Strip-trees.

This is something that NParks (or perhaps LTA) is prone to doing for reasons I would rather leave for them to provide. I can see very little reason why roadside trees are being striped of their ferns, orchids and other epiphytic plants.

Either NParks/LTA have not been doing their job in properly briefing their roadside tree maintenance contractors (to not remove such plants) or more likely, these organisations felt that it looked 'untidy' and so had them removed.

This is the before picture (taken back in 2003)


And this is the after picture (taken this year: 2012) WHY?


Again, what we are seeing is either rank incompetence or having the wrong people in the wrong jobs. Neat freaks should be put to work at the NEA to ensure our food courts and public toilets are kept clean and 'neat'.

Only in Singapore: Canopy Walk with no canopy.

You would think that it is not possible for NParks reputation to sink ever lower, but they still managed to surprise us. Incompetency apparently knows no lower limit. An irate user has written to the Straits Times forum a few days ago to complain that trees leading to the Tree Top Walk in MacRitchie Reservoir is being cleared away.

Apparently, this is to ensure 'safety' after a tree fell on an unfortunate SAF soldier at an army camp in another location sometime ago. This is an over-reaction bordering on the ludicrous if not criminally incompetent. One only hopes that the trees lining the Tree Walk hasn't been cleared away too. After all, what is the whole point of a Tree Walk if not to walk among the trees?

Shit happens. I mean, how many people get killed by falling trees? The only way to ensure it never happens is to chop down ALL trees. It is a good thing NParks staff do not run the health ministry. Otherwise, in order to prevent breast cancer, they would make it mandatory for all Singaporean women to undergo double masectomies. Sorry guys, no more fondling for you! To be fair of course, all Singaporean men will have to be castrated to prevent testicular cancer. In this case though, it would be an improvement. It would mean no more sex for favours cases or under-aged sex.

There is a canopy walk in Kent Ridge park. There too, the canopy has been removed. See picture below. The whole point of a canopy walk is to allow people to see what goes on in the canopies of trees. I cannot fathom the thinking behind the way NParks operates. Instead of being a custodian of our natural environments, it is instead a force for destruction. The way NParks has been operating is yet another visible symptom of the incompetency we increasingly see in public organisations.

At most, to mitigate the risk from falling trees, trees near enough to the walks could have guide ropes attached to their trunks in such a way that should the trees fall, it would be more likely for them to fall away from the walks. That would have been a sensible precautionary action.

Meanwhile, after multiple fatalities on our roads from supercars, the government has yet to impose a ban on such vehicles on our roads. I wonder why? Perhaps NParks should be put in charge of road safey instead!

Amputation. Do it slow or do it quick?

If your doctor tells you that your leg must be amputated, do you want to have it done quickly or to have it done slowly? As a sensible person, your first question would be: "Doctor, why must my leg be cut off?"

If your doctor happens to be the government, he will ignore your question and nstead tell you that to alleviate the pain of losing your leg, he will do it in stages, first cutting the skin, wait a while, then cut the muscle, wait a while longer and then cut through the bone. In between while waiting, presumably you will get used to hobbling along with a partially cut leg and so eventually get used to moving along without it.

This is the 'solution' proposed by the government for some stall holders of a few food centers who are facing huge (over two hundred percent in one case) increases in cleaning costs. The increases ostensibly is due to efforts to increase the income of cleaners. Well and good, but in order for such fee increases to be acceptable, the government needs to show in breakdown form, WHERE EXACTLY the fee increases are going.

Cleaners' welfare should not be used as a cover and opportunity to further pad the operators profit margins. As a patient, you have a right to know the reasons for a doctor's recommended procedure. For all we know, the doctor is being paid a commission from the company selling prosthetic legs and wheelchairs and there is a less drastic option than cutting off your leg!

Are we surprised by this 'solution' of staggering out the fee increases in stages? Nope. This is the same government that offers one time rebates for permanent increases in public transport costs. This is the same government that 'compromised' the destruction of a green space in Dairy Farm estate by reducing the condo development by two stories. (How does this save the green space?) This is the government whose solution to the building of an eldercare centre blocking the view and air circulation of Bishan residents is to plant trees to screen the building. (How does this improve air circulation? It's the building that is blocking air movement!)

One-off half measures to offset permanent cost increases and environmental degradation. The government might think that it has won by ramming through such 'fixes'. But each time they do it, they lose ever more of their credibility. I find it hard to believe that these otherwise seemingly sensible and capable people can spew out such complete illogical nonsense with a straight face without any hint of duplicity the moment they put on their government hats.

Bomb Maker or Bomber. Who is MORE guilty?

The answer is they are both equally guilty. But in the case of inappropriate comments posted on social media, it appears only the bomb maker is guilty. Those who planted the bombs and then set it off escape scot free and indeed are feted as heroes and guardians of public propriety. And if we continue to do so, the problem will never be solved.

Today's Straits Times showed a list of similar past incidents dating back to 2005. Has the authorities actions against such incidents in the past worked to deter further incidents? Obviously not. What will be the authorities action in this (Amy Cheong) incident be? Yet more of the same...

One does not accidentally stumble upon such a post on someone's personal social media site. Some of her supposed friends instead of privately messaging her about the inappropriateness of her posting chose to do a screen shot of it and distribute or otherwise publicise it outside of her personal site. What could possibly be the intention or motivation of such individuals?

If Amy Cheong's posts have 'elements of offence involving incitement to hatred' as some lawyers say, then those individuals who help to publicise it are no less guilty of a similar offence. If the authorities truly want to stop such inappropriate posts from going viral and possibly getting out of hand in the future, these individuals need to be arrested, charged and prosecuted as well.

Jail, fine and termination of internet access for people who publicise such postings will do more to deter future similar incidences than any punishment meted out ONLY to the original poster. One can only hope that the authorities will take such action. But if recent disclosures of incompetent behaviour up and down the line of public servants from front line staff all the way up to cabinet ministers are anything to go by, this can be nothing more than a vain hope.

I hope I'm wrong, but I, without any intention of blowing my own horn, will unfortunately usually be proven right. Just wait and see.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone

I'm surprised at the number of apparently sinless people living amidst us here in Singapore. It must be yet another one of our first in the world records. So Amy Cheong posted a racist rant on her blog and it appears almost everyone and their mother were scrambling over each other to proclaim their righteous disgust and make known their "I'm 'holier' than Amy Cheong" credentials.

If Amy Cheong is to be judged as being guilty of a socially unacceptable act, then everyone else who publicised her post, retweeted it, emailed it to their friends, reported it to the police is equally guilty. In cases of libel, reproducing the libellious content makes you equally liable to libel charges as the originator. If your neighbour's house is on fire and you added fuel and further fanned the flames, are you not guilty of making the situation worse even if you did not start the fire in the first place?

The blame for the increasing level of intolerance and exposition of extremist views and responses to perceived slights can be laid squarely at the door of the authorities. Their mistaken belief that by making examples of earlier bloggers of racist postings (highly publicised arrest and prosecution) would deter others have had the exact opposite effect. It had instead, spawned internet vigilantes ever on the lookout for the next opportunity to blow their own horn of moral superiority.

Racism, bigotry and discrimination like charity, begins at home. No one is immune. None other than our own ex MM LKY once asked the rhetorical question: "If your daughter were to bring home a black man (as a potential spouse), would you (as a parent) be happy?" (or something to that effect). Some may consider it racist, but no one ever to my knowledge, has accused him of it. Perhaps his daughter Dr Lee Wei Ling may want to write an article about it. It should be quite illuminating.

If the authorities REALLY want to solve this problem, they need to arrest those people responsible for spreading the original posting (at least up to the second level of reposting) and ESPECIALLY those who report it to the police. The authorities by reacting as predictably as they do are providing exactly what these internet vigilantes want: Notoriety. I mean, if one finds something offensive, why else would one help to spread it?

Unfortunately, as with other 'problelms' created by the authorities themselves, the answer will likely be to do MORE of the same. Like in the case of Singapore having a 'lack of land', so the solution is to bring in MORE foreigners. Our infrastructure is already bursting at the seams with a population of 5.3million, yet we have a population target of 6.1 million (for now...) Something is seriously out of whack. I wonder what it is....

SolidariNOT

Minister of State for Health Dr Amy Khor has been quoted as saying in a blog post that accepting eldercare facilities would be an "expression of solidarity with those advanced in years". Since when has solidarity have anything to do with eldercare?

No one disputes the necessity of facilities for caring of the elderly in our midst. It is WHEREthose facilities are to be sited. Dr Amy Khor herself has choked out on national television that one such facility (to be sited in Bishan Street 31) was constrained by the "scarcity of land". As it turned out, that facility will be built at that location despite local residents reservations after some "tweaking".

Urban planners when they design the layout of a community will plan for an appropriate mix of buildings and open spaces. Each of which serves a NEEDED function. Now, due to an apparently unanticipated need for eldercare facilities, an integral part of the original design is being sacrificed.

This isn't about solidarity. This is about living space, living environment and quality of life. When the occupants of the surrounding flats bought their units, they didn't buy them with the knowledge that one day their units would be blocked by an eldercare centre built right in front of their units. Is the government going to compensate them for the drop in their property's value? Property for which they are probably paying a 30 year mortgage for?

Dear Dr Amy Khor, if you expect these residents (and soon residents of another 100 other locations at least) to stand in "solidarity" with your plans, they would expect that you and your colleagues stand with them. We do not understand how on the one hand we need to make such sacrifices due to the "constraint of scarcity of land" and yet on the other, your Prime Minister could blithely state that we can "afford" a population of over 6 million.

For a start, perhaps you and your cabinet colleagues could make a veeery SMALL gesture of SOLIDARITY with your constituents: Voluntarily take public transport (buses and/or MRT trains) to and from work everyday. Surely this would not be too much to ask as this is a routine for over 90% of your fellow Singaporeans. You and your colleagues will then get to experience how the policies you've taken so much pains to convince your fellow Singaporeans to accept, first hand. And then in a further show of TRUE solidarity, to have eldercare facilities built right next to and in front of your own homes.

Are you and your colleagues with us (or not)? When we sing "Majulah Singapura", we want you to be marching with us, not hanging apart or worse, moving in the opposite direction. If you and your colleagues are truly with us, show it in deeds. Words are cheap, insincere words even cheaper. What say you Dr Amy Khor?