarantees of freedom of assembly and expression. Historically, however, Singapore has viewed political dissent through a lens darkly, treating protest as a threat to social tranquility and economic prosperity, rather than what it is -- a fundamental right and necessity in any democracy.

While Singapore claims to be a constitutional democracy, it nevertheless routinely arrests Singaporeans for attempting to assert those rights articulated under the constitution in the open light of day. A democracy, it's not quite.

Ironically, while their trial is about their right to public assembly in numbers more than four without a permit, and to free speech, they view it as a test about whether Singapore's judiciary is independent enough to interpret the country's constitution objectively. In effect, Judge Chia Wee Kiat, who's presiding magistrate over the case, is on trial, too. Many Singaporeans will be watching how he rules. Americans should be watching, too.

That's because Singapore's Minister for Home Affairs, Wong Kan Seng, appears to refuse to be bound by the affirmative rights guaranteed under the country's basic law. Last February, he stated that "[w]e have stopped short of allowing outdoor and street demonstration … Our experiences in the past have taught us to be very circumspect about outdoor and street protests." His reference is to the race riots in Singapore during the 1960s -- almost 50 years ago. Which is like saying that because Washington, D.C. experienced race riots in the 1960s, the residents of Washington must be denied the right to protest government policies. That argument simply doesn't wash.

But the judge in the case will likely rule accordingly, regardless of the plain language of the constitution.

The late Singaporean politician, Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, stated in an interview shortly before his death that his main concern was that the public had the "perception that its judiciary was not independent." He himself had been made a bankrupt by defamation lawsuits filed against him by his political opponents and the high damages awarded them by Singapore courts. After paying off his debts, he'd recently committed to heading a new political party, whose primary agenda was calling for the independence of the judiciary.

He was not alone. In July, the International Bar Association (ABA) issued a 72-page report on the state of Singapore's judiciary noting that "there are concerns about the objective and subjective independence and impartiality of Singapore judges." The report's final recommendations advocate tenure be granted Singapore judges and that the transfer of judges between "executive and judicial roles" be banned. They also call on the government to prohibit defamation as a criminal offense, and forbid public officials from initiating criminal defamation suits, which detractors claim are used by government to silence its critics.

One of those critics is Chee Soon Juan. He's been jailed seven times on a potpourri of politically-related charges, including speaking without a permit, contempt of court, and even for attempting to depart Singapore in order to attend an international rights conference. He's been fined nearly $1 million to date and made bankrupt by defamation suits brought against him by former Prime Ministers Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Chok Tong, and Singapore's current Minister Mentor, Lee Hsein Loong. In the next few months, he faces six more trials and an indeterminate amount of jail time. Yet all he wants is for the courts to properly enforce the spirit and letter of the Singapore constitution. Barred from leaving the country, he's been put under country arrest and is a prisoner of conscience.

Were the Singapore 18 living in China or Russia, they'd be enjoying considerable support from the U.S. Instead, they're victims of a sad neglect. They've been cut loose by a nation otherwise preoccupied. But the next Congress and administration should take up the cause of freedom in Singapore. They should exert their influences on Singapore to open up its political space to peaceful dissent and to embrace the benefits of political pluralism. Economic prosperity and political freedoms are not mutually exclusive in Singapore or anywhere else.

Above all, this country should call for judicial reform in Singapore because as J.B. Jeyaretnam would no doubt agree without independence there can be no rule of law.

Timothy Cooper is executive director of the human-rights group Worldrights.

DBS Cuts 900 Jobs

Singapore's DBS Group, Southeast Asia's biggest bank by assets, said on Friday it would be laying off 900 staff to trim costs amid the global credit crisis. The bank also reported a drop in third quarter net profit.

Chief executive Richard Stanley said most of the cuts, which would be carried out at the end of the month, will come from its offices in Singapore and Hong Kong and will account for 6 per cent of the workforce. He added that this was the largest lay offs ever.

The job cut will be across all businesses and all levels. The bank did not want to specify if the affected staff would come from DBS or POSBank.

Laid off staff will be paid the equivalent of one month's salary for every year of service as per market practice.

"To be a streamlined organisation, I believe we must run a tighter ship," he told reporters.

Source: Channel NewsAsia

The Contracts Must Be Fair And Just

The Catholic church in Singapore held a World Day of Migrants celebration at the Church of St. Vincent de Paul (SVDP) on September 28, 2008.

Singapore's Archdiocesan Commission for the Pastoral Care of Migrants & Itinerant People (ACMI) organized the event with support from the SVDP Church Migrants' Group.

Besides celebrating the migrants' cultures, it was a day on which Singaporean Catholics "should ponder seriously and see how we can contribute towards a healthy situation for foreign workers," Archbishop Nicholas Chia said in his homily during the Mass that preceded the programme.

"They serve us (in their jobs), but in our own way we must serve them. The contracts we offer them must be fair and just. Do not just look for cheap labour," he told the workers and parishioners.

Contrast that with this letter published in My Paper today:

I NOTE with concern a recent spike in murder cases involving foreign workers.

Recently, a Malaysian prostitute was murdered in Flanders Square.

It was also reported that there was a total of 24 murders in Singapore to date this year, and some which involve foreigners have been brutal and hideous.

There has been a backlash against the influx of foreign workers to Singapore shores.

It is not uncommon for foreigners with criminal records to use false papers and enter Singapore under a different identity.

For this group of foreigners, their past remains hidden from the authorities.

There are many foreigners who enter the country on two-week social passes and work in the flesh trade to earn a quick buck.

After working in brothels and pubs, they are able to recoup the cost of their air tickets.

Much to citizens' dismay, they are openly working illegally in Singapore, Before things get out of hand, the authorities should gradually place restrictions on the inflow of foreign workers.

I see young foreign girls below the age of 20 working in coffee shops.

They are putting Singapore's "aunties" and "uncles" out of a job as they are cheaper to hire and willing to work longer hours.

There should also be a cap on the number of study mamas entering Singapore, as they often do illegal work to make ends meet.

Something should be done before it is too late.

Mr Gilbert Goh Keow Wah
Sydney, Australia

Obama Makes History

Sen. Barack Obama became the first African-American president in U.S. history. Who would have thought this possible 50 or even five years ago? Thousands of people all over the world rooted for him and wept at his victory. Obama was gracious to his opponent in victory as was McCain in defeat.

Dr Chee Soon Juan used the words "historic", "inspirational" and "change" to describe Mr Barack Obama's election as the 44th President of the United States. Read his full article @ yoursdp.org.

Judge Makes Major Ruling Without Hearing Defendants

Here's the latest update (on 30 October) from the Singapore Democrats website about the Tak Boleh Tahan! trial:

District Judge Chia Wee Kiat today ruled that the defence could not ask questions to show that the police had unlawfully discriminated against the Tak Boleh Tahan! (Can't take it anymore!) protesters.

He also sided with the prosecution's contention that the Ministry for Home Affairs' declaration that it would not allow protests of any nature is not unconstitutional, this despite Article 14 of the Singapore constitution guaranteeing citizens the right to freedoms of speech and peaceful assembly.

The defendants had pointed out that the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) had also conducted a similar protest outside Parliament House in 2007 and 2008. Why was CASE allowed to stage their protest but not the TBT activists?

To add insult to injury, the Judge made these decisions listening only to the arguments of the prosecution but not the defence.

Yesterday Judge Chia had invited Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Isaac Tan to address him on the question of the constitutionality of the Miscellaneous Offences Act. He also wanted to hear the DPP's arguments on why cross-examination by the defence about the police's handling of the TBT application was irrelevant.

The DPP took the entire morning to research his case and then came back to court to present his findings. The defendants then asked for time to respond to the DPP's arguments.

The Judge had to adjourn the hearing in the afternoon to allow Mr John Tan and Mr Shafi'ie to go the the Hight Court to attend a pre-trial conference regarding their contempt of court charge. The other defendants took the opportunity to prepare their arguments.

When the hearing resumed this morning, Dr Chee Soon Juan asked for more time to prepare his case because of the complex nature of the constitutional arguments: "I am consulting legal experts from overseas and I need more time to put together a proper rebuttal to the DPP on this matter."

The other defendants, including lawyer Mr Chia Ti Lik, also requested for more time to prepare their cases.

Mr John Tan, who is acting-in-person, also argued that he needed time to prepare his arguments because he was at the Hight Court the whole of yesterday afternoon. "I did not take the afternoon off to conduct my own affairs. I am being charged for an offence and I had no choice but to go to the High Court," he reminded the Judge. "As such I did not have time to prepare counter-arguments to the DPP's points."

Mr Shafi'ie also made the same point.

All this fell on deaf ears as Judge Chia ruled that no additional time would be given. Worse, the Judge immediately went on to rule in favour of the DPP's arguments.

Dr Chee protested that this was highly irregular and prejudicial against the defendants' cases: "A judge normally hears both sides of the argument before coming to a decision. In this matter you have only heard the prosecution's arguments and come to a decision based on that."

Dr Chee pointed out that the Judge could have ruled that he was not going to give additional time to the defendants but then allow them the opportunity to submit on whatever they had prepared.

Ms Chee Siok Chin asked Judge Chia to reverse his decision, "wipe the slate clean" and hear the defendants first before making his ruling.

The Judge refused saying: "I have made my ruling. You can now say what you want to say."

Mr Gandhi Ambalam then pointed out the obvious: "What's the point of saying anything when you have already ruled?"

Dr Chee reminded the judge that the defence hung on the fact that the police had discriminated against the TBT activists when it rejected the application. This was unlawful under the Article 12 of the Constitution which says that all persons must be treated equally under the law.

"By ruling the way you did, you have cut the legs from under our defence," he told the Judge.

But Judge Chia Wee Kiat remained adamant and insisted the hearing continue over the vehement objections of the defendants.

Hearing continues tomorrow.

Worthless Degrees

MP for Joo Chiat Chan Soo Sen was the guest-of-honour at a dubious university's convocation, which got The Online Citizen website to comment:

It is thus shocking to learn that instead of pushing to outlaw universities such as WCU, former Minister of State for Education Chan Soo Sen was actually the guest of honour at the "fraudulent" degree seller’s convocation.

His excuse? He had not been given any information about WCU's accreditation, and his presence at the convocation was not meant to give the university credibility.

This explanation might possibly hold water if he was a random member of the public, with no knowledge of issues such as accreditation.

However, given that the Straits Times has previously run several exposes on degree mills (as the article points out, the reporter’s dog was registered to receive a doctorate), and Mr Chan was a former Minister of State for Education up until 2006, to claim ignorance is a poor defense.

Further, to claim that he did not intend to lend WCU credibility is missing the point.

Mr Chan might genuinely have neglected to do his due diligence and been ignorant of WCU's background. However, in the eyes of those receiving the "fraudulent or substandard degrees", as well as their family and friends, the presence of a former Minister of State for Education could only be interpreted as a seal of approval.

* * *
This news story was published in The Straits Times on October 22, 2008:

THE ceremony in the Old Parliament House had all the pomp and circumstance associated with any graduation.

The professors and graduands were in full academic regalia. Speeches flowed in English and Mandarin. And afterwards, a gala dinner at a hotel.

At the ceremony, the university's honorary president, a Professor Bernard Cadet, delivered an inspiring speech, urging graduands to transform the world.

'Believe nothing is impossible. West Coast University (WCU) will be proud of you in the future,' he told the 76 graduands from Singapore, Indonesia and China, before handing them their doctorates, master's and bachelor's degrees.

But this was a ceremony for an unaccredited university based in Panama, not Los Angeles, as its school in Singapore had claimed.

The Asia-Australia School of Management (AASM), a Case-certified school in Middle Road, offers West Coast University programmes here with a related company, Huanyu Training Expert.

At least two American states have outlawed degrees from WCU, describing it as a 'degree supplier' that offers 'fraudulent or substandard degrees'.

The Texas State Higher Education Coordinating Board warns on its website that WCU 'is used by multiple unaccredited entities. The extent to which they are related is unknown, but more than one operator is suspected.'

In some parts of the United States, it is a criminal offence to use degrees from unaccredited institutions.

'Dr' John Huang, one of the owners of AASM and Huanyu, insisted that the university is based in Los Angeles and faxed The Straits Times documents showing West Coast University International registered as a business in California.

But he confirmed that it was not the California-based West Coast University reputed for nursing and health science-related degrees. He admitted that WCU was unaccredited, but said his students had been given the facts.

His doctorate is from Ashwood University, the same degree mill that granted this reporter's pet dog a doctorate for US$599 (S$886) just two months ago.

The guest of honour at Monday's ceremony was MP for Joo Chiat Chan Soo Sen, who delivered a speech in Mandarin and English.

Contacted afterwards, he said he had been invited by a grassroots leader and accepted as he wanted to encourage the habit of life-long learning.

Told that WCU was unaccredited, he said he had not been given any information about it. 'If my presence there had given the university credibility, that was not my intention,' he said.

Several graduates interviewed after Monday's ceremony believed the university was based in Los Angeles and that it was a proper institution.

They had paid between $13,000 and $19,000 in fees to take up bachelor's, master's and doctorate courses lasting one year to 15 months.

Those who took up the doctorate programme said they attended classes two days a month, from 9am to 5pm.

Several said they did not know a university can be registered and yet have no academic accreditation, where it is subject to quality checks by an independent body. It also means employers may not recognise the degrees.

An electronics factory quality controller who paid $13,000 in fees for her bachelor's degree said: 'I was hoping to get a better job in logistics with this degree, but now it may not be possible.'

Ms Ho Fee Men, director of a Chinese medical hall, said she had heard rumours that the university was unaccredited, but continued with her PhD programme anyway. To get her doctorate, she paid $19,000 in fees, attended classes twice a month over 15 months and wrote a 50,000-word thesis.

Two businessmen said they knew their doctorates were worthless but took up the programme to learn about business management.

Mr Chang Chia Sheng, 55, managing director of X.L. Handle, which makes industrial fasteners, said he gained from discussions with other businessmen.

At least 218 people here have been found with degrees from dubious universities such as Preston, Wisconsin International and Kennedy-Western.

Business owners make up one of three groups here who have degrees from unaccredited institutions and degree mills. For many of them, an honorary PhD has become a must-have symbol of success.

Another group comprises consultants and private school lecturers who may have a first degree and some expertise in a particular area, but seek a master's degree or doctorate to bolster their credentials.

And lastly, there are those who pay for undergraduate degrees and transcripts - usually non-graduates who want qualifications to gain jobs or promotions.

Worker Sues And Gets $100,000

Here are excerpts from a news story in The New Paper today:

Mr Ong Kean Lim, 23, did what few foreign workers would dare to do: He said no to compensation for his injuries from the Manpower Ministry (MOM).

Instead, he took his employers to court.

And won.

He walked away with $100,000. If he had accepted the MOM assessment, he would have got only $4,410 for injuries which have affected his speech and facial muscles.

The Malaysian was lucky to survive when he fell 7m (about two-storeys high) from a platform while doing wiring work on 7 Oct, 2005.

He suffered fractures that required metal plates to be inserted in his face, and neck wounds that led to part of his thyroid gland being removed.

The MOM had assessed last year that he would get compensation of $4,410 because his degree of disability was assessed to be only 3 percent.

In September, he was awarded $100,000 in damages after his former employer Mas Power Engineering accepted 90 per cent of the blame for the accident.

Mr Ong, who was an electrician, told The New Paper: "What I got (from the court) is such a huge difference from what the MOM offered. Till today, I'm wondering if I'm dreaming."

MOM statistics show there were 14,927 work-men's compensation last year.

Accepting the MOM's assessment means the worker cannot pursue legal action against the employer.

Lawyers believe that for every 10 injured workers, at least five would sue their employer for more compensation, if they were aware of their legal rights.

Singapore Power Breaks Silence

Newspaper TODAY ran this story yesterday:

The uproar began slightly over a month ago when SP Services announced that electricity tariffs would increase 21.5 per cent in the last quarter of this year.

Consumers, already burdened by record inflation, saw red and pointed to profits of S$1.086 billion that SP's parent company, Singapore Power, made last year.

How would the poor cope, and why couldn't Singapore Power use some of its profits to absorb the cost, many asked in newspaper and Internet forums.

But the company remained largely silent, leaving market regulator, the Energy Market Authority (EMA), to respond to news coverage and readers' letters.

On Friday, Singapore Power broke the silence and launched a spirited defence against public anger.

"We have nothing to hide," said group chief executive officer Mr Quek Poh Huat in a media briefing helmed by top management.

The key message was this: Blaming SP Services for high tariffs is akin to shooting the messenger.

"If I'm the lorry driver (delivering) goods to your house, and you ask me how come the (price for) a bag of rice has doubled, I can't explain to you," said chief financial officer Yap Chee Keong.

SP Services does not generate electricity; it transports power from the generation companies (gencos) to end-users, selling to households without any price mark-up.

The transmission charge, together with the fee for billing and reading of meters, makes up 17 per cent of the tariff.

Over the last six years, Singapore Power has reduced transmission charges by 24 per cent through higher efficiency.

The remaining 83 per cent of the tariff – or 25.13 cents out of the current 30.45 cents per kilowatt hour – is paid to gencos.

EMA sets the formula for tariffs, which Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Sylvia Lim asked to be revealed in Parliament last month.

Singapore Power's profit from the regulated electricity market here was S$423 million last year, representing a 6 per cent return on total assets (ROTA) – a "reasonable" rate compared to other countries.

In Australia's Victoria state, for example, the ROTA is 9.6 per cent. The rest of its profit was from sale of investments and its Australian operations.

In the briefing, Singapore Power also tackled other thorny questions: How far in advance can consumers know of next quarter's electricity prices? Why can't investments in infrastructure be postponed? Why not ask the government for funding?

Tariffs for Jan to Mar 2009 will be based on October's average forward fuel prices, said SP Services deputy managing director Jeanne Cheng.

The gencos will convert the average forward price to Singapore dollars and use it to set the tariff's fuel component.

"By the end of November, we would submit to EMA for approval the tariffs for (next) quarter.

EMA would require time for checks, but I believe EMA is trying to work to shorten this period to have an earlier announcement," she said.

SP Services had announced this current quarter's tariffs two days before they kicked in, but notice of up to a month is possible, said Mr Quek.

When contacted, EMA said: "We are working with SP Services to shorten the turnaround time, but ultimately, due process is needed to compute, check and confirm the figures."

Singapore Power will invest S$5.1 billion in infrastructure over the next five years, with funds coming from operational cashflows and external borrowings.

It has borrowed S$9 billion from the international markets this year for further investment, said Mr Yap.

It would be unfair to ask the government for funding because that would mean taking from taxpayers, he said.

"We can take the easy way out, but S$10 billion from the Budget would mean S$10 billion less for the rest."

Mr Yap added: "Energy has a direct correlation with gross national product. If you believe Singapore will grow, then you need to plan forward. It's like the airport – you have to build it before planes will come."

Singapore's major industries like the banking and pharmaceutical sectors also require high quality power grids with minimal voltage fluctuations, and "just to maintain the same standard, you have to invest", said Singapore Power's chief operating officer Ong Boon Hwee.