Category: Sosial

NUS Dining Operator, Chartwells, Served Non-Halal Roast Beef At Halal Counter

A dining operator at the National University of Singapore (NUS) was found to have served non-halal roast beef at a halal counter earlier this month.

The beef was served at two dining halls for students from four residential colleges at NUS on Oct 8. Close to 2,400 staff and students, including about 80 Muslims, attended the dinner.

A spokesman for Chartwells, which was appointed the dining operator for both halls in June, told The Straits Times that the lapse “is an isolated incident, resulting from a (chef’s) poor judgment call, for which the chef feels deeply regretful”. The chef had worked at the kitchens on the NUS campus for “a number of years” and has since been suspended, pending the outcome of Chartwells’ full inquiry.

When contacted, the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (Muis) said Chartwells had breached conditions of the halal certification system, and that Muis “will be taking further action”.

Muis said the halal certificate may be suspended or revoked. Anyone found guilty of abusing the Muis halal certificate and logo could also be fined up to $10,000 or jailed for up to a year, or both.

An NUS spokesman told The Sunday Times that a Muslim student resident had told an academic staff member on Oct 8 that the beef served at a halal counter was prepared in an oven in a non-halal kitchen. Chartwells has halal and non-halal kitchens in NUS. NUS’ Office of Housing Services then immediately alerted Chartwells and apologised to the affected Muslims the next day in an e-mail.

The beef had been taken to the halal kitchens before being served at a halal counter, and the halal kitchens were closed after NUS learnt of the incident. They will reopen only after being re-certified by Muis.

While Chartwells is still serving non-halal food, it stopped serving halal food a day after the incident and was replaced by another halal-certified vendor, Eurest Catering. But some NUS students were uneasy with this arrangement.

Mr Syamil Maulod, believed to be from the University Scholars Programme (USP), posted on Facebook on Oct 10 that Eurest Catering and Chartwells belong to the same parent company, Compass Group.

“Our trust was violated. We do not feel it is right to engage the same (parent) company,” he wrote.

An article on The Cinnamon Roll, an official online publication of the USP, also said last Sunday that “most students, Muslim and non-Muslim, regard (the lapse) a serious breach of trust”.

The NUS spokesman said that getting Eurest to provide halal meals was an “interim measure” and a “third-party, external halal-certified caterer” has been providing halal meals since last Thursday. The caterer is not related to the Compass Group, said NUS.

Compass Group Singapore managing director Andrew Marshall said: “We deeply regret this issue… We continue to work closely with NUS and the student body to rebuild the trust of the community.”

A Cinnamon College resident, who declined to be named, said that NUS should have given an assurance earlier and asked the vendor to provide a public explanation.

“Only Muslims need to observe the dietary standard, but if you think about it, it is about food handling in general,” he said. “People who are vegetarians, or people who have allergies… we expect their needs to be taken care of.”

Source: www.straitstimes.com

October 19, 2015
Rich Singaporean Wives Hiring Women To Lure Their Husbands

Singaporeans have been hiring agencies in China to get their husbands’ mistresses to back off, according to a foreign report on these “mistress-ditching” firms.

But what if the spouse’s lover is in Singapore?

To save their marriages from falling apart, Singaporeans have been paying five-figure sums to hire honey trappers to seduce their own misbehaving husbands or wives, reveal private investigators here.

The honey trapper will attempt to seduce the third party or the cheating spouse to destroy the extramarital relationship, they say.

Yes, agents have been engaged by distraught husbands, too.

“It is not an advertised service. The request must come from the client,” says Mr David Ng from DP Quest Private Investigation Consultancy.

“They usually know what they want. They would request a particular profile of a honey trapper that they want, specific to the preference of their cheating spouses.”

Source: www.tnp.sg

October 18, 2015
Pemuzik Singapura, Riduan Zailani, Terima Anugerah Artis Muda

Pemuzik genderang, Riduan Zalani merupakan satu-satunya tokoh seni Melayu yang menerima Anugerah Artis Muda tahun ini.

Anugerah tersebut adalah pengiktirafan bagi para penggiat seni di bawah 35 tahun yang mempunyai potensi luar biasa dalam persada seni tanah air.

Bersama enam lagi penerima Anugerah Artis Muda dan empat penerima Pingat Budaya, Encik Riduan menerima anugerah dari Presiden Tony Tan Keng Yam malam ini.

Alat muzik genderang begitu dekat dengan hati Encik Riduan, 30 tahun.

Sejak tujuh tahun lagi, beliau mula bermain genderang untuk kumpulan dikir barat. Kerana cinta terhadap budaya Melayu dan genderang, Encik Riduan menubuhkan kumpulan genderang Melayu, NADI Singapura.

“Selama 23 tahun berada di atas pentas, saya sungguh bersyukur dapat menjelajahi lebih daripada 30 negara, dan 60 negeri.

“Kita cuba tonjolkan semangat kenusantaraan dan semangat ketimuran kita dari segi persembahan kita, pendekatan kita terhadap muzik Melayu sekarang yang ia boleh menjadi satu wadah yang boleh membuat ia relevan hingga ke hari ini,” ujarnya.

Encik Riduan yang mempunyai Diploma dalam bidang Muzik di Maktab Seni LASALLE akur tidak mudah untuk menjadi penggiat seni sepenuh masa di Singapura.

Salah satu cabarannya adalah pendapatan yang tidak menentu dan bergantung pada sambutan.

Maka itu, beliau percaya penting untuk seseorang penggiat seni itu untuk kekal relevan, menggunakan pendekatan inovatif dalam penyampaian dan bijak mengambil manfaat daripada geran-geran pemerintah.

“Harapan saya, agar sokongan ini dapat terus meningkat dan dapat menyemarakkan suasana seni di Singapura. Saya rasa sudah tiba masanya, kami bersatu untuk menubuhkan satu institusi yang mengetengahkan tradisi-tradisi Melayu kita termasuk gendang-gendang Melayu kita,” ujar Encik Riduan.

Selain genderang Melayu, Encik Riduan juga mahir bermain genderang Afro-Cuban dan Afro-Brazilian.

Tidak hairanlah, beliau sering dijemput untuk mewakili Singapura dalam pesta muzik antarabangsa seperti Pesta Muzik, Seni dan Tarian Dunia (WOMAD).

Pengiktirafan Anugerah Artis Muda bagi Encik Riduan adalah seperti pembakar semangat untuknya meneruskan perjuangan dalam arena seni tanah air.

Source: http://berita.mediacorp.sg

October 17, 2015
Mentally-Ill Man Jailed 3 Years For Assaulting Mother

A 31-year-old mentally ill man has been sentenced to 36 months’ jail on Friday (Oct 16) for assaulting his elderly mother. Rajesh Pannu was spared caning due to his diagnosis of chronic schizophrenia.

Rajesh slapped and punched his mother, 62, on her face and body repeatedly in November last year, and used a broom stick to beat her until it broke.

He was upset that his mother’s walking frame was making noises as she walked into the living room, where Rajesh was watching television.

He grabbed the walking frame and threw it away from his mother before attacking her.

To prevent his mother from calling for help, he threw her handphone onto the floor and unplugged the telephone in their Tampines Street 82 flat.

In pain and bleeding from the nose, Mdm Narindar Kaur Darshan Singh tried to make her way to the bedroom without the aid of her walking frame to rest. Rajesh became angrier when he realised his mother could walk without the frame.

He followed her into the bedroom and hit her on the forehead multiple times with a plastic mug, undeterred by his mother’s screams of pain.

I WANT TO KILL YOU: ACCUSED TO MOTHER

Rajesh returned to the bedroom with a knife and slashed his mother on her arm, shouting “I want to kill you!”

He also poured two pots of boiling water over his mother, before telling her to “go to the toilet and wash up”.

Rajesh then went to his room and fell asleep. He found his mother bleeding and collapsed on the bathroom floor when he awoke, and called an ambulance.

Mdm Narindar was taken to Singapore General Hospital with several injuries, including deep burns over 26.5 per cent of her body. She also suffered a fracture on her left hand, and “acute left subdural haemorrhage”, or traumatic brain injury.

She remained in hospital for 33 days, and also underwent an operation to treat her burns.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Selene Yap said Rajesh had “demonstrated specific intent and planning” in the “brutal and sustained … Attack which involved the use of various implements” including a broom stick and a knife.

NO CANING SOUGHT FOR ACCUSED DUE TO MENTAL ILLNESS: DPP

However, DPP Yap said the prosecution would no longer be seeking caning due to Rajesh’s diagnosis, even though his mental illness “did not have a causal link to his offending”.

Rajesh’s lawyer Mr Sunil Sudheesan, who represented him pro bono, as part of the Guidance for Plea Scheme, asked the court to ensure Rajesh receives psychiatric treatment while in prison, and for a “proper structure” to be put in place upon his release to manage his condition.

Mr Sunil told reporters that Rajesh was first been diagnosed with schizophrenia in 2002, and had been admitted to the Institute of Mental Health more than 10 times since his diagnosis. There needs to be long-term solutions for accused persons suffering from mental illness, Mr Sunil said.

District Judge Mathew Joseph echoed this point, and said that inter-agency cooperation would be required to treat and manage mentally ill persons during their incarceration and upon their release back into the community.

A collaborative effort between agencies such as the Singapore Police Force, the Ministry of Social and Family Development and social service centres to manage mentally ill offenders could help to mitigate and reduce their risks of re-offending in the future, Judge Mathew said.

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

October 17, 2015
A Third Of Students Go To School With No Pocket Money To Buy Lunch?

Record No. of needy students helped.

I refer to the article ”ST School Pocket Money Fund helps record number of needy students” (Straits Times, Oct 10).

It states that ”Pocket money is given to students whose families meet the eligibility criteria of not more than $560 in monthly gross household per capita income.”

Why not only for Singaporeans?

According to the SPMF’s web site – “To qualify as a beneficiary receiving pocket money, the child/youth must be:

A Singapore citizen or permanent resident”.

I understand that almost all other financial assistance schemes are for Singaporeans only. So, why are PRs eligible? (“Fee hike for international students and PRs attending local schools“, Straits Times, Oct 1).

If the assistance is confined to Singaporeans – perhaps the criteria may be less restrictive, such that more Singaporeans may qualify.

Most restrictive criteria amongst all schemes?

As to “Pocket money is given to students whose families meet the eligibility criteria of not more than $560 in monthly gross household per capita income” – I understand that last year’s criteria was “(the child must be) from a family whose per capita net monthly household income is not more than $450″, compared to the $560 gross income now.

If this is the case – typically the net income after deducting say 20 per cent employee CPF contribution may be $448 ($560 gross income less 20 per cent CPF).

SPMF’s criteria may be the most restrictive, of probably all the financial assistance schemes?

For example, ComCare’s criteria is “Families with a monthly household income of $1,900 and below, or a per capita income of $650 can also qualify for assistance if they meet all other criteria”.

So, why is SPMF’s criteria ($560) – $90 less than ComCare’s $650 per capita income?

Only help for 2 years?

As to “STSPMF is committed to helping children and youth who meet the eligibility criteria by providing them with school pocket money for 2 years” – in the previous year it said “providing them with school pocket money for at least two years. In exceptional cases requiring additional help, SPMF will extend the financial assistance to up to four years”

– Why is it that the term of assistance is only for 2 years – is it still up to 4 years in exceptional cases now?

From my experience doing volunteer work in financial counselling over the last decade or so – I have come across many cases of financial stress when SPMF assistance is terminated after 2 or 4 years.

Since a child generally goes through about 13 years of education – why do we have this “2 years” restriction?

Previously, some criteria don’t make sense?

In fact, the criteria previously was arguably even more strange – “Secondly, post-secondary students who wish to receive aid in the past needed to have either tapped on the fund previously or have a sibling who is drawing on the fund. In future, all who meet the income criteria can qualify. This change will benefit new applicants and those from single-child families”.

Why was there a need for either to “have a sibling who is drawing on the fund” or “to have either tapped on the fund previously”?

Were those who did not “”have a sibling drawing on the fund”, or “tapped on the fund previously”, less deserving – until only recently with the changes announced?

Number needing assistance increase more than 3 times?

Notwithstanding the increase in financial assistance (probably to cover inflation) and the widening of the scope of cover – don’t you find it rather alarming that for a developed country like Singapore – the number of students helped increased from 3,375 in 2001 to almost 14,000 now?

In this connection, Professor Tommy Koh said that “About a third of our students go to school with no pocket money to buy lunch” (“Three wishes for the New Year”, Straits Times, Jan 3).

The assistance disbursed increased from $0.9 million in 2001 to the $7 million for this year, as reported in the subject news report.

How much reserves?

Its accumulated fund is $17.9 million.

SG50 give $300,000 only?

As to “We were fortunate to receive $300,000 from the Government through its Care and Share programme launched to celebrate Singapore’s 50th anniversary” – don’t you think that the Government should contribute more?

Reciprocate trust with more transparency?

Since the people have given their trust and mandate – shouldn’t we reciprocate by spending more to help Singaporeans.

Leong Sze Hian

* Submitted by TRE reader.

Source: www.tremeritus.com

October 16, 2015