Tag: Murali Pillai

  • Faulty Sigma Elevators Worries Residence Of Bukit Batok Skyline II

    Faulty Sigma Elevators Worries Residence Of Bukit Batok Skyline II

    They are new HDB flats with many owners yet to move in, but the lifts at one particular block are already experiencing technical problems.

    On Wednesday, some homeowners had just collected their keys to one of the three blocks at Skyline II at Bukit Batok Street 22 and were looking forward to seeing their new home.

    But they found that one of the four lifts at the 33-storey building was not working properly.

    The lifts are from Sigma Elevator, which has been banned from tendering for new HDB projects since October 2015 due to poor performance and installation delays.

    On Wednesday, Facebook user Robin Zhang posted on Skyline I and II’s Facebook page for residents that there were problems when he was using lift D at Block 296B at 10.30am.

    He said while going up to the 18th storey, the lift stopped suddenly. After going up and down several times, it stopped at the sixth storey.

    When the door opened, he almost fell out as the lift had stopped about 20cm above the landing.

    He added: “I was very scared and decided to use the staircase instead.”

     

    The TNP team used lift C and when we were at the 16th storey, the lift indicated it was at the seventh storey.

    Once out of the lift at the 16th storey, we pressed the buttons several times but the doors did not open.

     

    When contacted, Sigma Elevator Singapore said: “We are working to gather more information as quickly as possible. There is nothing more important to Sigma than the safety of our employees, customers and the people who rely on our products and services every day.”

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

  • Chee Soon Juan – The Chiam Issue: Why This, Why Now?

    Chee Soon Juan – The Chiam Issue: Why This, Why Now?

    Below are some frequently asked questions about Mr Chiam See Tong’s departure from the SDP and why we are raising the issue now. I answer them here:

    Why rehash the past over the split with Chiam See Tong? Aren’t there more important issues to discuss?

    Many of you are sick of this matter and you don’t want to hear any more of it. I agree. There is nothing that I would love more than to leave this episode behind and get on with the issues that really matter to our nation. This is exactly what we did during the general elections (GE) in 2015 and again at the by-election (BE) in Bukit Batok – campaigning on the issues that voters care about.

    It is the PAP that keeps dredging up the issue to attack me and the SDP. Take a look at the following:

    • Mr Chan Chun Sing: “Dr Chee then proceeded to betray Mr Chiam, isolate him and force him out of the SDP.” (January 2015)
    • Vivian Balakrishnan: “I have just one message to send to the SDP: In the PAP, we do not have a tradition of backstabbing our mentors.” (GE 2015)
    • Sim Ann: “Singaporeans of a certain age will know…how he ousted his mentor Mr Chiam See Tong from the party Mr Chiam had built.” (GE 2015)
    • The Straits Times: “[Grace Fu] added that it would ‘be very interesting’ to see if there would b referral letter from Mr Chiam See Tong, who had recruited Dr Chee into SDP years ago. Last week, Mrs Lina Chiam had said in a Facebook post that her husband had not given his endorsement to any candidate in the by-election.” (BE 2016)
    • Mr Heng Swee Keat: “This means a person can lie, cheat or betray someone with impunity…How are voters to believe what such politicians say or hold them accountable for their actions if they were running a town council?” (BE 2016)


    Any fair-minded person will conclude that it is not SDP who is rehashing the saga. The PAP will not let the matter rest because it is to its advantage if it can continue to use this falsehood to attack me.

    But as long as the PAP continues to resurrect the matter, the SDP will rebut the lies. We hope opposition supporters will help us disseminate this information and, in so doing, make it counter-productive for the PAP to rehash the issue.

    But didn’t the episode take place nearly 25 years ago? Is it still relevant to voters?

    A few residents in Bukit Batok raised the subject with me and my party colleagues during our recent campaign. A couple of them indicated that they would not have voted for me had I not personally explained the situation to them. How many more voters are out there who still don’t know the truth?

    As much as some people think that the SDP-Chiam episode is no longer an issue, there are many who – with the help of the PAP and the media – still think it is.

    As a political party fighting for every vote, clearing up the issue to ensure that we don’t allow our opponent to capitalise on a falsehood to sabotage our effort is the smart and right thing to do.

    But why now?

    As I mentioned, we did not counter the PAP when it raised the Chiam issue in GE 2015 and BE 2016 because we did not want the PAP to distract the voters from the real issues. But not doing so may have hurt our campaigns because there are voters who still believe that I had betrayed Mr Chiam and, because of this, would not vote for the SDP.

    This must change. We cannot wait until elections to counter the lies, we must start now. To prevent these untruths from being reinforced and spread further in future elections, the SDP will counter them whenever they are raised.

    Why not just bury the hatchet with Mr Chaim?

    We tried – repeatedly. The SDP has invited Mr Chiam on numerous occasions to our functions in the hopes that we can bury the past and move on (see here).

    A recent example was our invitation to him to attend our 35th anniversary dinner in August last year. We even approached him to be our guest at our rally during the BE in Bukit Batok. The Chiams turned down our invitations.

    We also published an article in our party newspaper written by Dr Wong Wee Nam about how Mr Chiam and the SDP nearly came together in 2015. But Mrs Lina Chiam interpreted that as the SDP trying to use the piece as an endorsement by Mr Chiam of me. We had no such intention, we only wanted to bury the proverbial hatchet and to move on.

    For the record, Dr Wong’s article was published in The New Democrat in June 2015. An online version of the piece was published on 2 April 2015 (see here). Why did Mrs Chiam raise it only nine months later during the BE – and on two occasions, one of which was published in the Straits Times during the cooling-off period?

    Are you attacking Mr Chiam?

    No, not at all. In fact, it has been quite the reverse. Mr Chiam declared in 1993: “He has not been thrust into my position. He has usurped my position!” More recently, the Straits Times reported that “Mrs Lina Chiam accused Dr Chee of ousting her husband from the party he founded in 1980.”

    Nothing could be further from the truth. When Mr Chiam resigned as the party’s secretary-general, I, together with other CEC members, tried to persuade him to remain. Even when he went to the Singapore Press Club to criticise us and left us little choice but to expel him, we still tried – right up till the very end – to see if we could effect some form of reconciliation.

    But rather than go on a he-said-she-said type of argument, it is best to cite what High Court Judge Warren Khoo wrote in his decision when he presided over the lawsuit which Mr Chiam took against the SDP:

    There were allegations in the pleadings of bad faith and of the defendants (SDP) acting maliciously in order to injure the plaintiff (Chiam See Tong). There were suggestions in plaintiff’s counsel’s questions put to the witnesses for the defendants that the object of the disciplinary proceedings was to make the plaintiff lose his seat in Parliament, that being the consequence of the plaintiff being expelled from the party. I do not think there is very much in these suggestions, having regard to the fact that the CEC even when they had decided to expel him were making efforts to seek a reconciliation with him.

    The truth is that I have always tried to effect a reconciliation with Mr Chiam. I tried it more than 20 years ago and I have tried it in recent times.

    The falsehood that I ousted Mr Chiam and usurped his position in the SDP has gone on for too long. It must stop. Remember, a lie, if repeated often enough, becomes truth.

     

    Source: www.cheesoonjuan.com

  • Police Report Made Against PAP Member, Rahayu Mahzam, For Alleged Racist Remarks

    Police Report Made Against PAP Member, Rahayu Mahzam, For Alleged Racist Remarks

    A member of the public, Mr Abdul Salim Harun has filed a police report on Ms Rahayu Mahzam, a Member of Parliament from the People’s Action Party for alleged racist remarks made on 5 May during the last PAP rally for the Bukit Batok By-Election.

    Mr Salim claims that Ms Rahayu’s remarks to have the potential to cause subversion among the minority community here.

    In the report, Mr Salim wrote,

    “On the 5th May 2016, during a Bukit Gombak stadium PAP rally, Ms Rahayu Mahzam insinuated in her Malay speech mischievously, that the opposition candidate Dr Chee Soon Juan is not only xenophobic, but all foreign Muslims who come into our shores needs to be screened vigorously and background checks judiciously. I feel that such comments especially from elected MPs can constitute subversion among the populace if left unchallenged and does not go well with societal norms and fabric. The 8 min 20 sec speech also constitute defamation as Dr Chee had not said any of such at all and its reach is alarming.

    I am lodging this report for record purpose and will be seeking legal advise on the matter. “

    He said that these remarks were “placed into” the mouth of Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) when he never said any of such things.

    During the campaign of the Bukit Batok By-Election, Dr Chee responded to media queries on his views on the arrest of 8 radicalised Bangladeshi workers under the Internal Security Act. In the interview, he said, “we need to pay more attention to the people who come into our shores.”

     

    According to Mr Salim, the offending comments said by Ms Rahayu are as follow and can be seen in the video below;

    1) Jangan membenarkan kemasukan Pekerja asing – Not allowing the entry of foreign workers

    2) Setiap orang Islam yang masuk ke Negara ini perlu dipantau/disaring – Muslims who entered this country needs to be scrutinised

    3) Mengambil peluang ini untuk menjadikan isu Politik – Taking this opportunity to politicise the issue.

    Mr Salim said that as a Malay who enjoys minority rights, he distances himself from such unwarranted attacks on a Chinese and furthermore, feel ashamed from the remarks.

    He further added that similar racist remarks were made against him on Fabrication about the PAP (FAP) Fanpage by a “Shawn Loo” last year which was condoned by the authorities and Judiciary.

    Mr Salim had volunteered his service with the SDP as a volunteer during the Bukit Batok By-election.

    TOC has written to Ms Rahayu for her comments and will include her response when she replies.

    policereport_PAPmp

     

    Source: The Online Citizen

  • Dr Tan Cheng Bock: By-Election Result Is Victory For Multiculturalism

    Dr Tan Cheng Bock: By-Election Result Is Victory For Multiculturalism

    A victory for Multiracialism.

    The results of the Bukit Batok by-election clearly show that a minority candidate can win an election on his own.

    This win by Murali is significant because he won his seat as a member of a minority race in a predominantly (75%) Chinese constituency. And the win is even more telling because it was won in a by-election. Recent past by-election results have not been in favour of the ruling party eg Ponggol East by-election.

    Apart from the many other factors that contributed to his win, an important observation was that, race did not affect his performance of 62%. It is a victory for multiracialism and a sign that voters are more discerning and colour blind.

    The fear that a minority candidate cannot win on his own, resulted in the creation of Group Representation Constituency (GRC) after GE1988. The setting up of this GRC was to address this early concern that minority races may not be represented in Parliament if Singaporeans vote along racial lines.

    This victory by Murali has put paid to this fear and should pave the way for the removal of any race-based politics in future.

     

    Source: Dr Tan Cheng Bock

  • Walid J. Abdullah: Murali’s Win Illustrates That Sinicization Important Pre-Requisite For Winning

    Walid J. Abdullah: Murali’s Win Illustrates That Sinicization Important Pre-Requisite For Winning

    I have seen opposition supporters trying to put a positive spin on the by-election.

    Honestly, whichever way you look at it, it was quite a disaster (but not an unexpected one) for the SDP and Dr Chee. This was a by-election, not a general election, so there was a greater chance for him. He was up against a minority candidate. And it was an SMC.

    If he could not get more than 40% of the votes considering these factors, honestly, he’d probably find it hard to win in any other contest.

    Perhaps then it is time for Dr Chee Soon Juan to consider stepping down. He can help build the SDP, but maybe, his time with regards to contesting elections should be up.

    Of course, it is easy for me to say all these. I am not the one who has fought my entire life against all odds, just for what i believe in. So i may not feel the need to hold on as much as him.

    As for our friend Ah Mu, congratulations are due. But more than that: scrutiny should also be applied. His attendance record in Parliament, the amount of time he spends in his constituency (visiting homes just during election period is not ‘walking the ground’), the promises he made during hustings: all these should be looked at closely by Bukit Batok residents and Singaporeans in general.

    And a word on race: Ah Mu, it is hard enough for minorities as it is, so when someone who is as successful as you feels a need to be known via a Chinese name, it really does tell the rest of us that perhaps, being sinicized is a prerequisite for success. So please, Ah Mu and future minority candidates, bear this in mind.

    I want to say that elections should henceforth be based on contests of ideas, and not personal attacks, but Singaporeans have shown that personal attacks are rewarded. So my point on this would be moot.

     

    Source: Walid J. Abdullah