 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Today I heard a new excuse. “There are many dimensions to this problem, the issue is very complex, hence don’t question what we do, just hold on to our hand while we guide you through this dark and mazy room.”
Of course I exaggerate like I always do, but that is the gist of the speech. This is the perfect setting for brain-washing – treating you to lunch so that you will be grateful and accept everything said as facts and employing an elderly and friendly man with a nice official sounding title to deliver the propaganda so that the information fed is never questioned. I mean, we are Asians after all, and Asians generally respect seniors and authority. I’m not saying that everything said was designed to mislead and not true, but there is a certain degree of official party policy mixed into a layer of niceties. There was valid points, supported by official stats, such as the number of babies conceived each year being insufficient to replace the number of citizens we lose each year due to migration and deaths. I don’t know the numbers, but there was a report recently saying that Singaporeans lead generally long lives, and our birth rates are definitely not as low as compared to other developed countries. So why can’t we replace the numbers we lose each year? The answer ultimately lies with the migration problem. Singaporeans are moving out of the country at alarming numbers, due to a variety of numbers. He did point out some glaringly obvious reasons for the mass migration, such as National Service and for a better, less stressful lifestyle, however, there are other reasons for the departures, and it has everything to do with the unfair system and repressive political climate that Singaporeans face in Singapore. To avoid being labelled as repetitive, I will just add that these reasons are more cogent than the official statements meted out by our gigantic propaganda machine, the mainstream media.
My position right now can best be described as the proverbial between a rock and a hard place. What should I do? How should I do it? What should be my priorities? Hopefully it will be resolved soon and I can get back on track with my revision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday I had the best korean home-cooked dinner in my life. Its not that great an achievement considering its my first time eating home cooked korean food, but its still pretty awesome! Thanks ellie and tim!
My hell week (sort of) is over! Two major assignments back to back, plus a kick-ass exam early in the week means that my week was mostly spent at home and on my study desk. I can't even go to the library to do my assignment because everyone borrowed the good books home and two libraries can't supply enough books for the whole level. I'm not really complaining but the fact that people borrow books 1 week before the assignment is due and refuse to return them when they are done with the books, reeks of kiasu-ism. Oh well, its not the prerogative of Singaporeans to be kiasu afterall.
There is a motion suggested by the vice-chancellor that usyd would cut its enrolment by 10% so that we can compete with other leading institutions around the world. Apparently institutions like Harvard and Yale only has around 10-20k students, whereas we number 48k in total. The dip in quality is to be expected when you have so many students. They still think that we should be competing with world class instiutions instead of languishing around the semi-good and quasi-credible schools like nus. ;p
Another interesting thing happening around the school is the defeat of a bill to enable universities to introduce a blanket charge of around $250 per student. It means they are charging students for being in the union and utilising the school facilities. Currently we have superb facilities like broken down projectors, single colour chalkboards, creaky doors that bangs loudly whenever someone leaves or enter the lecture theatre and of course our WIDE array of books that caters to everyone in school. Sure you should charge us for that eh? Not to mention that international students still doesn't get concessions, and are discriminated in and around the school, it all adds up to the ultimate uni experience, right? Right, seriously though, politicians should not be so easily influenced by lobby groups, especially when they are unaware of ground conditions. Kinda like the Singapore situation. The welfare of the bottom feeders of the university's hierachy of power, and also the group with the least say in key decisions, ie, the students, should really be considered first. However, we all know its not going to happen.
It's almost my two years anniversary. In a way, I knew that we would be able to last, yet I'm still kinda glad that we managed to survive. I can't really say everything had been rosy and sweet, but most of it was, hee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly I got reminded of 5 points yesterday. 5 bloody points! If I had known, I would definitely have taken accounting...blahhhh!
Nice talking to Chad today. You learn so much from a person just by sitting down and chatting for about an hour or two. His grades kind of scared me, 81 avg for law subjects is no mean feat. Conversely, Soo sounded quite sad when she told me about her struggles with the law modules. The law lecturer actually told her friend to drop law and improve his english. Maybe the lecturer was just being sensible, but to a young aspiring student, it can be devastating. I remember I had a teacher who wrote in my testimonial that I am an average student. I was angry and confronted her, yet she thinks that she was right in saying so. Being a first time form teacher, she should have been more aware of students' feelings, her response is typical of someone who is so used to success and having things her own way that she cannot connect with the "lesser mortals" of this world. Being called average is worse than being called poor, I think. An average student means that he/she is not special, just someone to make up the numbers, and that, to a student, is probably the worst possible scenario. Even if it is the truth, testimonials are not supposed to be truthful reflections of a student. I think my secondary school form teacher understands that, and gave us all glowing testimonials even though a lot of us constantly gave her grief.
It's my first week in the new semester. Things are moving along nicely and I think my timetable is terrific! Friday off! Woohoo!
A picture paints a thousand words. A friend whom I've been trying to inform suddenly turns around and asked me to watch onul. He was so captivated by the information in it, yet it is exactly what I've been trying to convey to him all these months. I really think people in the media, especially graphics industry plays a very important role in society. A picture conveys such a strong message that words can never be equivalent.
Finally, to my dearest, the time will come, be patient. Good things come to those who wait =)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is my first post back in singapore! Hopefully its not the last, but knowing me, it prob won't be the last. Lots of things happened in the short 3 weeks I've been back. I went to Genting and KL, had a honestly splendid bbq/grill at Yihan's place and met up with lots of people! There's still a lot of people I haven't met, and probably wouldn't get the chance to meet before I leave again =(. My holidays always seem so short.
I've been sick the past 3 days, which sucks really. My holidays is already short enough, I really don't need this sort of disruptions to shorten it even more!! Grr..
We celebrated our 22nd month yesterday. Seems like we have been together for ever, but even from the start, the familiarity we share is quite strange. It feels like we know each other for a long long time, much longer than we actually do. I think we surpassed expectations as well, as many people thought we were incompatible. May we continue to prove all those who doubted our relationship wrong!
Only in times of emergency, do I realise how little I know of my sister. Who she hangs out with, where will she usually go, what does she actually do, I have no idea. Even my parents know more than me, and thats very surprising considering that my parents usually wouldn't know about these kind of things.
* * *
I have had too many of these kind of meetings recently. Where I feel like my friends and I have become sort of unfamiliar, sort of distant. I can't fathom what they are thinking, can't join into their conversation subjects, don't know what they are doing or have been doing. Can I still call them friends? How long do you have to break contact with one person such that you know so little of that person that you cannot consider that person your friend? Is there even a time period for this? Are friends really for life? The cynic in me thinks that lifelong friends exists only if both parties have something to gain from each other.
Many friends ask me why my entries sound so sad. I don't think I mean them to sound sad. Its just a process of finding out more about relationships, friendships and myself. Some people choose to keep it to themselves, I choose to reveal some of my inner thoughts and doubts on this platform. I'm sure if everyone is upfront about their own fears and insecurities, it would sound just as melancholic as my blog entries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the eve of my International Law exam, the fact that I'm online blogging and actively searching for material to blog about doesn't bode well for the impending paper. However, I have been bothered by one particular case, so much so that I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about it over the past few days (while I'm studying too). Why does this case irk me so much? Well, its disturbing how the law can be twisted to accomodate governmental interests, and at the same time heartbreaking to know that, for two individuals at least, their lives have been turned upside down, and the law, not only did it not help to redress their grievances, impounded upon their wounds by letting the guilty off with the lightest of punishment. the case extract is below. For those who can't be bothered to read the case, I included my summary of the case below the case extract.
Lim Hong Eng v Public Prosecutor
[2009] SGHC 92
Suit No: MA 187/2008
Decision Date: 17 Apr 2009
Court: High Court
Coram: Choo Han Teck J
Counsel: Subhas Anandan and Sunil Sudheesan (KhattarWong) for the appellant, Francis Ng (Deputy Public Prosecutor) for the respondent
Subject Area / Catchwords
Criminal Law
Judgment
17 April 2009
Judgment reserved.
Choo Han Teck J:
1 The appellant was convicted of one charge of causing death by dangerous driving, an offence punishable under s 66(1) of the Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 2004 Rev Ed) with imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, and one charge of causing grievous hurt by doing a rash act, an offence punishable under s 338 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or a fine of up to $1,000, or both. The District Judge sentenced the appellant to 18 months’ imprisonment and disqualified her from holding or obtaining a driving licence for all classes of vehicles with effect from the date of release from prison for the first charge, that is, the charge for causing death by dangerous driving. She was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment for the second charge, that is, the charge for causing grievous hurt by doing a rash act. Both terms of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently, making her total term of imprisonment 18 months. The Appellant has appealed against the conviction and sentence of both charges.
2 The charges against the appellant concerned a road accident which resulted in injury to a motorcyclist and the death of his pillion rider. The accident occurred at the junction of Whitley Road and Dunearn Road (“the Junction”) on Christmas Eve in 2006. At the material time, about 3.48 pm, the appellant was driving her car along Whitley Road in the direction of Orchard Road, and had intended to make a right turn into Bukit Timah Road and then a U-Turn to Raffles Town Club after the Junction. As her car crossed into the Junction she collided with a motorcycle that was travelling along Dunearn Road towards Newton Circus. As a result of the collision, the motorcyclist and the pillion were flung off the motorcycle. The motorcyclist suffered a compound fracture to his left leg while the pillion subsequently succumbed to her injuries and died.
3 The appellant submitted that the District Judge had erred in fact by placing undue weight on the evidence of one Lim Kian Seng (“Lim”), a taxi driver at the scene at the material time. Lim, a prosecution witness, testified that the motorcyclist moved forward into the Junction when the traffic light turned green in his favour. The obvious implication was that the appellant drove through the Junction against the red light (NE pp 20–21). The appellant also submitted that the District Judge had erred by failing to give due credit to the appellant’s consistent evidence that, inter alia, she did not know that the traffic light was not in her favour, and finding that the appellant intentionally drove in a dangerous manner. On the evidence, I see no reason to impugn the finding that the appellant drove through the Junction when the traffic lights were not in her favour. Having regard to the overall evidence, and in particular, the evidence of Lim, whose testimony was accepted by the trial judge, I am of the view that this finding of fact cannot be challenged. As regards the finding that the appellant drove through the Junction intentionally when the traffic lights were not in her favour, I am of the view that this finding was irrelevant so far as guilt was concerned. The offence of dangerous driving is not an offence that depended on an intention to drive dangerously. Whether the accused was driving dangerously is a question of fact to be determined by the court. The subjective intention or knowledge of the accused is relevant only for the purposes of sentencing. Thus, in Lim Chin Poh v PP [1969-1971] SLR 247, Choor Singh J held (at [10] and [13]):
10 … In my opinion the expression “driving in a manner which is dangerous to the public” indicates some dangerous act or manoeuvre on the part of the driver of a vehicle, eg overtaking a vehicle on the wrong side of it, or overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic, or overtaking when unable to see oncoming traffic, or crossing a junction against traffic light, and so on. There must be some positive act on the part of the driver which is dangerous having regard to all the circumstances. …
13 … Careless driving may well be dangerous though all careless driving are not necessarily dangerous. This court is not going to attempt to lay down what is or is not dangerous driving. The question in these cases always is: “Did the conduct of the accused amount to dangerous driving?” And to answer this question the court must consider whether or not the act or manoeuvre of the accused, viewed objectively, involved danger to other road users in the prevailing circumstances?
4 The state of mind of the appellant at the time, however, was relevant where the question was whether the offence of causing grievous hurt by a rash act had been made out. A rash act should be distinguished from a negligent act by the state of mind of the accused, as would be demonstrated in the following cases that were cited by M P H Rubin JC in PP v Teo Poh Leng [1992] 1 SLR 15. In Nidamarti Nagabhushanam (1872) 7 MHC 119, Holloway J stated (at 120):
Culpable rashness is acting with the consciousness that the mischievous and illegal consequences may follow, but with the hope that they will not, and often with the belief that the actor has taken sufficient precaution to prevent their happening. The imputability arises from acting despite the consciousness (luxuria). Culpable negligence is acting without the consciousness that the illegal and mischievous effect will follow, but in circumstances which show that the actor has not exercised the caution incumbent upon him, and that if he had he would have had the consciousness. The imputability arises from the neglect of the civic duty of circumspection.
Similarly, in Empress of India v Idu Beg (1881) ILR 3 All 776, Straight J stated (at 779–780):
[C]riminal rashness is hazarding a dangerous or wanton act with the knowledge that it is so, and that it may cause injury, but without intention to cause injury, or knowledge that it will probably be caused. The criminality lies in running the risk of doing such an act with recklessness or indifference as to the consequences. Criminal negligence is the gross and culpable neglect or failure to exercise that reasonable and proper care and precaution to guard against injury either to the public generally or to an individual in particular, which, having regard to all the circumstances out of which the charge has arisen, it was the imperative duty of the accused person to have adopted.
Likewise, in the case of Bhalchandra Waman Pathe v The State of Maharashtra (1969) 71 Bombay LR 634 (SC), it was held (at 637):
There is a distinction between a rash act and a negligent act. … Criminal negligence is the gross and culpable neglect or failure to exercise that reasonable and proper care and precaution to guard against injury either to the public generally or to an individual in particular, which having regard to all the circumstances out of which the charge has arisen it was the imperative duty of the accused person to have adopted. Negligence is an omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. … [A] culpable rashness is acting with the consciousness that the mischievous and illegal consequences may follow, but with the hope that they will not, and often with the belief that the actor has taken sufficient precaution to prevent their happening. The imputability arises from acting despite the consciousness. Culpable negligence is acting without the consciousness, that the illegal and mischievous effect will follow, but in circumstances which show that the actor has not exercised the caution incumbent upon him and if he had he would have had the consciousness. The imputability arises from the neglect of the civic duty of circumspection.
5 Rashness thus implies a disregard to the possibility of injury or death. The appellant, in the present case, did not appear to have shown such disregard. It appears from the evidence that she was not aware that the traffic lights had turned red. This was a finding of fact made by the District Judge, who held that the appellant did not intend to beat the red light, and had entered the Junction unaware not only of the fact that the lights were red against her but also that the motorcycle was passing through the Junction (Judgment at [44]). The court’s finding was supported by Lim’s evidence that the appellant’s vehicle moved at a constant speed without any evasive action being taken (NE at p 22). In fact, the prosecution, in its submissions below, conceded (NE at p 150):
Position of the prosecution is clear. Prosecution is not trying to prove that the accused was speeding and neither is the prosecution trying to prove that the accused beat the red light intentionally knowing that the red light was clearly against her but yet chose to speed crossing the junction.
Prosecution’s case is that the unfortunate accident happened because the accused failed to keep a proper lookout. [emphasis added]
6 In my view, the appellant’s conduct was more negligent than rash. The prosecution’s concession in its submissions below that the appellant’s conduct was one of omission (see the previous paragraph) further reinforces this view. The prosecution, in its submissions to this court, stated that if the appellant had not acted rashly, the charge of causing grievous hurt by doing a rash act should be amended to one of dangerous driving simpliciter under s 64(1) of the Road Traffic Act, which is an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or a fine of up to $3,000, or both. In my view, there is no prejudice to the appellant if the charge was amended as the prosecution suggested, since the case would have proceeded in the same manner if a charge of dangerous driving had been proceeded with from the outset. As such, I would amend the second charge to a charge of dangerous driving under s 64(1) of the Road Traffic Act and convict the appellant accordingly.
7 As I mentioned, the state of mind of the appellant would have an impact on her culpability, and thereby, her punishment. In the present case, the prosecution conceded that the appellant did not intentionally disregard the red light at the Junction. It seemed clear from the evidence and the trial judge’s findings that the nature of the appellant’s culpability lay in her failure to keep a proper lookout. That, in my view, did not merit a harsh custodial sentence. A long custodial sentence for a traffic offence is appropriate when the offender endangered the lives of others in a rash or reckless manner (such as driving at an excessive speed) and not when her conduct was merely negligent.
8 Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that a sentence of one day’s imprisonment, as well as a long period of disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence, would be an adequate punishment in respect of the first charge.
9 For the reasons above, I dismiss the appellant’s appeal in regard to her conviction for dangerous driving in the first charge but allow her appeal on sentence, and reduce the sentence to one day’s imprisonment. The disqualification order, namely, a disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence for all classes of vehicles with effect from the date of release from prison, is to remain. As for the second charge, I amend the charge of causing grievous hurt by doing a rash act to one of dangerous driving and convict the appellant accordingly. The sentence is varied to a fine of $2,000 with two months’ imprisonment in default of payment. The sentence of one day’s imprisonment will be served today.
The apellant in this case is Ms Lim Hong Eng. A couple of trivia facts - Ms Lim is the editor-in-chief of Shin Min Ri Bao - the chinese equivalent of The New Paper in Singapore. Her lawyers are Subhas Anandan and his nephew Sunil Sudheesan. Mr Anandan is the author of the book "The Best I Could", and is Singapore's top criminal lawyer. The facts are, Ms Lim was driving along a road using her telephone. She beats a red light unknowingly as she wasn't paying attention to where she is going. She knocked into a motorcycle, whose driver is a 70 year old Italian national and the pillon, his Indonesian maid. The maid died from injuries in the hospital and the driver is discharged but walks with a permanent limb. The facts are not in dispute. Two charges were laid against Ms Lim, causing death by dangerous driving and causing grevious hurt by doing a rash act. She was convicted of both acts and handed a sentence of 1.5year jail term and $12 000 fine. A paltry punishment in exchange of her actions you might think. However, on appeal, the trial judge reduced her jail term to 1 day and fine to $2 000. A laughable punishment in my opinion. We are talking about a death and severe injuries here, and worse of all, the fact that she was using her phone and not paying attention on the road is not even considered material enough for the judge to include in his judgement. The reasoning was that it did not constitute dangerous driving and its not even rash because she had no idea she is going to knock into someone as she was on the phone. To anyone who is aware, carelessness does not excuse liability. The judge in this case has made a fundamental error in his reasoning and it just frightens me that I would be subjected to the laws of this country, whose judges are of such calibre. *shudders* *** Which is worse? Being uninformed or misinformed? If you are uninformed, you wouldn't know the subject matter at all. Mostly, in a discussion of that subject, you will just keep your mouth shut and not make a contribution. You would not be able to discern whether the discussion is credible and whether the information is accurate or not. If you are uninformed about most things, you would be a pretty quiet person wouldn't you? On the other hand, if you are misinformed, you argue about things without knowing the true facts. Mostly, in a discussion, you will talk about things that you think are right but have no proof to back them up. You rely on non-credible sources and base alot of ur arguments on vague assertions, mostly on your limited understanding of world matters. The good thing is, you talk a lot, though not making sense most of the time. So which is the greater evil?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This morning when i woke up, I remained laid on my bed, my eyes wide open and my mind lazily getting into motion. I thought about my life, my life as it is now, my life as compared to other people. I thought about my assignments, I thought about results, I thought about whether it all matters. Then when I went down to brush my teeth, I thought about my family back in Singapore, my friends, my girlfriend. I thought about the way they are going to receive me, is it with love and affection after I successfully completed my degrees with good grades and looking forward to a bright future? Or is it with shame and disdain after I did what I've always done, quit at the last hurdle? I shudder at the thought of the second outcome.
I've always wondered whether I'm a dreamer. Someone who dreams of big things but does not have the resources and capability to carry out his ambitions. The great people in history, are they dreamers too? Or are they practical people who perform to the extent of their capabilities and be satisfied with that? If that is so, what makes them so much greater than me, such that the extent of their capabilities is so much greater than my own? Does it make them 10 times, 20 times a better man than I am? I think they are just normal human beings with big dreams too. The difference between us is the drive and determination to achieve those dreams I guess. These men have a purpose in their lives, a goal which they aspire to reach their whole life. What then, is my goal? Do I have sufficient drive to reach that goal? Big questions with no answers.
Sometimes I feel that life is great. The future opens up in front of you, giving you limitless opportunities to stretch yourself. Why be immersed in one subject when you can dabble in so many more? I wonder what goals and aspirations pious people have. Attaining Nirvana? That used to be the ultimate goal. The stage whereby nothing else matters. Or is Nirvana just another way of saying that the man has lost his goals and aspirations, given up on trying, and just content to sit out life in his comfort zone? Improvement only comes when you try to better yourself, it does not come out of the blue, drop down from the sky. Why then, should we give up trying?
Next time I should just wake up, so that I won't think about such things. =p
I have an issue with people who use profanities. I feel that its used as a tool for intimidation, and friends should not use them in everyday conversation. However, some people are so used to them that it becomes part of their everyday language. Does it make them feel more secure if they are able to establish intimidation in the other person? I think Mandarin is a very civilised language, I can't think of a very vulgar word in Mandarin, though Chinese people have other languages to supplement their need for coarse language, Mandarin remains clean. The worst word I can think of is probably TAMADE. Not very vulgar is it? The language used by a people is supposed to reflect themselves, so applying that logic, Mandarin speaking people are non-confrontational?
Much hype is attached to Kenneth Jeyaretnam's forage into politics. He could have hardly chosen a better time to do it, what with public sentiment on his side with his father's death, and GFC affecting the public's confidence in the current government. I have always thought that Singapore being such a small country, we need a coalition of some kind to prevent PAP's dominance. His entry doesn't boost the opposition's position. He becomes just another figure propping up another ailing opposition party. Maybe someone should take the initative to collate the opposition so that we can have a credible competition for the current government. My view is that the current government has been in power for so long, they are resting on their laurels. KJ has a double first (?) degree. Apparently he has a first class honours in Economics, which puts him in a better position to revive Singapore's economy than many of our other ministers, who are a mixture of engineering, medical, mathematics (lol), and many other assorted degrees. Since the MAS is in effect a mere subsidiary of the government and has no real say, it rests on the top man to make crucial decisions. Doesn't bode well for Singapore that the top dog is a trained mathematician. What the hell does a mathematician do anyway? Apparently LKY predicts that PAP will no longer be in power two terms after his demise. At least he knows that his son is useless. =p
Its getting cold in Sydney. How I wish I can return to Singapore tmr. Please? I promise to look through all the dull legislations and case law when I come back. I will even memorise the Trade Practices Act and read David Garland twice over. Please please please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Livejournal ate my last entry, but luckily i got it to regurgitate for me =) The 2 assignments were a nightmare, up till now, I'm still not very sure whether I did it correctly. Ahh..who cares, its done and dusted as far as I'm concerned.
Melbourne trip was made meaningful and activity-filled by clayton. Thanks dude! He did unload a lot of his problems on us though..and I'm quite concerned about him actually. Melbourne is really not an ideal city to be in when you are facing such problems. I'm rather glad that I am in Sydney and not Melbourne. Having Singaporeans around can make you feel at home and can help to ease problems with initial problems, but many of them are "privileged" Singaporeans, and I rather mix with people of other nationalities than hang around "privileged" Singaporeans.
I went to see the grand sounding "12 Apostles" at Victoria. View was fantastic, but I can't help feeling that its just rocks that are over-hyped. The original name of "sow and piglets" doesn't sound so appealing eh? Rather than be obsessed with the 12 apostles that has no meaning behind its name other than tourist-spin, I'm quite intrigued by Ned Kelly's story. Here is a figure that apparently transformed Victoria, throwing weight behind its republican move and giving new meaning to crime and control. He is the closest figure to Robin Hood, and the way he fell puts him in folklore for eternity. His armour is quite dis-tasteful though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's been quite a while since I last blogged. Life is still the same, but I feel that I have a new perspective of the world in general. This semester has been such an eye opener, I feel woefully inadequate to handle everything that is coming at me. That said, it has been very enjoyable =).
I went for a live football match some days ago. It was a world cup qualifying match between Australia and Uzbekistan and the stakes were high for both teams. To the Uzbeks, a loss would mean that their chances of reaching the world cup is too small to be considered credible. To the Aussies, home turf dignity and guaranteed qualification are the carrot hanging in front of them. We went in late due to tardiness on the part of the UNSW kids. I was hopping mad, but not for long as the atmosphere just sweeps everything under as raw emotion takes over on the stands. The first half was boring but you could tell that the standard of football is much higher than what I'm used to, ie. S-league football =p. The second half was much better and when the first goal went in, people were all up on their feet and throwing everything they can at other supporters. I had some popcorn and a few drops of beer on me by the time the euphoria died down. When the second goal went in, I was prepared for the onslaught of food, and I managed to swat them all away to the unfortunate people sitting below me. Too bad for them.
I wonder what I got myself into, volunteering to write an article for Vibewire. I'm completely bogged down by assignments and I had to get myself more work. At least the topic is interesting, and I can identify with it. Looks like my easter break will be spent doing all the essays.
this was an entry i wrote last week. somehow it got saved under my drafts instead of publishing..strange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was an article in the Straits Times a while ago regarding our "secret weapon" as referred to by our Prime Minister. You can access the article here. Our Prime Minister claims that this tripartite relations between government, worker unions and employers is the secret to our economic success. According to him, it is a very desirable attribute that other countries are not able to copy and enforce. In fact, he was practically gloating about it, saying that a visiting Latin American leader had been amazed to find out this fact. "'I told him, this is Lim Swee Say, the secretary-general of the National Trade Unions Congress, elected by the unions. He is a also a minister in the Prime Minister's Office, appointed by me. Same person. He looked at Swee Say, and looked at me. He said: 'Is that really true?' He could not imagine it,' said Mr Lee." Let me tell you why this visiting leader was surprised by this news. Labour unions in other countries have a certain degree of bargaining power. What are labour unions supposed to do anyway? It is not to protect the interests of the employers or the government, but to protect the interests of the employees. They gather together and use threats such as mass resignation or strikes to fight for higher wages or better benefits. Have you ever wondered why the cost of living is constantly rising while our wages are stagnant at the same level, its precisely because there are NO credible trade unions acting for the interests of employees in Singapore. As gloatingly pointed out by our leader, the leader of the trade union is also a member of the ruling party of the government. Where else in the world can you find this? Probably in Communist China where the government has control over every aspect of output. Once again, I would like to remind everyone that Singapore is ranked second last in a world wide index of how democratic the government is. This means places like Zimbabwe. Thailand, Malaysia etc has more democracy than "1st World Singapore". It is not a strange thing that trade unionists can become government ministers. In fact Barack Obama used to be a community organiser before he became the president of USA. However, the difference is that they don't hold 2 posts at the same time. It is just a conflict of interests. On one hand you are supposed to fight for workers' rights against the government, and on the other hand you are fighting for the interests of the government. It doesn't make sense at all. I met up with an old friend for lunch today. He was in the Obama's campaigning team, so he occasionally conversed with some important figures in the American government. He told me Singapore never came up in their discussions of how best to handle the current situation. I know netizens are hoping that he makes good his pledge during the inauguration speech of helping people who are suffering under authoritarian rule and to expose money laundering countries. However, looking at the current situation in Singapore, many people are happily oblivious to the lack of rights they have, and not much suffering of any degree are felt by the general public. I suppose any inquiry from the Americans in the region would be more concerned by the dire situation in Burma - a country whose military regime has some sympathy from our government. Which is why it is Myanmar to us, but Burma to every other democratic countries who refuse to acknowledge the name that the military regime enforced upon Burma.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
vinnyboy7's journal
Previous
