Friday, 3 August 2012

Watz Buzzing - 3 Aug 2012

Why I prefer the 80s & 90s

Before we begin proper, some caveats are in order, lest some amongst you accuse this article of not being an objective piece again and then set out to declare that you “disagree COMPLETELY” (yes, some actually did use CAPS), or that I need to stop smoking whatever I am smoking. Well, let’s just state categorically that this is a subjective commentary. A personal opinion rather than an objective argument. It’s like saying why I prefer a 1975 Toyota Celica to a brand new Corolla. From the feedback I got the last time out, I was wondering if people will soon be disagreeing with me for why I prefer tea to coffee, and chastise me in the process.



Also, to pre-empt those with much nationalistic fervour now that National Day is just round the corner, this is not an indictment against what Singapore is or will be. I like to recite my Pledge loudly with pride too. Perhaps, a nostalgic soliloquy that the past seemed better, but hardly a full-blown bitter gripe. If my Grandma can eulogise about the past, why can’t I?

Whew… only in Singapore must we state such detailed qualifications to prevent ourselves from incurring legal reprisal or public disdain. And so… 

read more

Housing woes of a single mother?

Amy and Mary (not their real names) came with Jane, a 35 year old unmarried single mother, who is staying in a shared 3-room HDB flat under the Interim Housing Scheme (IHS) with her 4 year old son and 55 year old mother.
Amy and Mary used to stay ia a homeless shelter, and are now staying in the IHS.

Jane pays $245 monthly rental plus utilities in the IHS.

Jane’s mother sold her 3-room HDB flat a few years ago because of her brother’s financial difficulties.

read more

Nation, city state, globalized-city : What will our future be?....

"You see, people in Singapore, they're pampered. They're not seeing how crowded Tokyo or Hong Kong or London or New York subway is. And therefore, they think it is very crowded. But Singapore has only 5 million. And I think if you plan it properly, I think we can live comfortably with 8 million" - TAN GEK YAP, NUS[Link]

I don't have to tell you what will happen if we listen to Tan Gek Yap. I take "pamper" to mean "enjoying a good quality of life" . Tan Gek Yap says we should be "less pampered" and learn to live with a population of 8 million. Why would a people want to "less pamper" themselves. If the purpose of having more people is not to deliver a higher quality of life then what is the purpose? We can't be emulating Tokyo, New York, London as an end in itself. There has to be a purpose in mind when we talk about growing our population.

When Paul Krugman received the Nobel Prize in 2008, there was a conspiracy theory that he was awarded it for political reasons - his left leaning views and support for Barak Obama. His Nobel Prize, however, had nothing to do with is ideas on income inequality and labor unions. 

read more 

High Court dismisses Hougang by-election case

Yahoo! News Singapore, 1 Aug 2012

The High Court has ruled against the application of Hougang resident Vellama Marie Muthu for a declaration that the Prime Minister does not have “unfettered discretion” in determining when to hold by-elections.

In a more than 50-page written judgement issued on Wednesday, Justice Philip Pillai concluded that “there is no requirement” in Singapore’s constitution to call elections to fill elected Member of Parliament (MP) vacancies. Full story


read more 

Court ruling on By Election case was expected 

No prizes for guessing that the Court rules that PM has the final say. If the judge had ruled otherwise, you can be assured that would probably be his last day on the job.

But then again, if the judge truly had ruled otherwise, PAP would amend the Constitution in double quick time to make sure PM still has the last say. Either way, the whole court case is just one wayang show.

For the ruling party, it was just a matter of procedure to show that PM has last say. For M Ravi, it was just another case where he could go round the international arena and say he is the only "brave" lawyer in Singapore to contest, bathing in the new found self glory. 

read more 


Aplication for Judicial Review on Prime Minister’s discretionary powers to call by-election dismissed

The High Court has dismissed an application by a Hougang resident to declare that the Prime Minister does not have “unfettered discretion” over whether and when to call a by-election.

The application by Madam Vellama Marie Muthu was dismissed by High Court Justice Philip Pillai.

In his judgment which was released today, Justice Philip Pillai noted there was no requirement in the Constitution to call elections to fill elected Member vacancies.

read more

Judge and Lawyer Talking Cock 

Now is the judgement a surprise? Yes? Did I hear you say Yes??? You also believe in Santa Claus and the Merlion legend! Did I hear you say No? Sorry, no prizes for you as there were 1001 cynics before you who thought so too.

There are 2 simple reasons why cleaner Vellama sure lose. OK, 3 reasons if you include this obvious reason - once she chose Mad Ravi as her lawyer, it is gone case. If she is crazy enough to take up crazy Ravi, then kaput is as certain as WP winning East Coast GRC the next time. The other reason is that in political cases where PAP's judgement, integrity and reputation is at stake and left to the court to decide, somehow, somehow, PAP always win. Always. Win. Maybe PAP's stand is so solid, or their lawyers always so steady, or other reasons you say, errr I don't know. Smirk. The house always wins!

The last reason is also very simple. Mad Ravi is talking cock. The constitution simply did not say that the election must be held within 3 months. The constitution says it is ASAP and what is ASAP only Tua Pek Kong, Allah, Jesus, Vishnu, and Harry Lee will know. Not a cleaner and a lawyer. 

read more 

Quote of the Day – Justice Philip Pillai 

"There is no requirement in the Constitution to call elections to fill elected Member vacancies," - Justice Philip Pillai

The much awaited decision of the Vellama Muthu versus the PM case is out. And it is now clear, a ruling by a high court judge, that according to the Constitution, there is no need to fill the vacancies of a constituency if it is empty for whatever reasons. And the judge also ruled that the PM has absolute discretion whether to call an election to fill the vacancy of an elected Member.

Is that the final answer? Apparently yes. Can make a call for help? An appeal against this interpretation of the law? I don’t think there will be any other interpretation unless the Constitution is amended. So the people would now have to live with a constituency without an elected MP if the bugger buzzed off during his term of office for some reasons until the PM decided otherwise. 

read more 

Verdict : Singapore Constitution Isn't that Democratic

Well, I have been waken from my political slumber once again and this time, it is really the most exciting and important happening that comes into my mind! I have long suspected that Singapore isn't a democratic country that all of us are made to believe by reciting our National Pledge everyday during our school time. Forget about the pledge which just state "Highfalutin" motherhood statements and ideas on "to build a democratic society". That pledge is after all, just for kids and teenagers to recite! How many of us, or the politicians who recite that pledge every time (only on National Day and election rallies), truly believe in all those Highfalutin ideas embedded in it? Stop kidding ourselves!

My suspicion that Singapore isn't and never was, a democratic society at all has been proven by a learned judge today. I am so happy that these mysterious doubts in my head have finally been cleared and solved. I have to thank this learned judge for his great effort in helping me to confirm that our Constitution wasn't really written with true democratic principles in mind. Let me elaborate here.

According to Todayonline report, the presiding judge of the Hougang By-Election case, Justice Philip Pillai, has declared that 

read more 

NTUC Making It Easy To Gamble

Near my house, on the top floor of AMK Hub, there is a very popular leisure outlet and I am not talking about the cinema. It is a NTUC Club or what is actually a very large jackpot room in the middle of a bustling town centre and very accessible to nearby residents.

It is packed with middle aged men and women as well senior citizens whiling away their leisure time at slots machines in the nice cool aircon comfort.

The doors are almost always close and to enter you need to show your member's card to the security personnel. A membership cost no more than ten dollars a month and they open late into the night to cater to their customers. 

read more 

This is getting boring

Lawyers of 51 men caught in the online vice ring sensation were waiting for the outcome of Howard Shaw's court case. Defence Counsel Josephus Tan opined the result will be "somewhat of a guideline for the rest of the cases to come".


Well, the 41-year-old grandson of the founder of Shaw Organisation and former Singapore Environment Council executive director was sentenced to 12 week's jail for paid sex with an underage girl. By comparison, the former principal of Pei Chun Public School was given 9 weeks' jail for a similar offence.

The difference is that the principal took his bitter medicine at one go, no excuses offered, while Howard's lawyer tried to argue there was "collusion and deceit" involved, and a custodial sentence for an offence which has no mandatory jail sentence or even a minimum fine would be "absolutely draconian". 

read more 

LGBTs tongue-tied on the definition of "consent"

LGBTs will argue that homosexuality is a matter of "sexual orientation". But when you tell them that argument can be used to justify pedophilia, bestiality and a whole host of other bizarre fetishes, they will quickly jump on the argument that in cases like pedophilia, bestiality etc, the other party has "no consent".

What the above means is that, for example, in the case of pedophilia, a young girl, say aged 14 or so, has no mental capacity to decide "yes or no" to sexual advances from a pedophile. But there lies the crux of LGBTs' (and Liberals) problem.

Firstly, "consent" is a matter of definition. Who is to define that a 14 year old does not have the mental capacity to decide yes or no? Secondly, there seems to be a direct contradiction on the part of LGBTs pertaining to "consent". If you recall, whenever the subject of Sex Ed is cropped up in schools, and when Conservatives wish to introduce the concept of abstinence as safest option, the LGBTs and Liberals will howl and the top of their voices, that parents should not interfere and these teens be allowed to decide for themselves. 

read more