The Online Citizen

Flying the state flag on Iraq’s highest mountain

Terry Xu — Wed, 22 May 2013 02:50:30 +0000

An overseas Singaporean, Morgan is a hospital-teacher, working with children with cancer and mental health illnesses at Sydney Children's Hospital (SCH). Earlier this month, he scaled Iraq's highest mountain to raise funds for the kids he works with at SCH. He also brought along almost a hundred lightweight books to donate to a local school in Kurdistan for the slowly returning Kurdish Diaspora from decades of civil war.

[caption id="attachment_3383" align="alignnone" width="400"] Morgan at the peak, flying the Singapore Flag.[/caption]

It was an independent project which was completely self researched, risk-assessed, planned and funded. He spent months establishing his own local contacts in the Kurdistan Autonomous Region of Iraq. Kurdistan is a semi-autonomous region in Northern Iraq which is relatively more stable and safe than the rest of federal Iraq. More countries are beginning to show a slight distinction between both territories, although foreign travel advisories still generally advise against travelling. For this reason, it was incredibly difficult to find any travel insurance company that was willing to cover him for his travel, let alone a mountaineering activity.

Mount Halgurd (3607m), Iraq's highest accessible mountain, lies in the Zagros Mountain range along a disputed region between Iraq and Iran. It is an area that very few outsiders have glimpsed at, and our expedition was an exploratory ascend of a mountain with no established routes. Mount Cheekah-Dar just to the North of Halgurd, stands at (3611m), but is forbidden to be climbed because of political reasons - it sits right on the disputed border with Iran. (The mountains behind Morgan in the photo are all in Iran, Cheekah-Dar is the one directly behind him which lies half in Iraq and half in Iran). The Kurds have always historically considered Halgurd to be their highest peak, and being sacred to them.

Morgan's account on his expedition up Mount Halgurd.

"I was part of a British Expedition party to be the first people to summit the mountain in Winter conditions, it has never been done prior to this. Our seven man team consisted of 5 UK citizens, myself, and a Kurdish team member who was our local translator.

This roller coaster of a journey started with me being denied from boarding my flight in transit in Dubai for bureaucratic reasons, and having to spend the most stressful, sleep-deprived 48 hours of my life dealing with airport authorities. I only narrowly managed to make it on to the last flight into Kurdistan for the week, with only 30 minutes until take off when I got the all clear to board.

This was followed by one of our first nights in Kurdistan sleeping on the floor of the local police station, where local guards casually pointed to the mangled remains of a car bomb partially wrapped in weatherproof sheets next to the compound, as they laughed and smoked their cigarettes. It was also during this time that we got to experience the incredible hospitality of the Kurdish people in a little mountainous village called Choman. Visitors are rare in this part of the world, and everyone was genuinely curious to know where we were from and why we were there. When we told them that we were attempting to climb Halgurd buried under deep snow, they simply could not get their heads around the idea (as did the president's nephew whom we had dinner with a few nights before - he was in charge of the Kurdistan-UK Friendship Association, and was overseeing our security).

Forging a route up the mountain was a difficult process, as we had to delicately negotiate active minefields left behind from the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s. Much of the mountain side is littered with mines, shells, and other ordnance, some spent and others clearly still live - a sign of once fierce fighting. To make things more challenging, we only had Soviet-era maps of the very porous border regions and mountains, all of which were detailed in Russian. We sometimes found ourselves having to take our cue from whether we found goat poo (safe) or goat bones (risky) in fields.

The fact that three American hikers were also kidnapped and imprisoned by Iran in 2009 was not lost on us, as we noticed tiny Iranian outposts dotting the mountain side across deep valleys.

Our first summit bid after two days of scouting possible routes was a failure. We set off too late in the morning and as the day warmed up, the snow started melting and turning into slush. Lots of rain overnight also made conditions on rocks very slippery. We often found ourselves in knee to waist deep snow. Being almost swept away in two successive avalanches within seconds of each other forced our retreat back to base camp. Helicopter evacuations off the mountain was non-existent, and it was a sobering experience for us all, highlighting the dangers of the mountain.

We decided to spend a few more days doing short walks and conducting recces of new routes, while we sat out the constant rain. During this time, we also had concerns over wolf paw prints we found near our base camp, as well as sporadic rifle fire which erupted one night near where we were sleeping.

Our second summit bid was a success with 6 of our 7 members reaching the summit. We were up in the cold at 3 in the morning and set off at 4 in the dark with head-torches. We climbed through the morning and as the day warmed up, our concerns about dangerous melting snow was renewed. One of our team members turned back about 30 minutes from the summit while the rest of us pushed on. We finally got to the peak at 0920h local time where we spent 15 minutes on the top, before making our very tense 3 hour descend down Mount Halgurd's South Face back to base camp.

Coming back to the town of Choman was a surreal experience. We were given a heroes welcome with interviews by Kurdistan and Zagros TV. We even saw ourselves on the tele that night!

The entire seven month journey for me from start to end was but a thread that hung from a knife's edge and filled with many uncertainties. However, it was a truly rare and unique experience to fly the state flag on top of one of the most misunderstood region's of the world. "

[divide]

Morgan team managed to raise four thousand Australian dollars and all the money has been credited to the hospital's foundation.

Link to the Hospital Fundraiser

AIM debate in Parliament: (Round 8) – its all about transparency?

Terry Xu — Wed, 22 May 2013 01:12:06 +0000

By Leong Sze Hian A lot of people (what is a lot to some may be little to others – for example, I cannot understand how people who earn more than $1 million can object to paying $50 more to those earning less $1,000) have asked me – what is the AIM saga all about? Transparency and accountability? Well, in a nutshell – its all about transparency (or rather a lack of it) and accountability. The AIM saga may arguably be just a symptom of the infestation of an endemic disease (lack of transparency and accountability) that permeates in all stratum of society in our country today. The galore of conflicts of interest are sometimes simply brushed off as mere latitude. Arguably, the lacking in transparency even occurs sometimes in the highest body of the land too -Parliament. Let me give one example (there are many examples which I shall write about in the coming days) from the most recent Parliamentary sitting: I refer to the article “Intake of international students at S’pore universities at 16%: Education Minister” (Channel NewsAsia, May 14). 16% foreign students intake? It states that “Currently, international students comprise 16 per cent of the universities’ intake, Mr Heng said. In a written parliamentary reply to Non-Constituency MP Yee Jenn Jong, Mr Heng said the majority of university places have gone to Singaporeans. Mr Yee had asked for a breakdown on enrolled and admitted student numbers — of Singaporeans, permanent residents and foreigners — for Yale-NUS College and Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine. Mr Heng said Singaporean students make up 79 per cent of the universities’ intake for the current school year (Academic Year 2012), while Permanent Residents comprised five per cent. Mr Heng added Singapore’s autonomous universities are required to cap the intake of international students at 2011 levels.” Never answer the question? NCMP Yee Jenn Jong’s question asking for a breakdown of enrolled and admitted student numbers was not answered because only the intake (first year?) was given. I also believe that the figure of 16 per cent is only for foreign students, excluding PRs, and also for undergraduate students only, excluding graduate students. 24% foreign undergraduate students? In this regard, according to the article “Foreign students capped at 20% or 24% in NUS” (TR Emeritus, May 8) – “The Ministry of Education often asserts that the percentage of international students enrolled in all local public universities is capped at 20% [1]. However, the numbers retrieved from NUS’ own online systems paint a grimmer picture. A total of 5965 students, or 24.2% of the full-time undergraduate population, are international students. This obviously exceeds the mythical 20% cap.” 64% non-Singaporean undergraduate students? If we assume that 15 per cent of the local undergraduate students are PRs, then about 64.4 per cent are Singaporeans. 40+% non-Singaporeans in total student population? I also understand that about 70 to 80 per cent of graduate students in the local universities are non-citizens. So, what percentage of the total student population in the local universities are not Singaporeans? About 40 plus per cent? Since there is no transparency on the breakdown of the total student population, let’s try to estimate the figures. If we assume that about 11.4 per cent (15 per cent of the locals) are PRs, we get 9,241 undergraduate students out of the total full-time students of 25,979 in FY2012/2013, who are non-citizens. If we assume 70 per cent of the graduate students are non-citizens, we get 7,147 graduate students out of the total graduate students of 10,210, who are non-citizens. This works out to a non-citizen overall student percentage of 45.3 per cent. People who reply in Parliament don’t understand simple English? Mr Yee’s question which asked specifically for the statistics on ‘Yale-NUS College and Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine” was also not answered. I hate to say this, but if the Minister of Education appears to have a problem understanding simple English in a Parliamentary question and gives a reply that does not answer the question – if a student in school fails to answer the question that he or she is asked in an examination – what grade do you think he will get? Moreover, since it was a written Parliamentary reply, the Minister had ample time and resources to prepare his reply. Its like a student is given ample time to bring the question home, do research and consult others, and yet still never answer the question! Foreign students’ statistics? Shouldn’t such statistics be made public on a regular basis? Are there any public universities in the world with such a high percentage of foreigners? How much money are we spending in a year on all the foreign students in the public universities – tuition grant, scholarships, etc? More foreign students help university rankings? In this connection, I would like to quote from the article “Local univs pro-FT students & profs to get high rankings” (TR Emeritus, May 20) – “The NUS was ranked overall 25th recently, partly because they scored 100% for INTERNATIONAL FACULTY and 98.3% for INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS. However, for quality of research (CITATIONS PER FACULTY), they obtained only 51.1%. (http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings) That is, to avoid low ranking, local universities are abusing the criteria set by ranking agencies by depriving locals of their rightful places at the universities.” “How many foreign students paying full fees?“, Mar 7, 2012 “What percentage of students in our universities are Singaporeans?“, Aug 16, 2011 “Foreign scholars: Missing statistics?“, Feb 22, 2012

Poverty as Taboo in Singapore

Terry Xu — Tue, 21 May 2013 09:10:06 +0000

By Singapore Armchair Critic

Earlier I wrote a blogpost on poverty and income inequality in Singapore, which rankled some pro-establishment netizens (read their comments). What struck me most was not their eagerness to stick up for the government – which was nothing extraordinary – but their defensiveness towards poverty.

By their reaction, these netizens seemed to have taken my straight talk on poverty as a personal affront. First they tried to deny that poverty exists in Singapore; then in the face of evidence they began to point fingers at the poor, blaming them for their plight.

Why and how did poverty become a taboo in our society, which, just a few decades ago in the 1970s, had a 55% “lower-working class” population teetering on the brink of indigence (Lim Yun Xin, “Voicing Poverty,” p. 19)? How did the poor become stigmatized over a mere few decades?

Poverty in Affluence

Taboo is “the prohibition or avoidance in any society of behavior believed to be harmful to its members in that it would cause them anxiety, embarrassment, or shame.” In Singapore’s “success story” perpetuated by the PAP and its mouthpiece, there is no place for poverty and its manifestations, be it begging or sleeping on the streets.

In fact, beggars may be penalized with a fine up to $3,000 or imprisonment up to 2 years under the Destitute Persons Act, which defines begging as conduct “calculated to induce the giving of alms, whether or not there is any pretence of singing, playing, performing, offering anything for sale or otherwise” (emphasis mine).

The Act also empowers the police to admit the homeless to a welfare home – more than 800 had been “assisted” by the MCYS from 2009 to 2011. Besides rounding up the destitute so that they are kept out of sight, our government has also been terribly ingenious in deterring people from sleeping in public areas (you wish such ingenuity had been at work when the SMRT rail came apart).

The physical cleansing is accompanied by newspeak. In a 2007 report, The Straits Times euphemistically called the poor and/or homeless “sleepers” and declared that “sleeping in the city is becoming popular” as if it was a favorite pastime. At a 2012 forum dealing with poverty, a ST reporter said:

I want to contextualise poverty, which is a very strong word. I’ve covered malnutrition and areas where people have no access to food and shelter. I don’t think anyone dies from starvation in Singapore. But are there unmet needs? Absolutely (emphasis mine).

By her logic, poverty = death from starvation. Note also that the journalist promptly conjured up the phrase “unmet needs” to substitute for what she deemed a “strong word.” I have also come across more than one netizens who dispute the existence of poverty in Singapore by defining it as the condition of “living on USD2 a day.”

Perhaps it is by this extreme standard that Kishore Mahbubani declared in 2001 that “There are no homeless, destitute or starving people in Singapore. Poverty has been eradicated…”

Certainly if one has to subsist on USD$2 per day or be dying from starvation to be considered “poor,” then there is no poverty in Singapore. But of course only the unthinking or the sycophant would subscribe to such a definition in the context of Singapore.

Instead of using such an absolute definition, poverty in affluent societies such as Singapore should be better understood as a relative concept. Thus the poor may be defined as “those whose incomes are so far removed from the rest of society that they cannot attain the standard of living that is considered normal and acceptable by most other citizens” (“Voicing Poverty,” p. 20).

It has been estimated that a family of four would need around SGD1,700 to cover basic costs of living in Singapore (the qualifying household income for various MCYS assistance schemes is also set at $1,700). Based on my previous calculation, there are between 73,196 to 115,792 resident households in Singapore that are “relatively poor.”

The Blame Game

According to the MCYS figures, there are 36,940 social assistance cases in 2012. Consider the number of cases receiving social assistance against my estimation of the number of poor households in Singapore. How may we explain the gap between the two?

The lack of awareness about the social assistance schemes available may be one contributing factor. Another may be the stigma attached to welfare and welfare recipients.

Let me digress a little and talk a bit about the situation in Hong Kong, where as high as 40% of the poor or 700,000 persons had fallen through the social safety net. In Hong Kong, welfare recipients are often perceived as undeserving, irresponsible and unproductive. This negative image has been perpetuated by none other than the Social Welfare Department itself and the media.

Similar stigmatization took place in Singapore. In 2000, Lee Kuan Yew wrote:

There will always be the irresponsible or the incapable, some 5 percent of our population. They will run through any asset, whether a house or shares. We try hard to make them as independent as possible and not end up in welfare homes. More important, we try to rescue their children from repeating the feckless ways of their parents. We have arranged help but in such a way that only those who have no other choice will seek it (From Third World to First, emphasis mine).

A member of a self-help organization also testified to the prevalence of the “blaming the victim” attitude in Singapore. Blaming the poor for their plight conveniently sidesteps the structural factors that may have given rise to poverty in a society. It also allows the non-poor to distance oneself from the plight of the poor, releasing the former from the responsibility of helping the latter.

Negative stereotyping also deters the poor from taking up social assistance. A telephone interview conducted in Hong Kong revealed that 60% of respondents would not apply for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) unless they were left with no other options. In an extreme case, a single mother refused to apply for CSSA, worked 19 hours a day till she dropped dead of exhaustion. Another unemployed man caught stealing bread declared that “Hong Kong people should be self-reliant, not live on the CSSA.”

In Singapore, we do not know the extent to which the poor may be reluctant to turn to social assistance. However, we do know of an 80-year-old granny who worked herself to death.

As a society, and an affluent one, we have to ask ourselves how did such an unfortunate incident happen and how can we prevent it from happening again. It begins with the self-awareness of how we perceive the poor and the bias we may hold.

It is very heartening to see citizen initiatives to help the poor like this social media movement “Chope Food for the Needy.” But for a more comprehensive approach to poverty, we have to start thinking about establishing an official poverty line. For if we do not know the extent of poverty, how do we gauge if poverty alleviation measures have been effective?

Our government also has to rethink the whole concept of welfare. Opponents to expanding welfare coverage in Singapore often decry the financial unsustainability of western welfare states. However, they fail to recognize that there is a huge middle ground between welfare provision in Singapore and that in mature welfare states. In other words, there is still room for our government to increase social spending without sacrificing fiscal prudence.

AIM debate in Parliament: (Round 7) – Alas … Land cost of HDB flats?

Terry Xu — Tue, 21 May 2013 01:35:05 +0000

By Leong Sze Hian Straits Times Editorial calls for clarity? I refer to the Editorial “Town councils: Time to clear the air” (Straits Times Editorial, May 20). It states that “Clarity on these (safeguarding of assets, disclosure of interests, tender process, restrictions on party officials being given contracts, etc) would help restore confidence in town councils”. Clap! Clap! Fully support the call for clarity? I fully support and concur with the above. But, in the interest of “clarity” – why stop at just looking at town councils? Clarity should be extended to HDB as well? From the perspective of residents, S & CC is just tens of dollars a month (some may call this peanuts) – the real biggie is arguably, HDB flats which cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. So, what do you think most Singaporeans would like more clarity (transparency) on – the breakdown of the cost of building HDB flats (which some may say is costing them an arm and a leg – for 30 years!)? Breakdown of flat costs in 1987? A reader, ES, sent me a document (Parliament report dated 15 June 1981) which shows the cost breakdown of a 4-room (4A) new HDB flat in Pasir Ris in FY86/87 – FY87/88 to be as follows: Selling price $56,300 Cost of construction $53,000 Land cost $17,800 Subsidy $14,500 Land cost $17,800 in 1987? So, the land cost of this example of a 4-room flat was only $17,800 in 1987. Cheapest 4-room in 2011 – $294,000? Fast forward to today – a 4-room BTO flat in Pasir Ris (Costa Ris) – same area of Pasir Ris in this example – was $294,000 (cheapest) in May 2011. “Investigative statistical snooping”? Since nobody wants to tell the breakdown of flat costs in the last two decades or so, we can try to do a bit of “investigative statistical analysis”. If we assume a 5 per cent per annul increase in the land cost, the $17,800 land cost in 1987 would be $57,407 in 2011 (24 years). Cost of construction – $236,953? Now, surely the cost of construction for the 4-room BTO flat in 2011 cannot be $236,953 (selling price $294,000 minus land cost $57,407)! Cost of construction around $150,000? I have been told and understand that the cost of construction in 2011 of a 4-room flat was probably around $150,000 or thereabouts. If we assume $150,000 for the cost of construction – how can the land cost be about $144,000 (selling price $294,000 minus cost of construction $150,000)? 4-room price range $294,000 to $347,000? And I am using the cheapest flat in the May 2011 BTO to calculate this example – the price range for 4-room was $294,000 to $347,000! Market subsidy pricing? So, how can HDB flats be said to be subsidised? Top secret statistics? No wonder, despite questions in Parliament and the newspaper forums over the years – there is no answer!! Land pegged to 1973 prices? In this connection, the late President Ong Teng Cheong was quoted as saying – “The government continued to peg compensation rates for acquired properties at 1973 prices because it wants to prtvide cheap housing for the people. Cheaper land meant lower prices for Housing Board flats, Mr Ong Teng Cheong said yesterday” (Straits Times, May 28, 1984). So, to conclude – any land acquired at low prices like the 1973 prices quote above, were subsequently sold – and priced at around $144,000 like in the above 4-room flat example? Chicken rice analogy? Allow me to end with a chicken rice analogy: You sell chicken rice at $3 You say it is very reasonable because the 5-star restaurant sells at $5 You say you lose money ($1) on every plate of chicken rice that you sell, because your cost is $4 Because you have to buy the rice from your brother at $3 although your chicken only cost $1 But, you operate a joint account with your brother! Lose money on every flat? Is this possibly why we lose money on every HDB flat that we sell – to the tune of about $1 billion a year? By the way, it was $2 billion a year a few years ago, when we were presumably selling less flats than now. - Sell more flats lose $1 billion, Sell less flats lose $2 billion? Here’s another funny analogy for you: Kind of like make software for $23.8 million – sell away software’s IP (intellectual property) rights for $140,000 to a $2 company – spend another $16.8 million to make another one – which you don’t even own but have to lease? Uniquely Singapore! Back to AIM? Oh! I almost forgot. Let’s get back to the main issue – AIM. I’m sorry – but one can easily get distracted by diversionary tactics that can be quite distracting!

My interview with Ms Rachel Zeng

Terry Xu — Tue, 21 May 2013 00:49:52 +0000

By Dr Kieran James This interview first appeared in Singapore Civil Society My interview with Ms Rachel Zeng (feminist activist and anti death-penalty campaigner), Part II, Changi Village, Singapore, 29 April 2013 "I did not believe that a Cause which stood for a beautiful ideal, for anarchism, for release and freedom from conventions and prejudice, should demand the denial of life and joy. I insisted that our Cause could not expect me to become a nun and that the movement should not be turned into a cloister. If it meant that, I did not want it” – Emma Goldman, anarcha-feminist [1869-1940] Kieran James (KJ): Hi Rachel, I want to ask you again first of all the events in your life which led you to becoming an opposition supporter. I know you answered this before by Facebook but the in-person interview this time should allow for a more detailed response. Rachel Zeng (RZ): When I was seven or eight [years old], I was staying at Towner Road, Jalan Besar GRC. There was a GE going on I can’t remember which year. I was crossing the road; Chiam See Tong was on the campaign lorry with a loud hailer, I was seven or eight. I asked my mom “who’s that handsome man?” Chiam See Tong was quite handsome when he was younger. She said “he’s opposition”. I said “vote for him, he’s handsome”. She said: “no, we can only vote PAP, they’re reliable”. I said “why must we vote PAP?” They cannot give me a good answer. I was a Chiam See Tong fan. That made me very curious about why people don’t vote for opposition. Basically my parents and relatives said they are PAP supporters, it made me very curious. Since then I have been very excited every time there is an election going on. Another incident was when the whole family was having breakfast at Bendemeer Market. Then Workers’ Party was selling The Hammer. I was below ten-years-old. I can remember it was $1 or something. I asked my Dad why they have to sell papers there, why aren’t the papers at the news stand? My Dad said “it’s opposition propaganda”. I took $1 from my Dad, I took money to the volunteer, but they said “we can’t sell to children”. My Dad was curious, he bought a copy, and he read it during breakfast. I asked my Dad what it was about, it was mostly in Chinese, he said “nothing much”. Those two incidents made me very curious about the opposition. Another random memory was my first placard, my first protest, against my parents! Once they promised to bring out me and my brother on a Sunday, they fell asleep, I felt they broke their promise. I wrote on a whiteboard “you broke your promise, we are very angry”. We sat outside their room until they woke up. I got caned for it, I was six-years-old. It was the first year my Mom went to work, my Dad was a carpenter. My Mom said “you will end up in jail if you do this”. When I started to question I realized this was the whole system, hierarchy. It shocked me when I realized that the President did not have the decision-making powers. We were quite puzzled in social studies class when this came up. These are the main events which made me question why we can’t voice out our opinions in a free-spirited manner. I’m always a very frank and straight-forward person. Also in social studies class when I was eleven, we were talking about money, different currencies, and poverty in some countries. We were discussing Third-World countries. The teacher was trying to develop our sense of empathy towards Third World people. I asked her why we can’t have one single trading system where everyone can be equal. She was very serious and said “this is a very dangerous idea”. The word “communism” came up somehow. Shortly after that I got my hands on a copy of The Communist Manifesto. [KJ note: This classic pro-communist pamphlet The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels was first published in February 1848 and it remains one of history’s most important social, economic, and political writings.] We spent our days at our grandma’s place. The people were very much Chinese-educated and working-class. One day I was exploring the block of flats. The Garang guni man had some books, very old books. I was reading. One was a very old copy ofThe Communist Manifesto, green, in English. I read the first chapter before the man came. He gave it to me although some of the pages were missing. I was also given some books by [Jean-Paul] Sartre. I could not understand what he was talking about back then but I remember his name. KJ: Tell us about your poly or uni experiences... RZ: Before poly I had to fight [just] to go to poly. We [my family] spent six months arguing after O levels. I said “I want to go to LASALLE College of Fine Arts. I’m never going to JC”. They said “in this country no-one is going to feed you, it’s not a Welfare State”. I got accepted into Marketing but I did not want to do it. We compromised and I went into Design. My Mom went to work upset and her colleagues told her to “let her make her own choice”. I went to Temasek Poly. I was exposed to the realities behind the fur-trade. It was a course on apparel design and merchandising. I was vaguely aware about the fur-trade and the cruelty towards the animals, sweat-shops, and child labour. I didn’t understand, I saw it as unfairness. If your government is not on good terms with their country you cannot get the benefits which other countries get from free trade agreements. There were a lot of questions in my mind. I asked my parents “why don’t you listen to the other side?” I said “even a clock that stops tells the time correctly twice”. They just said “we have a stable government, much foreign investment, and Lee Kuan Yew is a good man”. KJ: Do you remember the Marxist Conspiracy of 1987-88? RZ: I was too young; I remember their pictures in the papers. [KJ note: RZ was about eight-years-old at this time.] I just vandalized their faces. They were supposed to be “bad people” but nobody told us what they did wrong. KJ: How did you get involved in feminism? RZ: It had to do with my brother. When he was born the treatment shifted. I thought he was getting treated better because he was a boy. It’s like a fight. I have been doing this my whole life since he was born. Because he was obese and I was underweight my neighbours would joke to my parents that they treat boys better than girls. That made me very angry. My Mom taught me to wash dishes and sweep floors while my brother did nothing. I confronted my Mom. She said: “you are a girl so it’s your responsibility”. But my Dad helped with the household chores and did his part equally, it’s a contradiction. I just didn’t get the girls’ responsibility thing. Later on in life there was an incident, in secondary school after Sec 2 streaming. I chose to go to the arts class; I could have gone to the science class. I insisted on doing arts. My kind class-friend’s mother heard about it. Being a busybody she called my mother. She said “how could you let her ruin her life?” My Mom was supportive and said “that’s what she likes to do”. The reply was “well, she’s a girl; she can marry a rich husband”. I was furious. In my head I thought “man and woman are equal and I can support myself until I die, I don’t need a man’s support at all”. KJ: What do you think of the HDB [Housing and Development Board] rules where government flats can only be sold to legally married couples and singles aged over 35? RZ: Horrible! ... I was reading a lot of books along the journey. I realized what I was doing was called feminism, and then I read different branches of feminism. KJ: Did any particular authors inspire you most? RZ: Emma Goldman [1869-1940], anarcha-feminist, and Simone de Beauvoir [1908-1986], I read her first before Goldman. I have always asked myself how it is possible one person can love a single individual for the rest of her/his life. It is a very oppressive idea, it’s not possible. For me if two people want to be together it’s none of their families’ business. But in this culture if you marry then you [also] marry the family. I heard a lot about being a good daughter-in-law. I cringed a lot; I thought “that’s not me, that is not what I’m going to do”. KJ: Were you involved in any opposition campaigns then? RZ: No, just the research for my degree. I did a research [project] on how gender stereotypes in books influence children’s thinking and how to counter stereotypes. I and my research partner had discussions with children. The whole class of six-years-olds [then] decided it’s OK for boys to like dolls and girls do not need to like dolls or wear pink. KJ: Yes, that seems to be the age when the impact of gender stereotypes on children is greatest... RZ: Their conversation and behaviour changed [after our interactions with them]. In future I’d like to do similar research on a larger scale; I will see how it goes... KJ: Have you got any other projects planned? RZ: I am attempting to begin a book on that using this research as a beginning. There have been female leaders in the past in Asian societies and tribes which have systems which are not patriarchal, they are very equity based. The stories behind these tribes are not being told. These examples are what I want to present. KJ: Do you see yourself being inspired by communism or Marxism? RZ: I’m more of an anarchist. It’s strange isn’t it living in a capitalist society and being an anarchist? It’s very difficult. That’s my dilemma as well – saving for an Iron Maiden ticket [KJ note: concert by legendary British heavy-metal music band Iron Maiden in Singapore] when I know others cannot [afford to] see. I was fighting the dilemma. I told myself “life is very short”, one thing I wanted to do was see the bands I like perform as much as possible. KJ: What are your favourite bands? RZ: Nightwish, that is I mean the previous Nightwish, Sentenced, Cradle of Filth, Metallica up to the “black album” [KJ note: the “black album” is the popular name for Metallica’s self-titled album of 1991 which has sold 30 million copies worldwide as at 14 May 2013], punk rock, indie music as well ... Have you heard of the band Journey? I like them as well, I really like Paul Gilbert, guitar. KJ: What do you think of Singaporean society today? RZ: So oppressive [laughs] ... at another level. You still feel the Government trying to censor you. On the internet people put your photo on forums and talk crap about you. People give you crap and insult you about your boyfriend not being the same race as you. It used to hurt me a lot but now it doesn’t bother me so much. I’m a private person; I don’t like my details going into the public. I don’t know if I told you this before, but it [Singaporean society today] is like a bunch of lions locked up for years then let loose, they don’t know what to do [when released]. Even friends can’t accept that others think differently from them. KJ: What are your comments on the opposition parties at the moment? RZ: I’m not so close to them nowadays. In the first place I don’t believe in party politics. I hanged out with SDP [Singapore Democratic Party] because they were really supportive of me. All my life people thought I was a strange person. Why can’t you fit the system? When I hanged out with SDP I didn’t feel that way, it was really good. At that time, to be honest, SDP was not behaving like a political party; they were down-to-earth, activists, like a big family. After a while things changed I guess, directions changed. KJ: Do you view yourself as being with SDP at the moment? RZ: I was not happy when they started this Woman’s Wing. It was going backwards. Female participation has always been there. After the [creation of] Woman’s Wing it’s like telling women “go to your corner, you need your comfort, you need your space, but men don’t”. KJ: Like women’s meetings in a church on a weekday morning... [RZ nods.] KJ: So you will not be involved? RZ: The GE [May 2011] really distracted me from the death-penalty cause in (and) my life. I was feeling very stressed out. I had to do my work and help them [SDP] out in the GE. I knew I had to [give] priority in my work. I realized working against death-penalty is my priority. I realized I’m not concerned with [i.e responsible for] anyone’s political survival. I must do what means most to me. KJ: Why is the death-penalty issue so important for you? RZ: No-one has the right to take away another person’s life not even the government. KJ: So you don’t believe in death-penalty for anything not even for serial-killers? [RZ shakes her head.] KJ: What are your comments on Workers’ Party victory in the Punggol East SMC by-election? RZ: It was expected. I didn’t like SDP’s behaviour. KJ: Why? RZ: All the hype about running the BE then when people ostracized them on internet they said if they win the seat [RZ trailed away at this point] ... they had a strange proposal – SDP can go into parliament and WP can run the town council. It was so naive. Everyone knew that WP would not reply. That was the moment of disillusion. It was so damaging. After volunteers had worked so hard on the ground then they pulled out. KJ: Did you do any volunteer work? [RZ shakes her head.] RZ: At that time my stand was if the person has affair [referring to Michael Palmer, PAP incumbent in Punggol East] it doesn’t mean he can’t be a good MP. KJ: And the same logic applies to the case in Hougang SMC? RZ: When YSL [Yaw Shin Leong] case happened I said the same. Look, Michael Palmer is far more intelligent than Lim Swee Say [KJ note: Minister in Prime Minister’s Office, Secretary-General of National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), and PAP MP for East Coast GRC]. Lim Swee Say can stay but Michael Palmer resigned just because of an affair. KJ: What will happen in the next GE? RZ16: Hmmm, if LKY [Mr Lee Kuan Yew] dies in the next couple of years there might be sympathy votes. I might be wrong. Singapore is very strange and people when emotions are high for a particular person will remember all the good things he has done [instead of taking a more balanced view]. Someone’s death is a good opportunity for the propaganda machine to start working overtime. [On the other hand] WP may have more seats in the parliament which is annoying... KJ: Why annoying? RZ: Because when WP gets more seats they may become more arrogant. They are not much different from PAP anyway. I did appreciate when they raised certain issues about death-penalty in parliament but I don’t appreciate overall attitude of the party towards other parties I guess, they don’t really talk to each other... KJ: It’s very corporate-style politics now even with the opposition? [RZ nods.] RZ: And also within the party all members are required to toe the line very strictly and I don’t think this is very different from PAP. A lot of group-think is going on. KJ: What do you think of Singa Crew’s book Singapore Sucks? As you know I was helping him edit the English for the second edition when I was here late last year... RZ17: I have to promote it, right [laughs]? He is very inspired by James Joyce’s Dubliners [1914], it is our favourite book. He is trying to do the Dubliners-thing in the Singapore context. I appreciate that it’s so rare to get someone [here] who reads Dubliners. I love the title of his book too [Singapore Sucks]. KJ: What do you think the activist community needs to do to make more changes here? RZ: We have paid activists and some who are not paid. Paid ones work on a regional platform and are full-time. I hope they make it as a career but it’s all about fighting for rights of people and animals. It would be great if they become part of the solidarity process. The civil society here is very divided. It would be great if we could all see the actions and values of others ... and be there [for each other] when shit happens. Change will happen when you stop having party politics here. Individual representation would be much stronger not having to toe the party line outside and also inside the parliament. KJ: Any other comments on any topic? RZ: When I was sick I was reading the paper. I saw a group of activists in Japan protecting against the fur trade. I saw the word “activist” below the picture. I thought “that’s interesting; I want to be an activist”. I told myself (I was very sick) “if I can survive this I want to do something meaningful in life”. That picture really helped. (I was nine-years-old.) It was in the New Paper. [KJ note: When she was nine-years-old RZ had chronic gastroenteritis and was in and out of hospital for a few months.]

AIM debate in Parliament: (Round 6) – AHPE vs HBP?

Terry Xu — Mon, 20 May 2013 08:58:34 +0000

By Leong Sze Hian Relentless attacks? As a resident of AHPETC, I was rather perturbed and annoyed by the seemingly relentless attacks on the financial management of AHPETC. To put it crudely (pardon my language) – it was like people were coming to “shit in your own backyard”. AHPETC vs HBPTC? So, I decided to go look at the annual reports of AHPETC and HBPTC. 1. For FY2011/2012, AHPETC had an accumulated surplus of $2,748,196 against HBPTC’s accumulated deficit of $849,414. 2.AHPETC’s surplus for the year was $1,104,388 against HBPTC’s deficit of $689,624. 3.AHPETC’s operating deficit of $3,396,800 was about 21 per cent less than HBPTC’s deficit of $4,306,324. 4.AHPETC’s ratio of operating income to expenditure at 0.89 ($28,682,516 divided by $32,079,316) was better than HBPTC’s 0.84 ($22,530,581 divided by $26,836,905) – So, does this mean that AHPETC is more efficient than HBPTC? 5.AHPETC’s total comprehensive income for the year attributable to the town council at $3,226,962 was much higher than HBPTC’s $687,889 – about more than 4 times higher. 6.AHPETC’s managing agent’s fees was $3,827,113 against HBPTC’s $3,307,510. But, what I found to be rather interesting is that HBPTC’s fees decreased by about 11 per cent from $3,708,874 in the previous year – 2011. Fees decrease? I don’t know much about town council management, but is it normal for the fees to drop so much in a year considering that inflation was I believe rather high in that year (I think about 4 to 5 per cent – financial year ending 31 March very hard for a layman like me to try to figure out what was the exact inflation for that period). Was it a one-time abnormally? But S & CC increase? Also, I am confused as I don’t understand why HBPTC increased their S & CC last year when their fees dropped, whereas AHPETC was able to decrease theirs? I am sorry I was not able to find the fees for AHPETC in 2011 – maybe because it was then called Aljunied town council under a different management. I tried googling “Aljunied town council” – but I think the web site does not exist anymore or something. Looking at the above statistics, perhaps like they always say in a debate – “I rest my case”. Looking at the above, I am glad (at least from a resident’s perspective) that I am living in AHPETC (for over 50 years now) and not in HBPTC. “Related party transactions” AHPETC also had a statement – “Related party transactions – On 15 July 2011, the Town Council appointed FM Solutions and Services Pte Ltd as the Managing Agent for a period of one year for which Mr Danny Loh, Secretary is the Managing Director. Mrs How Weng Pan, the spouse of Mr Danny Loh, is also a director of FM Solutions and Services Pte Ltd and also acted as the town council’s General Manager. The total management fee for the year is $3,827,113.” I didn’t see any “Related party transactions” statement in HBPTC’s annual report – but you know all these reports are very very long – and if I had missed it – do please forgive me – as I’m just a layman and ordinary citizen who lives in AHPETC. Anyway, it would seem that HBPTC did not have any ”Related party transactions”. P.S. I am not an accountant and accounting was my worse subject in school (just managed to pass lah – I always avoided accounting subjects if I had a choice in selecting elective subjects). S0, if I have made an “honest mistake” in the above – may I apologise in advance.

Reflections on “Happy mothers are willing mothers!”

Terry Xu — Mon, 20 May 2013 07:07:04 +0000

This article has been contributed via Readers' Contribution [divide] AWARE's op-ed piece criticizes an unnamed organization (that provides a telephone service to assist women who face unwanted pregnancies) for providing inaccurate information and misinforming its callers. AWARE's overall goal to dispel unscientific myths and promote accurate information is commendable and comprises a necessary check-and-balance as we aspire to be a society governed by free speech. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that the critique is undermined by certain inaccuracies and over-generalities as well as poor timing. Given that AWARE's purpose in its op-ed is to unmask the inaccuracies and sweeping statements of another organization, it should naturally be held to a higher standard in its own reporting, especially since it uses the results from three academic papers to lend weight to its arguments. After reviewing these studies, I think that quite ironically, AWARE's op-ed also suffers from inaccuracies and over-generalizations, not unlike those that it accuses the unnamed organization of making. First, the op-ed claims that the 2007 NEJM study[1] found that ``a medical abortion … causes no adverse health effects on subsequent pregnancies.'' I believe that this is inaccurate. The study found that medical abortions had statistically similar rates of various types of complications in subsequent pregnancies to surgical abortions, not that there are no adverse health effects associated with medical abortions. Furthermore, this study only applies to abortions in the first trimester of gestation, not to abortions in general. Second, the op-ed claims that the 2011 NEJM study[2] ``shows that having an abortion does not increase the risk of mental health problems.'' This statement differs from the actual findings of the study in several respects. First, the use of ``does not'' in the op-ed is an overly strong assertion of what the study actually claims. By definition, such a study cannot definitely prove a negative statement. At most, it can (and does) only conclude that it failed to find the hypothesized statistical association. Second, the study only pertains to first trimester abortions, not abortions in general. Third, the study's outcome measure is first contact with a psychiatric facility, which is a good but nevertheless imperfect proxy for ``mental health problems.'' For example, it does not capture severity of the mental condition, and also suffers from potential selection biases. Finally, the study is restricted to the Danish female population and it is unclear that the results can be extrapolated universally as the op-ed suggests, particularly because unlike physiological conditions, psychiatric conditions may potentially be affected different social structures and other cultural influences. Third, the op-ed cites the results of the 2012 Ob&G study[3] to conclude that ``legally induced abortion is markedly safer than childbirth, with the risk of death associated with childbirth approximately 14 times higher than [sic] with abortion.'' I think this is the most accurately reported finding among the three studies. However, the op-ed fails to mention that this third study uses a very different methodology than the other two: it bases its conclusions on population statistics instead of a cohort study, and consequently does not control for individual-level covariates. Such studies are not usually considered at the same level of evidence as cohort studies because they are subject to biases from selection and inconsistency between data sources. Personally, I think that abortion is a highly complex issue. It cuts into our core beliefs about life, mortality, and free choice. I do not think that it is as one-dimensional as some on the far ends of the pro-life / pro-choice spectrum make it out to be. Specifically, I think that it is overly simplistic to frame the issue solely as being about choice or life. In this regard, I am disappointed that AWARE chose to use the occasion of Mother's day to vilify the other camp (I'm assuming that the organization is a pro-life group) and promote its overtly pro-choice agenda. It makes AWARE seem petty and mean-spirited, and bordering on hypocritical, as it is similarly using over-generalized findings to support its stance. In my opinion at least, it may have done more to hurt the pro-choice movement than to help it. References [1] Virk J, Zhang J, Olsen J. Medical abortion and the risk of subsequent adverse pregnancy outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine. 2007;357:648-653. [2] Munk-Olsen T, Laursen TM, Pedersen CB, Lidegaard O, Mortensen PB. Induced first-trimester abortion and risk of mental disorder. New England Journal of Medicine. 2011; 364: 332-339. [3] Raymond EG, Grimes DA. The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2012;119: 215-219."

SMRT’s released figures do not tally with actual data

Terry Xu — Mon, 20 May 2013 03:46:51 +0000

By Failrailsg.appspot.com Only three incidents in 2012? Referencing to the article on Today, "North-South, East-West MRT lines could be partially closed up to 12pm on Sundays to facilitate works" as well as two other articles on the replacement of sleepers for the tracks, http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/smrt-step-sleeper-replacement http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/smrt-steps-up-sleepers-replacement/674584.html In the article, the authorities reported that there were only three incidents in 2012 that caused a delay of more than 30 minutes. But according to the site’s recorded observations, there were at least 70 such delays in 2012 and 10 in 2013 so far. To verify the above information, interested readers can visit the website [http://failrailsg.appspot.com/] and click on the Search button on the top navigation bar. In the Search form, type in the year '2012' or '2013' in the Date field and sort the Duration (minutes) column in descending order. To get a copy of the data in spreadsheet format, click on the Data button on the top navigation bar. To see the charts, visit [http://failrailsg.appspot.com/line.html]. To highlight the major delays in 2012, all of which caused more than 2 hours of delay and the rail lines operated by SMRT:

CCL delay on 31 December 2012 - http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20130101-392834.html
EWL delay on 2 February 2012 - http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20120203-325617.html
CCL delay on 25 October 2012 - http://sg.news.yahoo.com/circle-line-cable-issues-stymie-smrt--lta.html
Bukit Panjang LRT delay on 22 April 2012 - http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20120422-341316.html
CCL delay on 18 April 2012 - http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sgseen/this_urban_jungle/1065776/the_human_sardine_caused_by_mrt_breakdown.html
EWL delay on 16 April 2012 - http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20120417-340279.html
CCL delay on 8 Jan 2012 - http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20120109-320623.html
NSL delay on 16 April 2012 - http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20120417-340279.html

Uncommon occurrence of rail cracks? With the rail crack yesterday afternoon, that makes two rail cracks in 3 weeks. Furthermore, both rail cracks occurred on the same stretch of the NSL between City Hall/Raffles Place and Bishan interchanges. The rail crack on April 29 occurred between Somerset and Orchard stations while the rail crack on May 18 occurred at Braddell station. SMRT's press release on May 14 explained away the April 29 rail crack as an uncommon occurrence: A series of ultrasonic tests aimed at ensuring rail integrity is conducted regularly every four months, in addition to weekly visual inspections by manual patrols. Rail cracks are relatively uncommon and in the past 26 years, there have been a total of 25 incidents. In the last 10 years, we have recorded an average of less than one rail flaw occurrence a year. (page 3 of SMRT’s press release) Unfortunately for SMRT, reality hits home 4 days later. This reminds the public of a certain Minister's remark on unusually heavy rainfall once every 50 years. It just shows that those on top doesn't know any better. If the rail crack is so rare, shouldn't LTA order an investigation and the findings be shared with the public in a timely manner? The public would not want another major disruption to happen with a COI billed at $10 million.

‘Grassroots leaders’ are the ‘silent voice’ of the majority

Terry Xu — Sun, 19 May 2013 09:14:37 +0000

By Philip Ang With reference to CNA article (dated 18 May) “Grassroots leaders are “voice of silent majority”: Lim Swee Say”, I believe there must be a typo in the article. CNA should retitle the article as “Grassroots leaders are the “silent voice” of the majority” because they are seldom seen and never heard on important issues concerning Singaporeans and heartlanders. How many have spoken up on the Population White Paper? Why did they await NEA actions on record cases of dengue, reluctantly participating only after instructions from ‘above’ and etc. The persistent issues affecting HDB residents is the result of a muted grassroots. It is an open secret that the majority of grassroots members are self-serving and their roles are determined by their political (PAP) masters. They must be conscious of their hypocrisy to the extent that they have avoided engagement with residents on all issues. In my 13 years as a resident in Pasir Ris, no ‘grassroots leader’ ever came knocking on my door to find out if there were any heartlander issues, suggestions to better our environment etc. As all residents must have also observed, grassroots leaders are more of event organisers for the PAP. I have written to the PMO a couple of times on the hypocrisy of our grassroots movement which requires an urgent revamp. The present system encourages greed and really does not serve anyone besides the PAP. It is precisely that we only have a grassroots movement in name that has contributed to the current mess in our country. Lim Swee Say should discontinue with his delusional thoughts on how ‘grassroots leaders’ help “to strengthen ties between the ground and the government”.

AIM debate in Parliament: (Round 5) – Holland-Bukit also 46% higher than Tampines?

Terry Xu — Sun, 19 May 2013 00:27:10 +0000

By Leong Sze Hian I refer to MP Teo Ho Pin, Co-ordinating Chairman of PAP Town Councils’ statement (16 May) on his facebook page. AHTC 50% higher than Tampines? It states that "My response to the WP’s statement on Town Council Management as follows:- The facts are clear. Based on their own calculations, their MA unit rate for 2012 was $ 7.58, 50% higher than the MA rate ($4.99) of Tampines TC which is of similar size. Why only compare with Tampines? Since so many people have been asking the obvious question - Why is it that only Tampines TC's rate is given to compare with AHTC? Why not disclose all the town councils' rates? Deafening silence on other town councils' rates? These "obvious" questions have so far been met by "silence" from both Mr Teo Ho Pin and the MND. Doing the obvious? So, if you are faced with this "problem" (not that its my problem as an ordinary citizen) - What would you do? What about HBTTC? Well, the first thought that came to my mind was to go look at Mr Teo Ho Pin's own town council's (Holland Bukit Timah (HBTTC)) web site and try to see if I can find any information on its Managing Agent's (MA) rate. HBTTC's rate 34% higher than Tampines in 2012? According to HBTTC's annual report for 2012 for the period ended 31 March 2012, the Managing Agent's Fees was $3,307,510. Dividing this by the total number of units of 41,074 (40,270 residential and 804 commercial) and 12 months gives a MA per unit rate of $6.71. If this is correct - then perhaps Mr Teo Ho Pin may like to also ask himself why his own town council's rate is about 34 per cent higher than Tampines' $4.99 in 2012? HBTTC's rate 46% higher than Tampines in 2011? According to HBTTC's annual report for 2011 for the period ended 31 March 2011, the Managing Agent's Fees was $3,708,874. Dividing this by the total number of units of 41,069 (40,270 residential and 799 commercial) and 12 months gives a MA per unit rate of $7.53. If this is correct - then perhaps Mr Teo Ho Pin may like to also ask himself why his own town council's rate was 46 per cent higher than Tampines' $5.15 in 2011 (same issue as AHTC)?By the way, did any of the other town councils have a decrease in their MA rate from 2011 to 2012, like Tampines and Holland-Bukit Timah?Finally, since their MA rate dropped, why did Tampines and Holland-Bukit Timah increase their S & CC last year, whereas Aljunied-Hougang decreased theirs ?