Wuhan Medical Treatment Centre, where some patients are reportedly in quarantine (Source: Weibo).

On Tuesday (21 January), Senior Lecturer and Professor of Practice at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Prof Donald Low commented that China’s efforts to maintain transparency on its handling of the Wuhan virus sounds “more progressive and enlightened” than Singapore’s stance on labour statistics.

Sharing an article by South China Morning Post (SCMP) about China warning its officials not to cover up the spread of the virus on his Facebook page, Prof Low said, “sounds more progressive and enlightened than the Sg [Singapore] government on labour market information”.

Prof Low also quoted a passage from the article:

“Only by making information public can [we] reduce [public] fear,” it said. “People don’t live in a vacuum and [we] will only provide a breeding ground for rumours to grow if we keep them in the dark and strip them of their right to [know] the truth.”

What’s happening in China?

The reason transparency was brought up with regards to the Wuhan virus in China was because of China’s poor handling of the SARS outbreak back in 2002 – 2003 which SCMP noted was “Marked by cover-ups and an official reluctance to share information”.

The article went on to say that sceptics are beginning to question if China will again put politics above public health.

The article then quoted one of the persons who raised this concern on social media on Tuesday, Peter Cordingley, who was the spokesman for World Health Organisation during the Sars crisis.

Online, Mr Cordingley accused Beijing of “lying about the spread of the Wuhan flu virus from the start”.

He added, “I say this because I was the WHO spokesman in Asia at the time of the 2003 Sars outbreak, and I’m seeing precisely the same reckless behaviour now.”

The article goes on to note that Beijing has reacted quickly to assure the globe that it will not stand for any cover-ups or withholding of sensitive information in relation to the outbreak.

In fact, the highest political body for law and order in China, the Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission, released a statement on Tuesday cautioning Communist Party officials to remember the painful lessons of SARS and to make sure reports on the current situation are timely.

“Anyone who puts the face of politicians before the interests of the people will be the sinner of a millennium to the party and the people,” the commentary on its Chang An Jian account read.

“Anyone who deliberately delays and hides the reporting of [virus] cases out of his or her own self-interest will be nailed on the pillar of shame for eternity,” it added.

The commentary also included an instruction from President Xi Jinping issue on Monday that the virus has to be “resolutely contained” and that all cadres must prioritise “the safety of people’s lives and their physical health.”

It was emphasised that the best defence against rumours and public panic is transparency.

“Only by making information public can [we] reduce fear,” it said. “People don’t live in a vacuum and [we] will only provide a breeding ground for rumours to grow if we keep them in the dark and strip them of their right to the truth.”

Additionally, SCMP highlighted that China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Monday that the country taking a “responsible attitude” in its handling of this outbreak in Wuhan and is willing to share information with other countries and regions.

Transparency in Singapore?

Now let’s go back to Prof Low’s comment about how China’s apparent commitment to transparency on this matter is “more progressive and enlightened” that the Singapore government’s stance on labour market information.

The issue about employment data has been dragged out as many opposition politicians, media, and netizens have persistently requested for a breakdown in employment figures of citizens and permanent residents but the government continues to be evasive.

Earlier this month, Worker’s Party chief and MP Pritam Singh had tabled a parliamentary question asking for the number of jobs created in each sector of the government’s Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) broken down according to citizens, PRs, and foreigner groupings.

In response, Minister of Trade and Industry Chan Chun Sing merely said that local employment increased by nearly 60,000 between 2015 and 2018.

Following Mr Chan’s speech, Mr Singh repeatedly asked for a breakdown of the employment data but Mr Chan did not directly answer the question.

The back and forth then continued beyond Parliament when Senior Minister for Trade and Industry Chee Hong Tat weighed in to caution against ‘driving a wedge’ in society by differentiating between PRs and citizens.

But employment isn’t the only sticking point when it comes to the government not volunteering data and information that has been widely and persistently asked for, both by the public and members of parliament.

The Housing and Development Board (HDB) has continued to stay silent on the breakdown of construction costs of HDB projects while the Ministry of Health declined to name those who have been identified to be at fault for the Hepatitis C outbreak back in 2015 which resulted in eight deaths.

We also still don’t know the identity of the person responsible for the largest cyberattack in the country—the SingHealth data breach affecting 1.5 million patients including the Prime Minister.

Additionally, Singaporeans have been debating the Singapore-India Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) and the benefits it apparently brings to Singaporeans. Many have asked for data relating to CECA and concrete information on how the agreement has benefitted citizens, but have yet to receive a satisfactory answer.

And last but certainly not least, the country is still in the dark about just how much the Prime Minister’s wife Ho Ching makes as CEO of Temasek Holdings. Since the company is an exempt private company under the Singapore Companies Act, it is not required to publish its audited statutory consolidated financial statements. This means we’re left to merely guess at how much Mdm Ho earns, with guesses going up to the millions based on market rates. Of course, we don’t know for sure.

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

尚穆根称转发假新闻不犯法

日前,我国律政暨内政部长尚穆根,接受《联合晚报》访问时指出,点赞、转发、分享网络假消息,在《防止网络假消息与网络操纵法》下,都不会构成刑事罪。 在防假消息法案下,部长被赋予权力,可强制个人或网络平台更正或删除假消息。尚穆根对于民间担忧,点赞或转发假新闻是否会触法,解释“99巴仙网民目前在做的99巴仙事情”都不会受法案影响。 “转发不会面对刑事责任” “我们大多数人会在收到资讯时转发。有时我们以为信息是真的,有时我们不确定。那如果转发的是假信息,需要在新法案下负起刑事责任吗?不需要。” 他也解释,涉及转发假消息的个人社媒账户不会被屏蔽,个人无需采取任何行动。“最可能的情况是,政府会直接指示脸书等平台,向浏览或分享了网络假信息的用户,推送更正告示。如此一来,他们可点击链接,阅读正确资讯。” 他强调政府立法用意,是确保所有阅读到假信息的国人,也能看到相关更正。只有极少数情况下,政府才会要求个人发布更正,例如若网红分享了假信息,政府可能会要求他在个人网站发布更正。 分享文章,梁实轩被总理告诽谤 照尚穆根对新法的诠释,点赞、转发、分享网络假消息都不会构成刑事罪,那么照此原则,为何只是单纯转发假新闻的时评人梁实轩,却要面对国家领导人李显龙总理提告诽谤? 梁实轩在去年11月,在脸书分享了一篇文章,该文章指《砂拉越报告》主编克莱尔,在接受访谈时指出在一马公司弊案中,新加坡和瑞士及美国,成了调查对象。但较后《砂》已澄清有关文章内容不实,要求STR纠正。 然而,梁实轩当时纯粹分享贴文,也未留下任何个人评述和留言。他已遵循资媒局(IMDA)指示撤下了贴文,但还是被总理以法律诉讼对付。 已遵循资媒局指示撤文 在控方(总咯i)誌期2月11日的证词中,指梁实轩发起群众运动,成功引起民众对这篇不实报导的注意,同时针对梁实轩指控总理滥用司法程序作出反驳。…

Golden Village launches GV25 Film Shorts in support of next generation of filmmakers in Singapore

Singapore’s leading cinema exhibitor, Golden Village, launched GV25 Film Shorts earlier this…

The “YouTube style of politics” in S’pore?

Is S’pore ready for the “Youtube style of politics”, as mentioned by MCYS minister Vivian Balakrishnan? Is the government ready to allow multimedia to be used for political or election campaigning?

国外传康复后再感染病例 国家传染病中心:对出院患者采额外防御措施

昨日(27日)日本传出有患者在感染武汉冠状病毒康复后再度感染,造成人心惶惶,人们纷纷对康复后的患者提出质疑,是否存在再感染的风险。国家传染病中心(NCID)对此表示,这不太可能发生在新加坡,因为患者在出院前, 医护人员会对他们采取额外的防御措施。 在此之前,本地已有62名患者康复出院,国家传染病中心的专家表示,这些患者已经过确认体内并无病毒的存在,因此无法将其传染给其他人。 然而,专家也表示,目前仍无法掌握患者是否可多次感染的现象,因为仍未有足够的样本数探究。 国家传染病中心临床主任兼高级顾问医生苏安华素(Shawn Vasoo)认为,对于再度感染的现象是极少发生的状况,但仍保留其说法,并会对此进行评估。 为了能够重复确认,中心已开始对出院后两周的患者,在后续追踪时,采取抽查的可能。 日本大阪政府于26日证实一名40多岁的女性导游于本月1日康复出院后,26日再次被验出阳性反应。 但当局表示,并未掌握太多相关信息,而且正与日本当局确认具体状况。 除了日本传出有康复者再度感染,中国也曾出现类似案例。四川省卫生健康委员会已证实,一名住在四川成都“望江锦园”、感染武汉冠病的民众,治愈后回到家中隔离,但在第10天复检时再次确诊。 专家:若呼吸道存在病毒脱落的现象,即具备出院资格 《海峡时报》也对此向专家请教,国家传染病中心主任梁玉心教授解释,要判断是否具有传染风险则需视患者呼吸道的病毒传播情况,医生在检测上会特别注意是否在呼吸道上仍存在活跃病毒,并具传染风险。…