Rilek1Corner

Tag: Singaporeans

  • Fairprice The First And Only Retailer Offering Tesco Products In Singapore

    Fairprice The First And Only Retailer Offering Tesco Products In Singapore

    Consumers here do not need to travel  to the United Kingdom to get their hands on products from British food retailer Tesco.

    Local supermarket chain FairPrice is offering over 400 Tesco products at close to 60 of its outlets and at its online store, under a partnership with Tesco officially announced on Wednesday (July 26). It is the first and only retailer offering Tesco products in Singapore.

    FairPrice starting introducing  a small range of Tesco products two years ago and is doubling the range of products and the number of outlets which offer the brand.

    The expanded range includes Tesco finest – the premium version of the brand – with products such as Fair Trade certified coffee, authentic Italian pasta from the Italian city Gragano, traditional British biscuits and a large selection of quality wines.

    FairPrice chief executive Seah Kian Peng said the partnership with Tesco “will help boost our ongoing efforts in catering to the changing lifestyles and tastes of our customers”.

    Chief executive of Tesco in Asia Tony Hoggett said: “With FairPrice’s local expertise and Tesco’s track record of sourcing great quality products from around the world at affordable prices, we are confident that together we can offer unrivalled quality and value to shoppers in Singapore.”

    FairPrice also launched a new “store-in-store” concept at its FairPrice Finest outlet at Bukit Timah Plaza.

    A space within the outlet has been set aside as a Tesco finest store, featuring about 150 specially curated Tesco products exclusive to the outlet, including the widest selection of Tesco wines available in Singapore.

    FairPrice will  expand its range of Tesco products to include a greater variety of packaged and chilled food.

    Besides Tesco, FairPrice also carries products by other international retailers including American retailer Costco’s house brand Kirkland and European food retailer Delhaize.

     

    Source: http://www.straitstimes.com

  • Gilbert Goh: PAP’s Main Motive For Suing WP’s Three MPs Probably To Stop Them From Standing For Next General Election

    Gilbert Goh: PAP’s Main Motive For Suing WP’s Three MPs Probably To Stop Them From Standing For Next General Election

    Let’s support the Workers’ Party as the PAP seeks to destroy and bring down the opposition party here. They can’t unfortunately ownself clear ownself like our PM did three weeks ago in Parliament.

    The PM’s own ward Ang Mo Kio Town Council also faced similar alleged corruption but the case was easily settled out of the public scrutiny when the town council general manager was relieved of his duties last year and dismissed without implicating the MPs.

    Its also a important distraction tactic as the government faces a host of its own problems involving the PM’s own abuse of power allegation by his two siblings which he has cleared himself in Parliament and the Malay-only Presidential Election.

    The PE which will take place in September has hurt the feelings of alot of our Singaporean Malays and put the government on a back-foot for the past few weeks as it struggles to properly address the racial legality of their preferred Indian-Muslim candidate Halimah.

    As for the lawsuit against the three WP main figures, if it involves corruption, the goverment should bring in the CPIB to investigate WP but it has instead threw the legal law book at the opposition party which will give the issue wider smear publicity.

    By appointing Philip Jeyeretnam son of WP’s founder father JB Jeyeretnam to preside over the case, it has also stir up much sentiments against the former founder’s son who now works for the government.

    Its vintage PAP’s distraction technique at its best to sue the WP now when the government has also faced many Accounting-General Office’s official complaints for the past 3 years into financial irregularities for many of its own statutory boards and civil services.

    Nothing is believed to have being done to properly investigate and clear the irregularities as the same financial problem is being re-flagged the next year. Should we not also sue the government for improper handling of our millions of taxpayer money?

    If the WP’s three MPs are found guilty by our court system, they are likely to be heavily fined and may not be able to stand for the next general election – probably the PAP’s main motive for suing them now.

    Let us support WP for the sake of our opposition cause!

     

    Source: Gilbert Goh

  • Good NS Performance Will No Longer Be Taken As Mitigating Factor For Sentencing Defaulters

    Good NS Performance Will No Longer Be Taken As Mitigating Factor For Sentencing Defaulters

    How well a national service (NS) defaulter performs in his duty when he eventually serves should have no bearing when deciding his punishment.

    This was made clear yesterday by the High Court as it laid down fresh sentencing benchmarks for NS dodgers.

    The benchmarks also “amplified” punishments for those who default for longer periods since it affects their fitness for service and the time they can serve as reservists.

    The three-judge panel, led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, set out four sentencing bands based on the length of default.

    For those who evade NS for two to six years, the starting point is two to four months’ jail; for seven to 10 years, it is five to eight months’ jail; and for 11 to 16 years, it is 14 to 22 months’ jail. For cases involving those who evade for 17 to 23 years or more, the default jail term kicks off from two to the maximum of three years.

    The grounds of decision were related to the cases of three defaulters, who were given heavier sentences in April after the prosecution appealed.

    Explaining its decisions yesterday, the panel rejected key parts of the sentencing benchmarks laid out by Justice Chan Seng Onn in February last year, when he sentenced a 25-year-old to three months in jail for defaulting for more than six years, and then gave a 1½ month discount for his good performance in NS.

    The panel agreed with Justice Chan that the main factor in determining an NS dodger’s culpability is the length of time he defaulted, and that anything over two years should mean a jail term. This, the court said, is because he would start serving only after his peers had completed their duty.

    But, among other things, the court disagreed that the sentence should be calibrated based on whether the defaulter has a substantial connection to Singapore, that a discount should be given on the accused pleading guilty instead of claiming trial, and that exceptional NS performance should be a mitigating factor.

     

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

  • SDP Urges President Tony Tan To Revoke Lucien Wong’s Appointment As AG

    SDP Urges President Tony Tan To Revoke Lucien Wong’s Appointment As AG

    The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has refused to look into Dr Lee Wei Ling’s and Lee Hsien Yang’s allegations that PM Lee Hsien Loong had abused his powers and made false statements in Parliament.

    In its reply to the SDP on 21 July 2017, the AGC said that it “does not undertake investigations into the matters alleged in the letter. The persons who are the subjects of any criminal offence alleged to have been committed may lodge a police report.”

    This is a curious, if not altogether hypocritical, stance. The AGC recently indicated that it would “look into” Mr Li Shengwu’s private Facebook posting which criticised the judicial system even though there was no mention that anyone had made a police report against Mr Li.

    Surely, if the AGC could “look into” private Facebook messages, it can look into the serious accusations of the abuse of power by the Prime Minister.

    Also, in 1997, then AG Chan Sek Keong had investigated the matter of Mr Goh Chok Tong and other ministers entering polling stations on voting day even though they were clearly not authorised to do so.

    As in the 1997 incident, the “persons who are the subjects” of the alleged offence are the people of Singapore. If AG Chan – despite his inane answer that Mr Goh and company had not committed an offence as they were inside the polling station and not waiting outside it – could investigate the incident, surely AG Lucien Wong can investigate the present matter.

    The added problem, of course, is that AG Wong was the PM’s personal lawyer prior to his appointment. This crucial fact was not disclosed to the public at the time the appointment was made.

    Given the situation, the SDP has written to President Tony Tan to revoke Mr Lucien Wong’s appointment. Under Section 22(1) of the Constitution, the President is empowered to do so.

    Mr Lucien Wong was sworn in as AG on 16 January 2017. However, the fact that Mr Wong was the PM’s personal lawyer was revealed to the public only in June 2017. The President may not have been aware of this fact or its full implications.

    The association of Mr Wong with PM Lee prior to his becoming the AG has created an acute conflict of interest which cannot be ignored. It is important that President Tan does the right thing in the interest of the people of Singapore and revoke Mr Lucien Wong’s appointment as AG.

    Any further delay or refusal to act will cause even greater erosion of confidence in our public institutions.

     

    Source: http://yoursdp.org

  • Aljunied-Hougang Town Council Takes Legal Action Against WP Town Councillors Over Past Payment

    Aljunied-Hougang Town Council Takes Legal Action Against WP Town Councillors Over Past Payment

    Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC), which had appointed an independent panel to help recover improper payments, is taking several of its town councillors to court.

    They include Workers’ Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang; the town council’s chairman, Mr Pritam Singh; and its vice-chairman, Ms Sylvia Lim.

    The Straits Times understands that the legal action was initiated as part of the work of a panel tasked with looking into improper payments made by AHTC.

    Ms Lim confirmed that the three WP MPs were served with a statement of claim against them by AHTC on Tuesday (July 25) evening.

    “We will respond further shortly, after we have studied the claim,” she told ST.

    The independent panel has the power to commence legal action on behalf of the town council for overpayments and payments without proper certification of work being done, among others. This can include mediation, arbitration and other court proceedings.

    The panel’s other powers include making demands and coming to settlements on behalf of AHTC.

    The Housing Board had asked AHTC to appoint a third party to recover the improper payments made from town council funds.

    The independent panel appointed in February is chaired by senior counsel Philip Jeyaretnam, and comprises senior counsel N. Sreenivasan and KPMG managing partner Ong Pang Thye.

     

    A pre-trial conference date of Aug 31 has been listed.

    Besides this case, AHTC also filed another writ of summons in the High Court against FMSS last Friday.

    This was in relation to an arbitration case over a financial dispute emerging from the lapses at the town council.

     

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com