MEDIA STATEMENT

Thursday, 30 May 2013

MAJOR ONLINE WEBSITES IN SINGAPORE TO PROTEST AGAINST LICENSING REQUIREMENT

The Media Development Authority had, on Tuesday, introduced a “licensing framework” that would require “online news sites” to put up a “performance bond” of $50,000 and “comply within 24 hours to MDA’s directions to remove content that is found to be in breach of content standards”.

As part of the community of websites in Singapore that provide sociopolitical news and analysis to Singaporeans, we are concerned about the impact of the newly-introduced requirement on fellow Singaporeans’ ability to receive diverse news information.

While the S$50,000 performance bond is a drop in the ocean for a mainstream news outlet with an online presence, it would potentially be beyond the means of volunteer run and personal blogging platforms like ours. Hence, MDA’s claim that the licensing regime is intended to equalize the playing field between online and offline news is incorrect: the regulations will disproportionately affect us.

Further, we believe that the introduction of the licensing regime has not gone through the proper and necessary consultation and had been introduced without clear guidance. In a typical public consultation exercise, a government agency will publish a draft regulation with detailed explanation and issue a press release to invite members of the public to send in feedback for consideration. We observe this is not the case for the licensing regime.

We call on the Ministry of Communications and Information to withdraw the licensing regime. We call upon our elected representatives to oppose the licensing regime.

It is in the interest of Singaporeans and the long-term future for Singapore that the licensing regime be withdrawn.

The new licensing regime has the very real potential to reduce the channels available to Singaporeans to receive news and analysis of the sociopolitical situation in Singapore and it is in the interest of all Singaporeans to guard against the erosion and availability of news channels that Singaporeans should rightfully have access to.

These new regulations significantly impact Singaporeans’ constitutionally protected right to free speech, and they should not be introduced without the most rigorous public debate and discussion.

The new regulations, and the manner in which they have been imposed by regulatory fiat, are unacceptable in any developed democracy.

 

Leong Sze Hian http://leongszehian.com/
Andrew Loh http://publichouse.sg/
Ravi Philemon http://www.raviphilemon.net/
Kumaran Pillai http://sgvoize.wordpress.com/
Terry Xu https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/
Richard Wan http://www.tremeritus.com/
Choo Zheng Xi https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/
Howard Lee https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/
Rachel Zeng

http://rachelzeng.wordpress.com/,

http://singaporeantideathpenaltycampaign.wordpress.com/

Roy Ngerng http://thehearttruths.com/
Kirsten Han http://spuddings.net/
Gilbert Goh http://www.transitioning.org/
Nizam Ismail http://nizamosaurus.wordpress.com/
Lynn Lee http://www.lianainfilms.com/
Biddy Low http://publichouse.sg/
Alex Au http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/
Martyn See http://singaporerebel.blogspot.sg/
Howard Lee https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/
Elaine Ee http://publichouse.sg/
Lim Han Thon http://publichouse.sg/
Joshua Chiang http://www.facebook.com/joshuafly
Donaldson Tan http://newasiarepublic.com
Stephanie Chok http://littlemskaypoh.wordpress.com
Jolovan Wham http://www.workfairsingapore.wordpress.com

 

If you would like more information or for media enquires, please contact Howard Lee at [email protected]

For queries on TOC’s position on the media regulations and how they potentially impact the website, our media contact person will be Choo Zheng Xi

You May Also Like

Nationalising Public Transportation – Is it feasible?

Azhar Khamis / The Workers’ Party manifesto for the 2011 election contains…

“质问储备金看管者薪资,在其他先进国不足为奇” 毕丹星:负责任反对党不盲从

前日,工人党秘书长暨阿裕尼集选区议员毕丹星,与副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰针对追加预算案交锋。毕丹星提及,反对党也同样是政府开支和储备的协同“监管者”,这是所有人都需要共同承担的。毕丹星强调无意在此时为难财政部和其团队,不过当政府在需动用储备推行政策时,需要自问“这些是否足够、太多?太少?” 对此王瑞杰在国会曾回应,鉴于国家安全和战略考量,政府不公开国家储备金的总额;也指收支条规是经过仔细敲定;提呈拨款法案都要向总统和总统顾问理事会报备和详加解释。而我国当前的制度也肯定比其他债台高筑的国家好很多,故此“劝勉”毕丹星我国还是必须谨慎行事。 毕丹星在昨日也少有地以中英双语在脸书发文,直言“对于任何当权者来说,透露详细信息极有可能引起更多公众质问的数据,从而令他们对于信息披露犹豫不决。这样的抉择的背后即有充足的理由,也可能有值得令人质疑的原因。” 毕丹星认为,过去几年,舆论有潜移默化的现象,尤其队国家储备金课题,已超越了封闭式政治体系那一套“不闻,不答”。 毕丹星在国会,曾以《商业时报》的一则报导,指出建议把国家储备金分成两部分:一部分用来做为赚取净收入回报的基础,这部分的数目可公布。其余的部分为安全起见当然可以保密。 “去年,我在国会向财政部长提出询问,我国的政府财政报表为什么无法供国人在网上查看(绝大部分公众并不知道在勿拉士峇沙路的李光前参考图书馆存有一份)。” “我当时得到的回答是:‘为了让公众简明易懂’,财政部摘选了相关资讯,发表在财政预算案有关的文件中。但财政部长也补充 ‘我们会继续检讨以及更新我们发布政府账目资讯的各种方式。’” 毕丹星指出,每一个市镇理事会和法定机构的财政报表,都能在网上找到。政府的财政报表同样地也应该在线上供人查看。财政报表列出国家各方面费用,如:德光岛填海工程的花费、为未来发展征用土地的费用、警察电眼监控系统的价格等等。 毕丹星认为,一个负责任的反对党,绝不是盲目顺从的——它必须在新加坡的国会制民主与治理之下扮演重要的角色。例如,询问负责投资和保护储备金的人们的收入,特别是当他们的薪金是从纳税者的税收而来时,在任何发展国家这并不稀奇,而方荣发先生也曾问过这个问题。“答案呢?却叫我们不必把焦点放在一、两个开销项目上。” 国家储备金被动用(或不被动用)的每一个当儿,所有议员与公众都必须了解并权衡当权的政府,不单单是一个行动党政府,所能够(或应该)给予国人的支持。 非执政党议员由于无法了解全面情况,唯有听取行动党或任何未来的政府所提供的资讯。我们能做得更好。就如开头引述的《商业时报》建议,我国肯定有许多可以进步的空间,不止是关于储备金的问题,而是涵盖更广的许多其他财务金融课题。

Cleaners' pay up $250 to $1,000: Congratulations?

~by: Leong Sze Hian~ I refer to the article “Town council cleaners…

严燕松视察客工在区内临时住所安排 每房不超过10人

工人党阿裕尼集选区议员严燕松,在昨日(11日)在脸书上发文指出,近日将有40名客工,被安置在勿洛蓄水池弯附近工地的临时住所。这些客工将在这里建设一所为本地社区服务的特殊教育学校。 他与该项目经理交流,讨论有关保障客工权益事宜,以及减少对社区造成的不便。 该项目预计2021年下半年竣工,这段时间客工都需要驻扎在工地。目前他们仍居住在工地外的客工宿舍,每日仍要往返工地。 严燕松也表示,“这些客工每间房住不超过10人,且有提供餐点和无线网络,让他们能够获得温饱,与家人保持联系。” 他也指出,尽管勿洛蓄水池居民目前无法亲自会见这些客工,但他也邀请居民一同向辛苦的客工表达感谢。 此外,他也将会定期参观一些附近的建筑工地,因此也吁请民众能够提供更多意见和向他们表达疑虑,并公开自己的联系方式(WhatsApp 89250747),方便居民联络。 严燕松在本届大选中协同贝里安毕丹星等人角逐阿裕尼集选区,以59.93%得票率成功守住该集选区。 一直以来关注弱势群体的严燕松,也在近日并持续推动“蓝色环保”(BlueCycle)活动,鼓励民众捐出物品,帮助社区中有需要的居民。