Blog

  • DTL2 Woes: Bukit Timah Residents’ Pleas Fall Through Cracks

    DTL2 Woes: Bukit Timah Residents’ Pleas Fall Through Cracks

    Cracked and slanted walls, burst water pipes and front gates that are unable to properly shut.

    These are some of the issues that residents at a stretch of terrace houses in Duchess Road in Bukit Timah have had to live with for the last five years.

    And for the most part, their repeated attempts at seeking redress have still left them in limbo.

    At least six residents who spoke to AsiaOne claimed that the damage to their homes was due to the construction of the Tan Kah Kee MRT station, which is part of the Downtown Line 2.

    The station, which sits about 70m from their homes, opened on Dec 27 last year.

    Two residents, who only wanted to be known as Mr and Mrs Lim, serve as spokesmen for the affected residents.

    The Lims, who are in the 50s, told AsiaOne that despite repeated attempts over the years to rectify the issues, they were told that neither the Land Transport Authority (LTA) nor its contractors were responsible for them.

    In September 2011, the Lims noticed that a number of cracks started to appear on the walls of their house. A year later, they claimed more cracks surfaced on their car porch roof, allowing rainwater to seep through and dislodge a shoe cabinet. Several tiles in the porch had also cracked and become dislodged.

    Following their complaint, LTA surveyed the defects and installed devices to track any widening of cracks. Instruments were also fixed outside a few houses to stabilise the ground.

    LTA’s Austrian contractor, Alpine Bau, also did some interim repairs on the couple’s home in both 2011 and 2012, assuring them that full repairs will be conducted after the completion of the station.

    However, Alpine Bau went bust in 2013 – before full repairs could be done – and a South Korean contractor, SK E&C, was appointed to take over construction works.

    The Lims were left helpless after that.

    In June 2014, the Lims and their immediate neighbour, who only wanted to be known as Mr Yang, discovered that they could not fully close the front gates as the wall supporting them had tilted to one side.

    Mrs Lim said: “This was too much. My family’s safety was compromised and I couldn’t sleep properly knowing that we had a security issue.”

    At Mr Lim’s request, SK E&C installed a temporary metal bar to prevent the wall from tilting further. Mr Yang claims that a similar request made by him was rejected and he had to chisel away certain parts of the wall himself to allow his front gate to fully close.

    He told AsiaOne that the new contractor claimed that the cracks were due to a palm tree right outside his house.

    “This is extremely illogical and utterly unreasonable as the palm tree wouldn’t be able to cause damages to the internal areas of my house,” said Mr Yang in a telephone interview.

    The Lims’ also said that LTA attributed the damage to nearby construction works of a new condominium next to their house as well as that of Hwa Chong Institution. However they noted that these projects only commenced after the cracks appeared.

    When AsiaOne visited the Lim residence, the cracks on the wall were large enough to snugly slot in a number of credit cards and hold them in place.

    Some cracks were so deep that the wall was nearly split in two. There was also a 10m-wide crack across the floor in the Lims’ backyard. Some of the bedroom doors in Mr Yang’s three-storey home could not be shut properly.

    Damage to the Lim’s house is estimated to be about $78,000, while that to Mr Yang’s house is said to be about $70,000, according to a private contractor both households engaged.

    Another resident nearby who only wants to be known as Mrs Tan, claims the construction works caused her underground water pipes to burst twice – first in 2012 and then in 2014. She only discovered the leakage after her monthly water bills hit $800 on average.

    Besides settling the water bill, Mrs Tan told AsiaOne that she also spent a total of $3,450 to repair the water pipes.

    Member of Parliament for Holland-Bukit Timah Group Representation Constituency (GRC) Mr Christopher de Souza made two home visits over the last couple of years.

    Mr de Souza told AsiaOne that his main priority is to ensure the safety of the residents and their homes.

    He added: “I have requested a compensation board to be convened to address the families’ concerns in an impartial way to resolve the difference in views.”

    This is not the first time residents living along the Bukit Timah stretch have complained of damages caused by construction.

    In 2012, residents living in nearby Watten Estate, reported damage to their homes after construction works to build the same MRT station began.

    In this case, LTA carried out the necessary repair works.

    In a letter addressed to Mr Lim in November 2012, LTA said that the damage “could possibly be caused” by the station’s construction.

    When asked for a response, LTA explained that a survey carried out in 2009 found that some houses had pre-existing cracks. Independent experts also later assessed that the construction works did not cause damage to the Duchess Road houses, added LTA.

    The LTA spokesman said: “Residents who do not agree with the assessment made by the independent experts may refer their claims to an independent Compensation Board, which is headed by a District Judge.”

    The Compensation Board requires the residents to engage a lawyer – a move they have not been keen on as it would incur additional costs.

    But while the residents are grateful for the convenience of a nearby MRT station, they are still considering what to do next.

    “We have invested $1 million of our life savings into building our dream house,” Mrs Lim said with tears welling up in her eyes. “To be dealing with unaccounted damages like these for over five years now is really, very tiring. ”

     

    Source: http://news.asiaone.com

  • Tan Jee Say: Singaporeans Will Elect Minority Candidate As President Based On Merit

    Tan Jee Say: Singaporeans Will Elect Minority Candidate As President Based On Merit

    My comments on PM’s proposed changes to the Elected President, GRC and NCMP schemes, are as follows:

    1. Elected President-

    a) Existing eligibility criteria are sufficiently tight and yet flexible to permit candidates from a broad background to come forth and contest, so no need to change criteria;

    b) CPA (Council of Presidential Advisers) is not elected by the people and has no mandate or moral authority to have more powers vis-a-vis an elected President, it should remain an advisory body and not empowered to dilute the authority of an elected President;

    c) the Government cannot force a minorities President on the people as it is the people who decide; a President imposed on the people rather than truly elected by the people has no moral authority to check the Government; there are many minorities who satisfy criteria to be candidates and Singaporeans will elect them if they are adjudged to be better than others.

    2. GRC’s –

    a) GRC’s should be scrapped and Parliament reverts to SMC’s for all seats;

    b) minority representation, the purported objective of the GRC scheme, can be secured through a modified NCMP scheme for a minimum number of minorities MPs.

    3. NCMP’s –

    a) no impact with only minimum 12 opposition MPs including NCMP’s,

    b) will only make a difference if number of NCMP’s is increased to ensure minimum of over one-third opposition MPs that can effectively check government with a veto.

     

    Source: Tan Jee Say

  • PPP: More Extensive Reform Of Elected Presidency Required

    PPP: More Extensive Reform Of Elected Presidency Required

    Response to PAP’s change of political rules

    The Prime Minister has announced a few changes to our political system, basically centered around NCMP scheme, down sizing GRC, increasing number of SMCs and rules regarding the Elected Presidency.

    People’s Power Party is founded on the principles of political reform based on Separation (and Independence) of Five Powers, namely Legislative, Executive, Judiciary, Selection/appointment and Impeachment Powers.

    The Elected Presidency

    One important advocacy of our founding beliefs is to entrench and enhance the Elected Presidency so much so that, certain powers or government institutions should fall under the charge of the Presidential Office. We are advocating the institutions of Impeachment powers, Selection/appointment powers to come under the purview of the Elected Presidency. Namely, the Elected President should take charge of the following institutions and functions:

    1) CPIB
    2) Election Department
    3) Public Service Commission (PSC)
    4) Appointment of judges
    5) Ombudsman Commission
    6) Equal Opportunity Commission
    7) Appointment of key office holders in Temasek Holdings and GIC

    On top of that, the President should have the veto powers to block any legislation which he deems detrimental to the nation’s interests. Such veto can only be overturned by subsequent two-third approval of parliamentary votes.

    Thus, the reform for the Elected Presidency could be more extensive than what the Prime Minister has proposed.

    Although we welcome the proposal of putting the racial balance into consideration for the Elected Presidency, but we object to the proposed increase of power given to the Presidential Advisory Council. The appointment of the members of this Council should not be decided by the ruling party or Cabinet. It should be the sole prerogative of the Elected President to appoint his own Council. Furthermore, the Elected President is elected and empowered by Singaporeans and he should have the full power to make decisions in the interests of the Nation He should be the one who will answer to the Singaporeans who voted him, not the Advisory Council. Thus, the Advisory Council cannot overshadow the powers of the Elected Presidency.

    GRC, NCMP and Proportional Representation.

    We welcome the announcement of downsizing the GRC. We feel that the correct size for the GRC system should be 3 to 4 seats per GRC.

    However, we do not see the necessity of having any SMC nor NCMP if our proposal of Proportional Representation is implemented.

    No matter how PAP tries to package it, NCMP has little legitimacy under the current setting. They will always be considered as second class members of parliament or just simply “backdoor MPs”.

    The advantages of Proportional Representation system coupled with the full GRC system will truly give Singapore’s Parliament Plural Voices while prevent the loss of Ministerial caliber members of any political party which would become the ruling party or part of a ruling coalition.

    Proportional Representation system guarantees intense contest and competition of ideas and ideals whereby multi-corner fights would not be frown upon or “avoided”. It will enhance political competition and consensus building based on plural voice and representation in parliament.

    The current system has tremendous flaws. Beside discouraging healthy competition and contests, it also post a danger of instability. If the ruling party lost a GRC, it may risk losing one or two of its good Ministers altogether. This will not provide the kind of political stability and continuity which we need.

    The Proportional Representation system also mitigates the problem of the Tyranny of Majority Rule. It would allow individuals or groups with specific focus to contest and chance of getting into parliament to contribute to the plurality of debates. Example, if a group of Nature lovers or Green activists were to be elected into parliament, they will provide a diversity in the debates in various development plans, providing the Green Views instead of subjecting our Nation and future generations to the ills of a monolithic discourse pushed by the ruling party.

    Thus, we urge the ruling party to reconsider their plans to change the political landscape to take a serious long term view on the Nation’s political stability by adopting a more comprehensive and bold stance of political reform, which is beyond party politics, to ensure that our Nation adopts the best democratic system based on the fundamentals of Separation of 5 Powers.

    Goh Meng Seng
    Secretary General
    People’s Power Party

     

    Source: Goh Meng Seng

  • SDP: Government Should Focus On Enhancing Whole Democratic System, Not Cosmetic Touch-Ups To NCMP System

    SDP: Government Should Focus On Enhancing Whole Democratic System, Not Cosmetic Touch-Ups To NCMP System

    This is the SDP’s response to media queries about Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s proposal to increase the number of NCMPs:

    The proposals by PM Lee serve only to distract the people from the real problems that plague elections in Singapore. A democratic election system requires a free media, freedom of speech and assembly, and a transparent electoral process. If the PAP is genuinely interested in a democratic system, it should take the following measures:

    1. Amend the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act and the Broadcasting Act. The control of the media by the PAP is what has kept it in power all these decades.

    2. Abolish the GRC system. The GRC system has enabled the PAP to draw constituency boundaries to its advantage.

    3. Repeal the Public Order Act. The police stop the opposition from speaking and meeting freely with the people while PAP MPs have free access to the electorate.

    4. Lengthen the campaign period. The election period should be lengthened to at least 3 weeks. The short campaign period makes it unnecessarily difficult for the opposition to mount a meaningful campaign.

    5. Remove the Elections Department from the control of the PMO. A genuinely free and fair elections can come about only if there is an independent body to conduct and monitor elections

     

    Source: Chee Soon Juan

     

  • Walid J. Abdullah: Singapore Must Foster A Culture Of Intolerance Towards Intolerance

    Walid J. Abdullah: Singapore Must Foster A Culture Of Intolerance Towards Intolerance

    Of the recent speeches by our politicians, two in particular stood out for me.

    First was the one given by Minister Yaacob Ibrahim, in which he said Singaporeans must be tolerant, and the only thing we should be intolerant towards is intolerance.

    This is most definitely a welcomed speech; the idea of accepting and tolerating different viewpoints is wonderful. (of course, intolerance needs to be defined properly first.)

    In this spirit, i hope more politically diverse opinions will be tolerated. I hope the media will give more coverage to different viewpoints. I hope serious discussions will take place on important issues: for example, the discourse on terrorism has been heavily skewed towards religious ideologies. While religious ideology is undoubtedly a factor, almost every major and serious research on terrorism states that other factors (foreign policy, socio-political conditions, loss of trust in authority etc) matter in radicalization too. Therefore, we must be tolerant of different viewpoints and discuss these issues openly and honestly. I further hope those with different standpoints will be met with reasoned argumentation, rather than the full force of the law.

    I truly hope, that we are indeed intolerant towards intolerance; whether it is religious or political.

    The second was by WP’s Leon Perrera, where he argued for a culture of diversity of opinions. Again, this would be a fantastic thing to have in our society. I hope WP will put its money where its mouth is: in the last parliament, there were occasions in which WP refused to take a stand on some issues or just ignored discourses that were going on in society, perhaps to not offend anyone and reach out to the median voter. I fail to see how keeping silent in important moments contributes to creating this culture.

    Hopefully, WP will truly exemplify the culture of diversity, not only by taking a stance on important matters, but by allowing its own members to take different positions on issues.

    If one is familiar with parliamentary speeches throughout the world, one would notice that they are often filled with grandiose plans and bombastic words, but unfortunately, with little outcome. One can only hope, that is not the case with these two promising speeches.

     

    Source: Walid J. Abdullah

deneme bonusu