Opinions

Pritam Singh from the Workers' Party (WP) has criticised the "glaring exemptions" of the government and public agencies from the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). Singh was of the view that this was a "lost opportunity at winning the trust of the public" and "does not cnform to the principle that the rule of law applies equally to all".

In response, Senior Minister of State for Law, Edwin Tong, pointed out that government can be held accountable in usual forums like the PAP.

Indeed, Pritam Singh, has pointed out a very glaring ommission. Why should the government fall outside POHA and why should the citizens not be protectted from any acts of doxxing or harassment by the government?

This would serve to reinforce the perception that the government is immune to laws and that these laws, as was articulated by Singh, do not apply equally to all.

The government is supposed to be one of the people, and for the people.

With this omission, it only serves to cement the notion that the government is above the people.

A Redditporean posted a reddit thread ranting about the three entitled elderly he met just this morning. You can read it here:

In the short span of this morning, I've had the pleasure of:

• having an auntie shamelessly cut in front of me in a queue (claiming she had only briefly stepped away to talk to her husband);

• witnessing an uncle hock a loogie into a public water cooler;

• enjoying some sweet-ass cheena edm mandopop remixes because some uncle decided to try out that dj career he's always dreamt of by cranking his phone's volume to 168% and gracing us with his beats.

[Tulan Tuesday Tirade] Entitled Elderlies from r/singapore

Other Redditporeans joined in and talked about their expereinces with entitled elderlies such as:

• Don't you just love it when an uncle walks into you and expects you to apologize?
• i feel you man. Last week a random auntie sat at my spot while i was eatnig without asking and started throwing away receipts, coupons and waste paper onto my table and walk off.
• two aunties and one uncle ganged up and forced me to give up my seat on the mrt when there were so many other people sitting down,,i wasn’t even on a reserved seat

So do you think elderlies in Singapore are getting more and more entitled? It is true that they are an elder generation and that we should respect them. But does that mean they can outrightly act like they own the world and order you to give up seats for them? Did youngsters not pay for the same transport fares as they did? Does it mean that just because you are young you would not get tired?

These are some questions for all of us to think about. I believe that yes, we should respect and help take care of the elderly. But that does not mean that they can rub it in our faces. Whether we choose to respect them or not is our own prerogative. And let's be real for a second here. Why should we respect them if they are disrespecting us in the first place? Respect does not come with age. Just because you are older doesn't mean you have a free pass to do and get anything you want.

Credits: Facebook

K Shanmugam told parliament today that there are no 'free passes' for university students for those who commit sexual misconduct.

Throughout academic years 2015/16 and 2017/18, there were a total 56 cases of sexual miscounduct reported to the autonomous universities, where 37 were eventually reported to the Police. Of these, 13 were given conditional warnings while two were given stern warnings.

Shanmugam reiterated the stance that Police take a case-by-case approach and excercise their discretion based on the unique facts of each case.

What is missing is further data to support the claims. Yes they have shown that there are cases where prosecution and jailing was meeted out to offenders from the universities. 

As a point of comparison, the Ministry of Education should also provide statistics on such cases involving non-university tertiary institutions, and how many of the perpetrators were charged or released with conditional warnings. 

Only then will the public be satisfied that the law does not favour one with better academic qualifications.

Earlier today, the Minister for Defence, Ng Eng Hen, released the COI findings into the death of local actor, Corporal First Class Aloysious Pang, to Parliament. Pang succumbed to the injuries he suffered during a reservist exercise in New Zealand.

The COI ruled out mechanical fault as a potential cause of the accident. Foul-play was also ruled out. 

It was believed that the incident occured due to safety breaches and compounded by the panic that set in. The COI detailed how Pang was not in a designated safe position before the barrel was lowered. Despite being urged to do so, Pang had dismissed the concerns and downplayed the possibility that he would be hit by the barrel. 

After Pang was hit by the barrel, the two servicemen with him did not react acccording to estalished protocols because they were gripped by panic.

It was unfotunate that Pang lost his life.

The picture painted by the COI would have been more complete with his inputs.

Let this be a lesson for all servicemen - your safety is of utmost importance. Don't take your safety for granted.

On 29 Apr 2019, only need small space to have sex minister Josephine Teo released her May Day message. In her message, she mentioned that the tripartite workgroup has reached a consensus to raise the retirement age beyond 62 and re-employment age to beyond 67.

Josephine Teo claims that this is a 'significant milestone' that will provide assurance to seniors who wish to continue working. 

How many of you actually wish to continue working at that old age? Wouldn't we want to enjoy our retirement earlier? The only reason why people need to work at an older age is because of the rising costs in Singapore which is also caused by our Government. They raise the costs, citizens suffer, they tell the citizens that things can get better if we continue working.

Is this what we really want? How many of us are already tired after years of working but have no choice but to do so?

As a netizen Melvin Tan put it in his meme, 'while WP uses #workersforlife to show solidarity with workers, PAP takes #workersforlife literally by raising the retirement age and work us for life".

Former PAP MP Inderjit Singh has lauded the PAP government on it move to combat fake news. He has, however, cautioned the government to address several procedural concerns and aim for a balance between combating fake news and upholding freedom of speech, in order not to lose the trust of the citizens. By doing so, Singh believes that Singapore can be an example for the rest of the world on how to manage the fake news menace.

Singh has a reputation for being an outspoken backbencher who was not afraid to speak out against PAP's policies. Nevertheless, despite his retirement, he remains a member of the party and will continue to speak on behalf of the party.

We can all agree that fake news needs to be addressed. The implications are potentially severe, especially when it comes to more sensitive matters involving race and religion. Spreading such fake news may be carried out by any member of the public, for various reasons. They can also be done by foreign parties, potentially through local proxies, to destabilise our country for their own benefit. Fake news is not a joke and combating it shouldn't be taken lightly.

That being said, the government has yet to demonstrate emphatically that it understands the difference between expressing an opinion, and perpetuating a false statement of fact. Singaporeans are concerned.

What compounds these concerns are also appeals procedures and processes that are not as independent as they can be, like what Singh himself had pointed out. At the very least, the appeals process and language have to be made more accessible and simple, and the appeals should be overseen by an independent committee not made of the government or civil servants.

Singapore may never achieve Singh's vision of becoming a beacon for the world in terms of handling fake news. However, there are tweaks that it can make to the process and scope of the bill, to win the trust of Singaporeans.