Blog

Elections Department: Lee Li Lian, Dennis Tan And Leon Perera Elected As NCMPs

Ms Lee Li Lian, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Leon Perera from the Workers’ Party have been elected as Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMP), the Elections Department (ELD) announced on Wednesday (Sep 16).

In a statement, ELD said three candidates who received the highest votes among the unelected candidates from Opposition parties will be declared elected as NCMPs, as six opposition MPs were elected to Parliament in the Sep 11 General Election.

Ms Lee, who contested in Punggol East SMC and Mr Dennis Tan, who contested in Fengshan SMC, received the two highest percentages of votes among unelected opposition candidates.

Ms Lee received 48.23 per cent of the vote against the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) Charles Chong, while Mr Tan garnered 42.50 per cent of vote against PAP’s Cheryl Chan.

WP’s East Coast GRC team – comprising former NCMP Gerald Giam, Mr Daniel Goh, Mr Mohamed Fairoz and Mr Leon Perera – who ran against PAP’s team anchored by Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say, gained 39.27 per cent of the votes. The group informed the Returning Officer on Wednesday of their decision to nominate Mr Leon Perera as NCMP, said ELD.

DANIEL GOH TO TAKE PLACE OF MS LEE AS NCMP IF PARLIAMENT RESOLVES TO FILL SEAT: WP

Ms Lee, who was elected MP for Punggol East following a by-election in 2013, had told the media after the results were announced that she is not inclined to take up a NCMP seat in Parliament if offered.

In a statement released shortly after the ELD announcement, the Workers’ Party said its Central Executive Council (CEC) concurred with Ms Lee’s decision not to accept the NCMP position.

The CEC said should Parliament resolve to fill the vacated NCMP seat left by Ms Lee, that Associate Professor Daniel Goh would fill that seat.

PARLIAMENT NOT OBLIGED TO DECLARE THAT SEAT BE FILLED

According to the law, if an eligible NCMP decides not to take up the position, the seat may not automatically be transferred to the next eligible opposition candidate.

In response to media queries, Parliament is not obliged to declare that seat be filled by the next succeeding candidate.
The ELD said: “The Attorney General is of the view that if any NCMP declared to be elected under Section 52 of the Parliamentary Elections Act fails to take and subscribe before Parliament the Oath of Allegiance under Article 61 of the Constitution at the first or second sitting of Parliament during its first session after the General Election, then Parliament may at its discretion declare that seat vacant. Parliament is not thereafter obliged to declare that seat be filled by the next succeeding candidate.”

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

September 17, 2015
Police Officer Fined $10,000 For Illegal Search On Computer System

A senior staff sergeant inspector who used the police computer system to do an unauthorised search for his brother-in-law’s girlfriend was sentenced to the maximum fine of $10,000 on Wednesday .

Kang Wei Chian, 40, had pleaded guilty to two of seven charges of computer misuse at Police Cantonment Complex in May last year.

The policeman with 22 years’ of good service had logged into the Frontline Officers’ Computerised System (Focus) to search for a unit in Tanglin Halt Road which his brother-in-law and his girlfriend wanted to buy.

They suspected that the unit might have been subjected to harassment from an unlicensed moneylender.

After doing a search and determining that there were no hits against the unit, Kang informed the girlfriend of his brother-in-law, that it was safe to buy.

Focus, which is under the Ministry of Home Affairs, allows police officers to lodge reports and carry out online searches for details of reports lodged by members of the public.

It also contains, among other things, personal information of complainants, victims and witnesses.

All police officers know that the system can be used only for official purposes.

Kang’s offences came to light in July last year after a supervisory audit check on Focus revealed several unauthorised screenings done by Kang.

The prosecution had sought four weeks’ jail for Kang, but his lawyer Daniel Atticus Xu had urged the court to impose a high fine or a short detention order.

District Judge John Ng said on Wednesday he was satisfied that what Kang had done was a “foolish act” rather than abuse of his power for nefarious activities.

“So I am satisfied that a custodial sentence is not necessary in this case,” he said.

The judge noted that there have been similar cases in the past where a non-jail sentence was imposed but a heavy fine.

“I am sure other police officers will be warned by what has happened today…what has happened to you. Unfortunately, you tried to help your wife.. and now your wife has abandoned you,” he said.

Kang, who has been suspended from duty, is undergoing divorce proceedings.

He could have been fined up to $5,000 and jailed for up to two years on each charge.

Source: www.straitstimes.com

September 16, 2015
Stupid Youngsters These Days Really Naive And Lack Trust

I spoke with some students today and really blood boil. What is wrong with youngsters these days, don’t know how to think?

They really believe all of the government’s bullsh*t! This is what I managed to pick out from my conversations with them:

Me: “absolute power corrupts absolutely”
A: “don’t worry PAPs track record is flawless, they won’t do anything wrong one.I put my trust in them”

Me: “why are the opposition bad?”
B: ” look at their track record? Look at ahptc? If they cannot prove themselves how to win?”

Me : ” what do you think of the 2 sides?”
Students ” PAP= very good. Opposition will ruin the country made up of useless people destroy the stability ”

Really is naive and myopic. Wait until they grow up and see people go through bread and butter issues as a result of gov policy then they will know the pain.

xing221
A.S.S. Reader

Source: www.allsingaporestuf.com

September 16, 2015
Former SPR: Error To Take Up Singapore Citizenship

Dear New Citizen,

You must be a very big and stupid moron. Why do you want Singapore citizenship? This is a very small island with no natural resources and limited space. Maybe you have been influenced by the good publicity the government has projected. Do you enjoy living like sardines in a tin can?

The cost of living is very high. A simple Japanese car costs S$130,000, the most expensive in the world and you only own it for ten years. It is very stressful living on this tiny island. Why let your children and grandchildren suffer and curse you in future?

Be realistic, ask yourself how long can Singapore sustain its economic achievement? We are at the mercy of big nations like China, USA and Europe. Anytime, we may sink.

If China decides to build the Kra Canal in Thailand or a highway across the Kra region, we are finished. Even if they open the sea route in the Northern Hemisphere around the North Pole, we are finished.

If the US and other European countries decide to move their MNCs back home or to other cheaper countries which are catching up fast, we are also finished.

We cannot compete with India or China or even Indonesia or Philippines in terms of labour for manufacturing. Technologically, we are just poor copycats with no real inventions of our own. The only thing we can boast of right now is building oil rigs but once the Chinese or South Koreans decide to undercut us, we are finished.

And to add to that we have no freedom to express ourselves. We cannot protest in public. Some Singaporeans have been jailed for 32 years without any trial at all for disagreeing with the government, longer than Nelson Mandela in prison.

Actually most of us locals realise our weaknesses and hope to have a chance to migrate to larger countries where the cost of living is lower overall and there is plenty of living space.

I think you have been conned by the PAP Ministers who draw salaries which are higher than President Obama’s and who can easily relocate to larger countries like the US, Britain or Australia when the time comes.

You have indeed made the biggest mistake in your life by becoming a Singapore citizen.

Former Singapore PR

* Submitted by TRE reader.

Source: www.tremeritus.com

September 16, 2015
Sentosa Rape: Prosecutors – Accused Poured Liquor Into Victim’s Mouth

A former lifeguard at Sentosa allegedly poured liquor into a partygoer’s mouth and then raped her at the beach when she was unconscious, said a witness at the High Court on Tuesday (Sep 15).

A friend of the victim who had accompanied her to a beach party at Wave House, both of whom cannot be named to protect the victim’s identity, took the witness stand on Tuesday.

According to the witness, she had drinks with the victim and the accused, Pram Nair, 26, on the night of May 5, 2012. Nair was a lifeguard at Sentosa then.

The witness claimed that Nair poured liquor from a Cointreau bottle directly into the victim’s mouth for 20 seconds, and that he suggested doing so because the victim was 20 years old.

In the opening of the prosecution’s case last month, Deputy Public Prosecutor Bhajanvir Singh said the victim was introduced to Nair at the party.

At one point, Nair, who is represented by lawyer Peter Ong, allegedly took the intoxicated victim to the beach and raped her, he said.

Prior to the alleged incident, the witness said she had tried looking for the victim to leave the party and found Nair supporting her as she looked “really drunk”. Nair then told her to grab the victim’s bag but the witness could not find them when she returned.

WITNESS FOUND VICTIM “PASSED OUT” ON BEACH

The witness called the victim on her mobile phone multiple times but no one answered. When someone did pick up one time, no one said anything on the other end, she said. She called again, and this time Nair picked up and told her they were at the beach and she need not go look for them.

But the witness still headed to the beach and found the victim “passed out” there. She was wearing only a tank top and could not respond to anything the witness was saying. She also claimed that Nair was rummaging through his bag near where the victim was found and threw her a pair of shorts to put on the victim.

The witness said the victim was not very coherent by then and claimed that the victim had asked her to call her boyfriend or another man called Jeremy.

When the victim started foaming at her mouth, the witness said she called for an ambulance.

WITNESS “UPSET” THAT ACCUSED SHOWED NO INTEREST IN HER: DEFENCE

During the defence’s cross examination of the witness, Mr Ong challenged her statement and claimed that the witness had been the one who suggested that the liquor be poured directly into the victim’s mouth for 20 seconds.

He then disputed the duration of that particular incident, saying that the liquor was only poured for one to two seconds.

Mr Ong also questioned the witness’s conclusion that the victim was raped by Nair when the witness did not see him doing anything. He also suggested that the witness was upset that Nair had not shown interest in her and hence accused him of raping the victim.

The witness on Tuesday disagreed to the above challenges made by the lawyer.

The trial continues on Wednesday and if convicted, Nair ccould be jailed up to 20 years and fined or caned.

Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

September 16, 2015