Singaporeans rally behind Facebook against K Shanmugam
March 22, 2018
Yesterday, social media platforms Facebook, Google and Twitter were invited to give their opinions in person on new censorship laws, only to get a lashing from the Law Minister. What I find puzzling initially was why these platforms given a stage to air their opinion, because these “platforms” are merely a vehicle to deliver content, regardless fake or real. Facebook should not be responsible for propagating fake news as much as the inventor of AR-15 be responsible for wars and mass murder attacks, or Singtel being responsible for fraudulent calls, or Microsoft being responsible for hackers using windows, or your postman being responsible for junk mail…you catch my drift.
Asking Facebook for an opinion on fake news is only as good as asking SIRI whether is fast food good for your health. What do you expect Shanmugam?
Facebook executive Simon Milner’s responses were easy to understand, but the snake of a minister felt disrespected. When the dictator wants a “yes”, you don’t give an open-ended response. Stopping short of sending Simon Milner to the firing squad, K Shanmugam was clearly dissatisfied to be talked back.
Simon Milner was right to not take his brow beating and stuck to explaining Facebook’s policies. The Law Minister was clearly asking leading questions, making irrelevant paraphrases to suit his political agenda. It became interesting that the public hearing became a lecturing session from K Shanmugam, with him alone talking throughout the session while the other 9 Select Committee members sat quietly. It was then clear: there is no Select Committee, it is only Shanmugam’s Committee.
As usual, after losing a debate, K Shanmugam attacked the credibility of Simon Milner. K Shanmugam tried to make Facebook out as an irresponsible corporation by referring to the recent data leak scandal. Why would the data leak scandal be even relevant at the hearing I don’t know. Instead, the minister’s eloquence yesterday had people questioning if that is indeed the calibre of a senior counsel, or whether his bullying behaviour is befitting of a Law Minister.
A green paper was conveyed for the first time in 30 years, a 10-member Select Committee and now an invite-only hearing consulting fake “experts”. All the troubles went through in the name to ban “deliberate fake news”.
The aim could not be clearer: Law Minister K Shanmugam is desperate to ban States Times Review. Temasek Review, The Real Singapore and now the States Times Review. I am honoured to have partaken of the earlier two banned editorial, and am equally delighted that my articles today warranted similar censorship actions. States Times Review is only alive because it is an Australian website, out of reach from local jurisdiction banning corrosive criticisms (in all fairness, the Singapore government stomach mild criticisms i.e. TheOnlineCitizen, they could however never accept anyone calling out nepotism or legalised corruptions.)
continue reading here :
Teachers to pay for parking in schools from August
26 Mar 2018 03:06PM (Updated: 26 Mar 2018 05:02PM)
SINGAPORE: Teachers will have to pay monthly season parking rates if they want to park their cars or motorcycles at their school car parks from Aug 1 this year, the Ministry of Education (MOE) confirmed on Monday (Mar 26).
During the school term, the monthly season parking rates for cars is S$75 for an uncovered lot and S$100 for a sheltered lot. This is lowered to S$15 and S$20 for an uncovered lot and sheltered lot respectively during the school holidays. The annual rate for parking in an uncovered lot is S$720 while that for a sheltered lot is S$960.
For motorcycles, the monthly season parking rates during the school term is S$13 for an uncovered lot and S$14 for a sheltered lot. During the school holidays, the rates for uncovered and sheltered lots are S$2 and S$3 respectively. For the full year, it costs S$123 for uncovered lots and S$135 for sheltered lots.
The Education Ministry said that different rates will be charged during school term and the holidays as demand for parking fluctuates significantly between the two periods.
“This better reflects a sense of fair charging for the teachers, and was an important feedback we took away from our consultations with school leaders on the implementation aspects of school parking charges,” it said in a reply to Channel NewsAsia’s queries.
The parking charges are uniform for all schools regardless of location “for ease of administration”, it added.
The Education Ministry had said it was reviewing its car park policy for schools after the Audit-General’s Office (AGO) 2014/2015 Financial Year report noted that the Institute of Technical Education, Singapore Polytechnic and Temasek Polytechnic did not impose charges or had charges that were below the market rate.
Read more at
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...k-pay-10076794
Ho say liao even the teachers are not spared . PAP Government surely make more people to pay .
Over a year of speculation later, teachers confirm they will have to pay between $720-$960 to park in schools
March 26, 2018
Teachers at all primary schools, secondary schools and junior colleges will have to start paying hundreds of dollars for parking at school premises from 1 Aug this year. Teachers speaking to reporters on the condition of anonymity – since they are not authorised to publicly comment on such matters – said that this new policy was announced at staff briefings in various national schools this morning.
Reporters claim to have seen documents that show that teachers who drive cars will have to pay S$720 yearly for parking in uncovered lots and S$960 for covered lots, while motorcyclists will be charged S$123 annually for parking in uncovered lots and S$135 for covered lots.
The news comes after over a year of speculation that a school carpark policy review will cause teachers to pay fees for parking on school premises. Speculation arose after he Auditor-General Office’s (AGO) last year flagged the Institute of Technical Education and two polytechnics for not imposing parking charges, or charging below market rate, for use of their car parks.
Interestingly, the AGO report did not highlight our public schools for such lapses. The Ministry of Education (MOE) had said last year on the matter: “We understand the concerns raised and we are with you in appreciating the dedication and hard work by all our teachers. We seek your patience and understanding as we are still in the process of reviewing the carpark policy for schools, bearing in mind civil service guidelines and recent AGO observations. We are taking the time to do this carefully.”
The Ministry has yet to comment on the implementation of the carpark policy review, which was initiated as park of a “clean wage policy” that is meant to make any hidden perks and subsidies for teachers transparent.
continue reading here :
http://www.theindependent.sg/over-on...rk-in-schools/
To the teachers do you still want to vote for PAP ?
Parking charges at 6 more military camps and bases from April: MINDEF
27 Mar 2018 11:13AM (Updated: 27 Mar 2018 11:57AM)
SINGAPORE: The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) will be imposing market rate season parking charges on six more MINDEF and Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) camps and bases from Sunday (Apr 1).
In a news release on Tuesday, MINDEF said the car parks in these six camps have been deemed to have market value due to their proximity to public amenities. It did not specify which camps will be affected.
Channel NewsAsia understands that Khatib Camp and Mowbray Camp in Choa Chu Kang are among the six.
MINDEF said the season parking policy will apply to all permanent staff as well as contractors who require a car park lot on a regular basis.
This is in addition to the 10 camps, bases and related premises that currently impose season parking charges.
“Operationally ready National Servicemen who are going for their in-camp training and other operationally ready National Service activities will continue not to be charged for parking their cars in all camp/bases,” said MINDEF.
Channel NewsAsia understands that the season parking charges are S$120 per month for covered car parks and S$90 per month for open-air car parks.
Read more at
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...april-10079268
Ho sia liao now MINDEF staff also have to pay car park fees .Might as well all Ministry and Stat Boards should also charge staff for car park fees . So you guys still want to vote for PAP ?
Reporters Without Borders: Waste of time over consultation since Parliament is 80% controlled
March 27, 2018
In what seems like too good a deal to be true, the Singapore Select Committee yesterday (Mar 27) announced that their invite to Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) “still stands” and they are happy to wait for the two international freedom advocacy groups to send in their representative.
The invite however is most likely a guise for the dictatorship to charge the representative for falsehoods. The HRW and RSF has earlier published a condemning report, titled “Kill the chicken to silence the monkeys”, and labelled the comprehensive 192-page document that wrote extensively on Singapore legislation as “fake news”.
The HRW has earlier rejected attending the Singapore hearing and slammed Law Minister K Shanmugam for his “irrelevant and ridiculous” accusation claiming that their absence is a sign of their report is “indefensible”.
The RSF wrote on it’s website pointing out a consultation on the PAP-controlled Parliament is a waste of time:
“Given the alarming legislative precedents in the city-state, RSF shares the deep concern that Singaporean defenders of the freedom to inform have expressed about this proposed law, which they suspect will be yet another tool for censoring dissent. We take note of the declared desire of Singapore’s authorities to listen to civil society’s views. Unfortunately, with the ruling party controlling 80% of the parliament, we fear that this law will be adopted without any real debate and without any significant amendments, which means this consultation would be pointless.”
continue reading here :
Why don’t NGOs who like to whack S’pore attend the Select Committee’s public hearings?
Don’t shy leh.
By Sulaiman Daud | 6 hours
It’s WrestleMania season, and the WWE’s stars are getting ready for the biggest show of the year.
One of the most anticipated matches is between John Cena and the Undertaker. They have yet to meet face-to-face, but will do battle and find out who’s the better man.
But it would be a real shame if after all the hype, the Undertaker failed to appear at WrestleMania and left Cena all alone in an empty ring.
That’s kind of what it felt like when international NGOs Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Reporters Without Borders (Reporters Sans Frontières or RSF) have yet to show up and give evidence to the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods.
Time to step up
The Committee are currently holding public hearings on ways to tackle deliberate online falsehoods.
They have invited people from all walks of life to give evidence, so it can hear their concerns and suggestions before producing their own report for Parliament.
So far representatives from academia, the media, tech companies, and members of the public have been heard.
If you have ideas for how the government can tackle the problem of falsehoods, or even want to criticise their policies, then this would be a great opportunity.
After all, these hearings are conducted in a public setting, with both international and local media present. And whatever is said would be protected by the laws of Parliamentary privilege.
For people based outside Singapore, the Parliament Secretariat has indicated in some cases that it would even fund their travel costs.
Shots fired
So it’s quite puzzling to hear that representatives of two rather famous organisations, HRW and RSF, have yet to attend any of these hearings, or made any plans to do so.
Consider that HRW recently published a report named “Kill the Chicken to Scare the Monkeys” – Suppression of Free Expression and Assembly in Singapore.
As you might have guessed from the title, it’s about how Singapore’s laws threaten such freedoms.
continue reading here :
Blogger Han Hui Hui removed from Select Committee hearing after disrupting proceedings
29 Mar 2018 04:08PM (Updated: 29 Mar 2018 05:25PM)
SINGAPORE: Blogger Han Hui Hui was on Thursday (Mar 29) removed from a public hearing by the Select Committee on deliberate online falsehoods.
She held up a stack of papers, prompting a security officer to ask her to leave the room.
According to Shawn Danker, a photographer who attended the public hearing, the stack of papers had the image of a book cover printed on it, which read: “Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse And Legitimacy in Singapore.”
“She began holding it up shortly after she sat down,” he told Channel NewsAsia. “On and off she went from between holding (the papers) up and (down) on her lap.”
The incident happened at about 3.05pm, during an exchange between Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam and historian Thum Ping Tjin.
Ms Han insisted that she was holding “blank papers” and refused to leave the room.
“No, these are just blank papers. Look, I’m just trying to write my notes here … I don’t want to miss his hearing,” she said. “I want to follow his hearing which is why I purposely came here.”
She was eventually removed by female officers and a five-minute break was called.
Read more at
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...after-10086870
She really need to do something constructive and not to create unnecessary nuisance to the public .
Han Hui Hui physically removed from Select Committee hearings after disrupting proceedings
March 29, 2018
Blogger Han Hui Hui was physically removed from the chambers in Parliament after she disrupted the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods’ final day of hearings today.
Han disrupted the proceedings by holding up an image of the cover of a book, as historian Thum Ping Tjin was delivering his testimony in front of the Committee, which included Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam.
The book cover image Han was holding up is from a book entitled “Authoritarian Rule of Law – Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore”, written by Minister Shanmugam’s first wife, Jothie Rajah.
Parliament staff confiscated Han’s papers and told her to leave the chambers but she refused to do so. Insisting that she was holding “blank papers”, Han was heard saying: “No, these are just blank papers. Look, I’m just trying to write my notes here … I don’t want to miss his hearing,” she said. “I want to follow his hearing which is why I purposely came here.”
She reportedly added: “I want to sit here because I want to follow the hearing…What else you want from me? I already give you my papers…What did I do wrong? Can you give me an official paper to say I cannot stay?”
A female staff member responded, “Either you walk out on your own or I bring you out.” to which Han replied, “I’m not going.” She was then physically lifted out of the chambers by three female staff members.
A five-minute break was called in the chambers after Han was ejected from the room. A Parliament spokesperson told reporters that Han was removed from the chambers for creating a disturbance in Parliament while the Committee was hearing evidence. The representative added: “This was after she was requested to leave, but refused to do so.”
continue reading here :
Lee Kuan Yew prepared to accept options other than demolition of 38 Oxley Road: Ministerial committee
02 Apr 2018 04:06PM (Updated: 02 Apr 2018 06:06PM)
SINGAPORE: The late Mr Lee Kuan Yew wanted to demolish his longtime residence at 38 Oxley Road but later became open to other possibilities, according to a report released on Monday (Apr 2) by a ministerial committee.
The bungalow’s status came under scrutiny in June last year after Mr Lee’s children, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, accused their elder brother and current Singapore prime minister Lee Hsien Loong of using the house to “enhance his political capital”. A back-and-forth ensued, leading to a two-day parliamentary debate on the issue.
A year before, in June 2016, a ministerial committee was set up to explore various options for the house. It is chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean and excludes PM Lee, who had earlier recused himself from all Government decisions involving the property.
On the matter of Mr Lee’s thinking and wishes for the house, the committee concluded in its report: “Having looked at the objective evidence and the views expressed by the parties, the committee’s view is that Mr Lee’s preference was for the property to be demolished; Mr Lee was also aware that the Cabinet and others, including senior journalists, were opposed to demolition given the property’s historical and heritage value as well as their reading of public sentiments.
“In view of this, Mr Lee had further reflected on the matter and was prepared to accept options other than demolition, provided that suitable arrangements were made to ensure that the property was refurbished and kept in a habitable state; and the family’s privacy was protected,” read the report.
The committee said that in considering the “objective evidence”, it had placed emphasis on contemporaneous documents and statements made personally by Mr Lee. It also noted that PM Lee had provided the committee with letters and statutory declarations, as well as a file of supporting documentary evidence - including emails and letters from Mr Lee.
Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang did not provide any documentary evidence, according to the committee.
DEMOLITION CLAUSE, CABINET LETTER
The Committee said it found three components of the evidence “particularly useful”: The demolition clause in Mr Lee’s last will dated Dec 17, 2013; Mr Lee’s letter to Cabinet dated Dec 27, 2011; and renovation plans Mr Lee submitted to the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) in March 2012.
Read more at
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...eport-10096280
Here we go again .
Ministerial committee on 38 Oxley Road lays out options for house of Lee Kuan Yew
02 Apr 2018 04:00PM (Updated: 02 Apr 2018 04:36PM)
SINGAPORE: The ministerial committee tasked with considering options for 38 Oxley Road, the family home of Singapore’s first Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, laid out several options for the house in a report released on Monday (Apr 2).
This ranged from preserving it by way of gazetting it as a national monument on one end, to demolishing the property and allowing the owner to redevelop it for residential use.
There were also “intermediate” options laid out by the committee, such as retaining the dining room – which is considered the most historically significant part of the property - and demolishing the rest of the house.
Chair of the ministerial committee, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, made clear that the committee did not make any recommendation on what to do with the house because no decision is required at this point in time. This is because the late Mr Lee’s daughter, Dr Lee Wei Ling, is still living there.
“The various options outlined in this report are drawer plans to help a future government make an informed and considered decision about the property when it becomes necessary,” said the committee, which was set up in June 2016.
A dispute over the house was brought into the public eye last year, after claims and counter-claims made by the late Mr Lee’s younger son Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee on the one hand, and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on the other.
Among the issues were whether the family home should be demolished as stated in Mr Lee’s final will, and whether tearing down the house was the only option he was prepared to accept.
THREE BROAD OPTIONS
In its report, the committee said that the options for 38 Oxley Road can be categorised into three. These are:
Retain the property either by gazetting it as a national monument to be acquired by the state with an alternative use for the site, or gazetting it for conservation and allowing the owner to retain the property for residential use;
Retain only the dining room and integrating it with an alternative use for the site;
Demolish the house fully for redevelopment, carried out either by the owner for residential use, or by the state for alternative uses, e.g. as a park or heritage centre.
The options that involve acquisition by the state are - gazetting it as a national monument, retaining the dining room and demolishing the house for alternative uses by the government of the day.
If the house is allowed to be demolished and redeveloped by the owner, the committee said the site allows for a five-storey residential development according to estimates by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). The committee noted, however, that doing so “could result in the loss of a historically significant property, and the potential of that history bring leveraged for commercial".
Read more at
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...tions-10096284
And so the wayang show continues . Now waiting for the other Lee family members to respond .