~by: Kin M Ah~


Ok I’ll be upfront, this is the airing of a personal grievance – no wait, repulsion.

There’s this little club (accessible mostly to a privileged few) located in a hotel on Robertson Quay that’s been doing great business. It operates exclusively on an ‘invitation only’ basis The club boasts that its clientele includes the children of the wealthy in Singapore (read: charge it to Daddy’s credit card, please).

Now here’s what most customers of this joint ALREADY know but don’t want to articulate publicly for fear of reprisal (read: not being able to patronize the joint in future). In more than a handful of anecdotal accounts (including one from an established journalist for a daily newspaper who griped about this in a FB status update) the reservation process works in the following way:

Customer: Hi I want to make a reservation/table booking for 8
Joint Staff: Sure, for 8, the minimum spend is XX. (Normal business practice for all clubs, no surprise)
Customer: Great, that’s fine.
Joint Staff: Oh, how many white people do you have in your group?

Are you kidding me? I don’t mind if you have a minimum spend policy, or a male/female ratio one; but a Singapore business discriminating against Singaporeans?

So I ask you, does this matter to you as Singaporeans? If you think you could spend enough money but still can’t get your friends in because you don’t have enough white people in your group, then that’s a real BIG problem.

In the USA, the very question is enough to qualify as a “hate crime” and is chargeable offence. I ask you this question, “does this sound right to you?” As for me, I will never patronise this joint or its new affiliate joint in Marina Square in future.

But if you decide that you want to go, I just have one question for you, “how many white people are there in your group?”

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

【国会】时隔多月竟无人纠正维文失误? 林瑞莲:合力追踪数据风波本可避免

主管智慧国计划的外交部长维文,在本周国会会议提呈冠病(临时援助措施)(修正)法案,以限制防疫数据的使用方式。 维文曾在去年的记者会上,说服民众下载合力追踪应用程式,并承诺数据将仅用于病例接触者追踪。但在昨日的国会,坦言自己当时忽略了警方在刑事诉讼法下,有权调取任何数据查案,为此他愿意承担全责,并为造成恐慌和焦虑深感遗憾。 出于全民防疫的大局,尽管工人党仍支持有关提案,但该党主席、阿裕尼集选区议员林瑞莲,直言如果一开始政府就先说明,即警方可索取合力追踪数据,那么这场轩然大波本可避免。 遗憾的是,包括维文在内好几位部长,似乎都表达合力追踪仅限防疫用途。直到上月,维文才向国会坦白,他忽略了刑事诉讼法对防疫数据的权限,结果导致他“有许多不眠之夜”。 但林瑞莲也质问:“在这好几个月,难道政府里没有一个人站出来,纠正有关合力追踪数据的错误说法?” 上月4日,内政部政务部长陈国明在国会答复议员质询时证实,刑事诉讼法赋予警方权力,可获取任何数据,包括合力追踪便携器的数据。 此事引起坊间不满,有者抨击政府有误导群众之嫌;更多人坦言,即便警方可调用合力追踪数据,只要一开始政府说明白,大部分民众还是会认同的。但如今,是在议员在国会提问后,民众才得以知晓此事,只会引来群众的不信任。 而国会昨日通过的修正法案,旨在阐明警方只有在处理七种严重罪案,包括谋杀案、强奸案、绑架案等案件调查时,才可提取有关的数据。 对此,林瑞莲认可政府已尽力在缩小权限,民众也会认同让警方在这些严重罪行时索取资料调查。不过她也询问合力追踪数据的局限,包括人们可能关闭手机蓝牙功能、或是刻意不携带防疫器等。 她举例,例如澳洲等国家,则限制执法机构索取冠病追踪的数据。与此同时,她提及一些律师同业也询问,一些当事被告是否也能索取合力追踪数据。

Politics has overtaken considerations for the people, says PSP’s Dr Tan Cheng Bock

On Wednesday (24 June), Secretary-General of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) Dr…

在空军基地附近使用无人机 男子被判罚款2000元

一名男子因在未经允许下,在空军基地附近使用无人机,而被罚款2000元。 37岁的被告陈俊延(译音,Ed Chen Junyuan)今日(4日)被控涉嫌在巴耶利峇的空军基地五公里范围内驾驶小型无人机。 据悉,陈俊延今年6月,在网上购买了一架0.36公斤的DBPower无人机。6月26日晚上,他与朋友戴秒生(译音)前往榜鹅附近地区,他家对面,一同驾驶无人机,其中一架无人机被巴耶利峇空军的航空Aeroscope 系统发现,一名休班的空军军官也随后接到警报,表示两人正在驾驶无人机,便开车前往该地,随后两人被捕。 检察官认为在该地驾驶无人机对航空安全有严重的后果,并描述陈俊延是如何操作无人机,强调新闻此前已不断提醒无人机操作者必须要在使用前进行检查,应罚款3000元以上。 但辩方则辩称,此事并未对任何人造成实际的伤害,而且该无人机仅飞行5至6分钟,并没有显示其速度,因此应减轻罚款500至1000元以内即可。 若在未经许可之下,进入空军基地5公里以内,一旦罪成,将可罚款至高两万元。再犯者将会被罚款两倍以上,即四万元,并可能被监禁15个月以上。 另名被告戴秒生,亦被指控数项罪行包括操作0.43公斤的无人机逾越64米高的限制高度,据悉,其驾驶高达431米左右。目前案件仍在处理中。

Sister of death row inmate – “Are you helping good people or bad people?”

Kirsten Han / The family of a Malaysian man sentenced to death…