Category: Singapuraku

Osman Sulaiman: No Hope Of PAP Malay MPs Speaking Up On Oxley Issue

PM Lee is going to make a ministerial statement in parliament [today] regarding the allegations made by his siblings. Party whip has been lifted and PM Lee has urged all our MPs to question him robustly.

I dont think there will be any meaningful questions from the PAP MPs. Who would question their superiors in the real world? So this ministerial statement is just nothing but a smoke screen to appear to be upfront.

Halimah Yaacob has spoken and said that she hopes Oxley Road dispute will be ‘properly debated’.

Who among those MPs will fire the first salvo? Definitely not the Malay PAP MPs. They are known to acquiesce to anything the PAP wanted even at the expense of the community.

Instead of being the voice for the people, they are the voice of the PAP.

I’ve long ago lost hope on ‘our representative’ to stand up for us. This is why I ventured into politics. Our voices are not heard in parliament often enough.

I would put my hope more on the non Malay Mps to speak up. Our Malay PAP MPs are just too weak politically and emasculated to be fighting for us.

Source: Khan Osman Sulaiman

July 3, 2017
Halimah Yacob Calls For Proper Parliamentary Debate On OxLee Drama

Speaker of Parliament Halimah Yacob on Saturday (Jul 1) said that she hoped issues would be “properly debated” in Parliament on Monday, when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is set to address allegations by his siblings against him.

“There will be of course a lot of speeches, but I do hope that we can see that the issues are properly debated and hopefully, if we can have some finality, that would be ideal. But I really leave it to the debate,” she said when asked on the sidelines of a People’s Action Party (PAP) event what she hopes to see during the debate.

“As the speaker, my task is to ensure that it’s a fair, open, transparent debate that goes on on Monday.”

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

July 3, 2017
Alfian Sa’at: Why I Don’t Attend Pink Dot

Growing older, I find that my introverted nature is becoming more pronounced. One of the reasons why I decided not to go for Pink Dot this year is because I’m beginning to get more terrified of crowds. There’s always a moment when I’m surrounded by too many people when I start feeling dizzy and nauseous.

And then there’s the issue of my nervousness around dogs. I know Pink Dot is an opportunity for some people to bring their pets along, pets which are as dear to them as family. But dogs–when there’s more than one, or two–have always put me on edge. This is not a problem of the dog-owners roaming the park but my problem alone. (And this is the learned mantra of any minority.)

This isn’t supposed to be an indictment of Pink Dot’s agenda of inclusivity. I think every year the organisers attempt to provide an atmosphere as hospitable to as many as possible–sign language interpretation, differently-abled access, seating for seniors. But any embrace will come up short at some point because an arm span is finite.

The space at Pink Dot is also inhospitable for others–those who fear crowds, or fear dogs, those without a pink or blue IC. It makes me think about the limits of inclusivity, the dangers of fantasising about utopian spaces, or spaces that aspire to speak for the entire community.

In that anxiety to pack in bodies at the event, so as to create an optics of the local-indigenous, is bodily participation privileged over other forms of support? Be there or be square, be there or betray?

While I support what Pink Dot stands for (and many of its organisers and ambassadors and volunteers are wonderful, tireless people whose activist work extends beyond Pink Dot), I can’t stand to form that dot. Neither can I stand any kind of guilt tripping over one’s absence there, as if fidelity to the cause must translate into piety towards Pink Dot.

Ultimately I think of Pink Dot, no matter its organisational capacity, as part of something larger–and not as some large reservoir where other tributaries (no matter how many booths, how many representatives) are supposed to converge.

Source: Alfian Sa’at

July 3, 2017
This Abang Is Mangkuk With This Unprofessional $118 Bowl Haircut He Didn’t Ask For

Guys does this look like a $118 haircut+rebond+wash (package) to you?

i ask for rebonding,cut and wash. Asked for high slope at the back and get mangkok (bowl in malay).

And ur hairdresser still can smile after what he did to my hair i even tell him this is already wrong.

Even with that, not even a sorry for the mistake. Dont bother going there for a hair cut.

Money not well spend. with Sante De Beaute sante

Source: El Syibli

July 1, 2017
Singapore Athletes’ Brutally Honest Reactions To $600 Annual Grant

Exactly a week ago, The Online Citizen ran a story after a Facebook post by Jose Raymond about government agency Sport Singapore’s current funding policy for national athletes.

In the Facebook post and subsequent story, it was revealed how Singapore national athletes were receiving a meagre $600 a year, or an average of $50 a month in training assistance grants from the government.

The grants are disbursed to the athletes twice a year, or $300 each time.

The post by Mr Raymond, who is a Vice-Chairman of the Chiam See Tong Sports Foundation and Vice-President (Partnerships) of the Singapore Swimming Association, has since been shared more than 120 times as at 30 June, including both former and current athletes.

Said national sprinter Calvin Kang, one of those representing Singapore at the upcoming SEA Games in Kuala Lumpur: “The harsh reality of sports in Singapore.”

National squash player Vivian Rhamanan, a gold medalist at the last SEA Games in Singapore in the jumbo doubles, said: “I’m one of the fortunate athletes to get funding by Singapore Sports Institute. Currently carded as L4, n get $600 annually from this system.”

Added former national sprinter Izwan Firdaus, a silver medalist from the 2009 SEA Games in Laos: “I have to beg my parents for a new training shoe each time my shoe broke.”

Sharing how athletes were told that they should run for their passion and not for the passion, Izwan said that he could not live with the way the athletes were being funded and decided to choose to focus on his rice bowl instead.

Former national swimmer and Olympian May Ooi, who is now a mixed martial arts fighter chimed in and added that “appropriate allocation of resources for deserving athletes should be a priority.”

Responses by other athletes as follows:

Government agency Sport Singapore has not responded to the story by TOC, or the Facebook post by Mr Raymond as yet.

When contacted, Mr Raymond said: “The frank and unedited responses by the athletes is loud and clear. It makes for painful reading but it is a harsh reality. The athletes must always be at the heart of whatever we do in sports administration.”

Source: www.theonlinecitizen.com

July 1, 2017