Light at the end of the tunnel please

When it comes to tragedy, I’ve always thought TNP would be one-up on the rest. I turn to it for pictures, graphics and good story-telling. So it was with the tunnel collapse today. Except that I couldn’t make head or tail of the graphics. Where were the  workers standing? What wet cement? In this instance, ST had a much better graphic . So the two men who died were under the roof when the scaffolding gave way? The concrete was being poured into the mould for the roof? So they were buried in wet concrete? And they weren’t  supposed to be  there, were they? So why were they there in the first place?

I suppose that’s  an unfeeling question. What a way to die! But it’s worth looking into whether safety rules were breached on this particular aspect. I mean, I’m sure investigations will look at whether the scaffolding itself was a problem and could not hold the load. And the usual fines and punishments will kick in. But it could have collapsed and NO ONE would have died if everyone is where they should be.

I must say I am full of praise for the SCDF fellows who had to themselves suffer chemical reactions when digging through the wet concrete. I wonder why they had to use their hands though. No trowel? Small point. But hey, good on our SCDF boys!

Another point: Notice that the injured were sent to the private Raffles hospital?  Good that steps have been taken to get them to the nearest hospital than a public one further away.

Deducing the deductible

The CPF system is quite a wonderful thing. Money comes in and moves mysteriously among the different accounts. Want to buy a house? Check your CPF. In hospital? Check your CPF. Need to pay your kid’s university fees? Check your CPF. If only the interest rate was higher…

It’s always good NOT to take cash out of your wallet – that you have money somewhere to pay for some important thing. That’s why the announcement on Medishield changes should make everyone sit up and look carefully at the figures. Because it DOES mean you take more cash out of your wallet.  I’m talking about the deductible, that amount you have to pay on your own before the insurance kicks in for the rest. It’s gone up from $1,000 to $1,500 for C Class patients and from $1,500 to $2,000 for B2. Seems a lot of cash…But the examples that have been given in the media don’t  seem to fit. The fictitious Mr Chin paid just $40 cash in co-insurance (what is this?) and deductible for a hospital bill of $6,000 plus. That’s not much at all. The kidney dialysis patient has $1,800 medical bill a month of which $1,000 is paid by Medishield, NKF pays $500 and he pays $300. What’s the deductible here? $800?

I know insurance is a complicated business. I’ll wager that most times, we get the hospital bill and quickly look at what’s out of pocket that we would have to settle without doing the maths behind the bill. It’s good that the limits have increased etc, and  that there will be top-ups to help pay for premiums, but it’s worth enlightening people about that portion that they would have to pay when they are in hospital so that they can always try to keep some cash in hand.

Scandalized

When I was a news editor, I was terrified of running foul of the courts. How far do you go in criticising a conviction or a sentence? Do you let people mouth off about a sentence being too light, too heavy, or to use that loaded word “unfair”? I wouldn’t even let through comments that one party is going to appeal the conviction or the sentence. Appeal first, THEN we publish. There’s another more prosaic reason: If you say you’re going to appeal,  it’s incumbent upon the media to report that you did NOT appeal. And tell readers why not… You know how many people say things in the heat of the moment in the aftermath of a case?? Too many.

The judiciary is  a strange animal (I’m not scandalising the judges with this metaphor, I hope!) I mean, you can slam the Infocomm Development Authority or that much-beseiged LTA for fines that are too paltry, but hey, careful with the courts because you might be in contempt! People in the media have heard the arguments before: Protect the integrity of the institution. Remember the judges can’t  defend themselves. I’m fine with the first, but the second…aaah, the judges haven’t been sitting  on their hands, have they? They have avenues too, and some have criticised outside comments during the course of hearings (I’m really, really  sorry but I cannot recall specifics beyond remembering turning pale whenever a court reporter returns to the newsroom with the judges’ jibes) There’s the CJ’s speeches at opening of the Legal year and other legal functions. So the judges aren’t quite poor defenceless creatures.

There’s this other thing that I used to worry about – subjudice. You know, giving details of some crime that hasn’t gone before the courts yet. I remember admonishments from the G when some  details were given away – not intentionally but neglectfully. The  reason was that we shouldn’t be influencing the judge before the case is heard. Frankly, I wouldn’t think that a judge would be influenced by what’s written in the press….I mean, this  is  not a jury system with ordinary laymen who can be swayed….But I would draw the line at convicting  a  person before a trial has begun or mid-way. Or calling a crime a  murder when it hasn’t been ascertained as such with all its legal implications. Someone died, my dear. He was killed. Could be  accident, could be suicide, could be murder. It’s  the courts’ business to decide.

Now of course, you get details on the Internet, video, photos and  all. And opinion too. The G would be hard-pressed to bring everyone to book for subjudice. In fact, plenty of times I thought the media would get into trouble for giving too much away but it seems that the G is more relaxed about this.

Actually, that’s  what I am not comfortable with: You never quite  know when the G will decide to draw the line, at which point, over what case.  So it’s natural to err on the side of caution: Say nothing at all and  you will be safe. Which is bad. If you want to say something, you better have some justification for doing so. Criticise the action, not the man. And don’t go generalising stuff from a single incident or event.

I think Alex Au went overboard calling the judiciary biased by using the Woffles Wu case as a jumping off point. As for him misleading readers with his analysis of the charges against Wu etc, frankly, I find  the whole  thing pretty complicated too. So Wu was charged under Road Traffic act because the underlying offence was not  serious, rather than the Penal Code. But the layman doesn’t care about his supposed drink driving  or speeding or that he hasn’t hurt or killed anyone. It’s the aftermath – the old man who took the rap for him (supposedly) – that bothered readers. It’s THIS ACTION that they find unconscionable. No amount of explaining by the  G about this section or that section or  this precedent or no precedent is going to wash with the public. Given the weight of public opinion, a heavier emphasis should be given to attempts/alleged attempts (I’m being careful here…) to cover up (allegedly) a (supposed) crime, no matter how big or small. It’s a signal for future such deceptions.

You know, I keep wondering  why no grounds of judgment was issued  on the Woffles  Wu case by the judiciary. I suppose the case is too small as  it’s  just a Road Traffic thing… Well, it is my considered opinion that there should be a judgment in light of public interest. Break precedent and tell the public how it came to be that Woffles got off with a fine.  Maybe address some points made by the public on treatment of rich and poor (yes, I know the judges will say all men are treated equal – but good to hear from them lah). Maybe  that will clear the air a bit.

I hope the judiciary isn’t scandalized by my comment. Because if it is, it’s my turn to be scandalized.

Changi’s double size

I don’t  know about you but I did a double-take (raised eyebrows included) when I read ST’s front page headline: Land for Changi to double size. Immediately I thought more reclamation works would  be done for the eastern part of Singapore and my next thought, wow, McDonald’s up size my meal has really caught on!

I suppose when someone says Changi, you know immediately that it’s about the airport? I’m not sure. There are so many foreigners here as well and Changi is a place. Wouldn’t it better to say its the airport since we only have one? And is it natural to read “double” as verb? Seems to me it should just read Airport land to expand. Anyway, minor point.

I couldn’t understand the point about increased number  of flights outpacing percentage increase in passenger traffic. So it’s14.5 per cent more flights last year against, say, a corresponding 10 per cent rise in passenger numbers…? I’m a bit dumb but what does this signify?  That planes not carrying enough passengers? Sigh. Too hard for me to work the maths….

LawSoc should get its house in order

It’s a bit RICH for the Law Society to hammer others on the M Ravi case when it should be apologising for not keeping its own house in order and therefore causing this “disturbance”. So now  we hear that the so-called Law Society “representative” went to court with the doctor’s letter on his own volition and its statement that the Law Soc had initiated the proceedings was wrong (I don’t remember reading this in the media by the way). But…sheesh! What kind of outfit is the LawSoc running when one  of its own can go running  to the courts armed with a letter to the LawSoc? Was the “representative” Wong Siew Hong really so silly as not to even keep any of the  LawSoc bosses informed that he was going to do so? Surely, there are procedures in place in the LawSoc before any lawyer can go running to the courts or come up with a statement on behalf of the LawSoc? So, I say Mr Wong Meng Meng: Go shoot your own messenger.

PS. I am intrigued by the dates. So Calvin Fones examined M Ravi on July 14, according to the ST timeline? And not in May, as was in that screen grab of the  letter that TNP re-produced yesterday? So the screen-grab was a fabrication? Or I’m blind or what? Sheesh. Can someone make this clear? No need for any more muddle please.

Beer talk

I have always appreciated journalists who have fun with their writing because it makes their stories so much easier to digest – or in this case, swallow. I’m talking about BT’spage 1 lead today on Mystery buyer seeks big swig of F&N and APB. The  intro is cliched enough about something  “brewing”. But there were little bits within the story which made me smile. Like how Japanese beer maker Kirin has “popped up” on the  scene and seems to be making aplay for the shares held by OCBC and its subsidiary Great Eastern Holdings. Speculation being “corked” and discussion that have been “canned”. (I didn’t know that F&N and APB make wine though…)Japanese companies having a habit of “swallowing” others.

Here’s a few others of my own – OCBC is frothing at the mouth, and Kirin’s cup will runneth over if it wins the bid and rival Heineken will be left with the bitter taste of failure. Or is this all a slip between the cup and the lip on my part?

Cheers!

The curious case of the doctor

I saw something interesting in The New Paper today. It had a screen grab of the letter that DrCalvin Fones wrote to the Law Society about lawyer M Ravi’s mental state. It was dated July 16, that is, the day of the by-election hearing. BUT he examined the patient on May 16 – a whole two months before. Makes you wonder why the good doctor waited so long before deciding to write to the Law Society. And why he picked such a critical day – critical to this citizen, at least.

Then there was the statement the doctor made that Mr Ravi had been having a  relapse over the past two weeks. So that makes it early May, when he first started making his case about whether  the Prime Minister can order a by-election at will. What’s happening?

The LawSoc rep, armed with the doc’s letter,  tried to address the court before the hearing – why? So the judge can make an instant decision on whether to hear the  case? It turns out the letter was handed in after and so got to hear the arguments on both sides.

What happens next? I hope the good doctor can explain his time lapse. Then I wonder what the judiciary will do now. Meet the doctor? Decide that what has happened in the past two months, including yestderday didn’t take place? Null and void? Send Ravi to IMH?

Whatever happens next, I certainly hope there will be a decision made  on the by-election rules. If not, the better forum is Parliament. Surely, MPs on both sides of the house want to know what happens to the people who elected them to serve in the unfortunate event that they conk out?

Drama at the Asean House – Finale

The story continues….

For the first time since the clan was formed 45 years ago, they didn’t hand out a farewell note – and the host of the  Asean Phnom Penh open house, Cambodia, is LIVID. He looks fit to explode, berating ”some” family members for sabotaging the joint communique which would have listed what the elders had decided at the meeting. These people are only interested in getting their own way on the South China Sea, he complained. Holding the communique “hostage” to their bilateral interest, was how he put it.

Who do they think they are?  We’ve got like 100 over good things to say and they are unhappy over just one point and because of these jokers, we can’t issue the farewell note? Irresponsible! Disappointing! Anyway, that’s about the gist of his complaint. Imagine this said in long-winded Khmer, repeated ad nasuem…and badly translated into English.

He said this after every relative had left the house, which is now a thorough wreck. Minor and major relatives had been up all night and the morning, talking at breakfast, lunch, coffeebreak etc trying to get everyone to agree on the words of the joint communique. Alas, it was not to be.

The gloves came off. The Cambodian is pissed because people think it’s HIS fault. He’s chairing the meeting and he is clearly on China’s side, so of course, he wouldn’t want anything down on paper about the South China Sea that would make the Chinese look bad.

The Cambodian is practically yelling now: It’s not my fault! How can you say this? Don’t you remember it was me who started ball rolling 10 years with the Declaration on the Code of Conduct? That was a fine piece of work. It had everything, legal and political principles that say everybody must behave by international maritime law…Now these Filippinos! And these Vietnamese! They want to complicate everything…. Asean is not a tribunal you know. Anyway, its between China and the Vietnamese, and China and the Philippines.

Actually what the Filippinos and Vietnamese want is to have some “newish” words put in the communique: Scarborough Shoal (the P says it’s theirs), continental shelfs and exclusive ecomic zones (where all that oil is). The Cambodian doesn’t think they should be in….

The Philippines isn’t taking this lying down. Deplorable! And how can that Cambodian blame it on us? All we wanted is for some facts to be put in! We should be tackling the issue as a team! But the Cambodians are listening to the Chinese….What the…!

So the Asean house is a total shambles, a failure? So much for Asean unity…

The Cambodian gets angry: Who says it’s a failure?  We agreed on everything else you know

The Asean guardian, the Secretary-General, is diplomatic: It’s a hiccup, he says. These things happen. Points of inflection. We need to do some soul-searching. We had a unique situation. (He’s a master of the art of words which can mean something or nothing)

The Singaporean was sharper: Failure? That’s your word, not mine.

But the Singaporean, who has kept out of the cross-fire, says the Asean image is taking a knock. Dented. Elders are going back to their own leaders with nothing to show after so many days spent together…That communique was to have covered so many things, connectivity, economic integration, cross-border partnerships etc. Then it gets passed to the Asean leaders and the secretariat for work to get done. The ministers, even if not the meeting, “failed”, he said.

The Asean sec-gen calls it a “void” between now and maybe September, when there is a chance for the elders to meet again at the sidelines of a UN conference in Geneva.

Seriously, why not have the communique without those three offending words South China Sea? There are after all, 100-over points to make – and to get down to work on to get the goal of an Asean Community by 2015. The Cambodian himself said he couldn’t understand why not. Seems perfectly reasonable to leave that bit out and settle it separately at a later date. But apparently, other relatives think that such a ”censored” communique wouldn’t reflect accurately what went on during the meeting. So it’s all or nothing.

The Asean consensus: Okay, nothing then….

Some elders left last night. There were only five left when the Open House drew to a close today Friday 13. The Cambodians were happy to be rid of everyone, it seems. The gong bangers, always a hungry bunch, thought there would be lunch back at the workplace. But all the stuff had been cleared away….No communique. No lunch.

STORY ENDS HERE

2nd last episode of Drama at the Asean House

The story continues….

The quarrelling among the Asean relatives continues and it’s got so bad that they can’t even agree on what to say in their farewell note. It’s the first time something like this has happened. The Cambodians who are leading this open house still don’t want to piss off the Chinese, while the Philippines still wants to tell the world about what happened in the South China Sea. The Indonesians have stepped in: Hey, hey, we’ve got to agree on something okay? At least to say we enjoyed the food…But no. They can’t even agree that they liked the food.

Funny how in the past, people have criticised the Asean clan for its farewell notes. They are bland, bland, bland. That’s because the family  trys to come up with something everybody is comfortable with – and that means the language gets watered down just to satisfy the most unhappy member of the clan.

The sticking point is the South China Sea and how to manage the dispute over who owns what part. The Chinese want nearly all of that part of the world but Vietnam and the Philippines (as well as quieter members Malaysia and Brunei) don’t want to give up their parts. Vietnam has drawn up its own title deed allowing outsiders to come in and take a look at the oil down in the sea. The Philippines is upset at how their fishermen in their sampans keep bumping into the Chinese junks.

The Chinese aren’t budging at all. The area is theirs, they say. By ancient right, they say. We can talk about it, they say, but ultimately we have to talk about it one-on-one. We don’t like that Code telling us that if anyone doesn’t behave, we should go international and get others to decide over our property. Hey, we’re CHINESE!

The Americans are getting antsy, pulling aside the Chinese to talk to them. They are  on the Asean side, or rather on the Philippines side:. Don’t try using force or threatening the poor little fellows ok? You’ve been scaring them, banning Philippines bananas and all that….And those boats of yours moving in the area, you say they are not navy but they might as well be…We know you’re a big boy but we’re bigger. Okay, a little bigger…We want the South China Sea open and we’re here to stay in Asia. So don’t try anything funny.

Both the Chinese and the Americans have been trying to reach the gong bangers. Of course, when their spear carriers talk to the media, everything looks cosy. The Americans even say the Chinese MIGHT consider sitting down with Asean to draft the code of conduct. They made it clear its  a SMALL possibility though. What they call a “slight indication”. The Chinese told gong bangers they MIGHT sit down and talk, if the conditions are RIPE. In other words, they want to call the shots on when talks can start and exactly what should be talked about. You can bet that they don’t want anything said about settling the dispute written in, not if the method involves other big boys and that old grandfather, the UN.

The good news is that both big boys really want to be friends with Asean. They have to. Asean is getting richer, and countries like Myanmar are opening up. Their businessmen want in on the action. The Americans who didn’t use to care very much about the place have been watching the Chinese courting Asean over the years. The Chinese seem to have a head start, so the Americans must move in. And they are…with money – and aircraft carriers.

As if the Asean family doesn’t have enough trouble, another guest is knocking down tables and chairs in the house.

The Americans, South Koreans and Japanese had gone into the garden to have a little chit chat. That North Korea, the little fellow with the big guns, is making everyone uncomfortable. What if the crazy fellow starts shooting? The trio wants him to put down his guns, throw them in the dustbin. We’re gonna stop him if he starts shooting. Don’t he dare try….Of course the North Korean heard this. He lost his temper…and started swearing.

The Asean family still has some time to tidy up the house, sweep and mop and set the furniture right. Oh, is that a blood stain? They have to face the rest of the world when they leave the disaster zone with their bags. Doubtless, they will give plenty of verbs like resolve, support, consider, note, engage, enhance…and even progress and co-operation. It’s the Asean way – finding a way to save face. Maybe they will say it’s a miracle that everybody got together to sit and talk, that everyone was present, that it wasn’t a full-blown fight although voices were raised. Maybe that’s the extent of their achievement. Maybe they will even say: We are satisfied.

Stay tuned for the last instalment of Drama at the Asean House.

Timing is everything

The story continues…

This time, it’s the turn of the Americans to keep everybody waiting. Except they didn’t wait.

Right on 2.15pm, the VIPs gathered for the mega Asean Regional Forum got on the stage for the usual picture to record their presence. Twice: the formal pose which looks like they were facing a firing squad, and the Asean linked arms way which is a bit of a squeeze for the fleshy. Hosts and guests went into the meeting room and sat down – and the Americans came.

The Asean elders must be pretty disappointed that the group picture of Family and Friends has a missing person. How will they ever explain this on their Facebook page? Anyway, no one knows why Hillary Clinton was late. She did look COLD though, wrapping a shawl tightly round her shoulders as she marched in. The Asean house seemed to have turned up the conditioning to cool down tensions.

Some of them had an earlier meeting before lunch, which they call the East Asia Summit. Lots of talk about co-operation, peace and stability. The Chinese side seem determined not to mention those three bad words South China Sea and the even worse phrase, Code of Conduct. They never made it into any formal speeches at the forum.

Unhappy gong bangers had waylaid a junior Chinese minister who gave an interesting tid-bit: – that the Chinese will start negotiations on the code when the time is “ripe”. Ah…When is ripe? What is ripe? Is it still going to be ripe in September, the date everyone was talking about earlier this week? Is that when Asean and China sit down and ….do what? Say they will refrain from coercion, threats, force, intimidation – as Hillary Clinton wants?

That looks easy enough…no? Surely, this is not an episode from the Sopranos…

But the Philippines still seem pretty unhappy. The elder wants the code to be “substantial” and wants it to spell out how the dispute will be resolved. Not enough to just talk and talk. Everybody must leave the Asean house with a solution.

Some people think it might be better to develop disputed property jointly, and split the money evenly.There’s so much money to be made in this fish-rich, oil-rich area….Maybe too much. But working together is what  the Malaysians and Thais are doing in their own disputed part of the sea – and it seems to be working out fine.

Some gong bangers are making much of Clinton’s words that the pact must be resolved “collaboratively” – they think she means taking the dispute to a multi-lateral or international level. Now if the intepretation is correct, the Chinese are going to be mightily unhappy.

Frankly, no one looks happy at this open house…some look positively grim.

There’s still time to fix things and make sure no one does a high noon on the high seas.  The Americans are meeting the Japanese, themselves really unhappy with the Chinese for presuming the Senkakus was its Daiyou. The Americans are meeting the Chinese too. Then the Americans are meeting the press. The Japs will do so tomorrow – before the Asean elders do theirs.

This is going to be one big fight over property.