A 7.6 magnitude earthquake off the coast of Sumatra caused our office building to shake for a couple of minutes yesterday evening, around 6:30 pm or thereabouts. I thought I was falling sick (not surprising given how tired I have been recently), and am having a dizzy spell, but after a while it just didn't feel right.

It wasn't the first time we felt tremors from earthquakes in Sumatra. I recalled the first time it happened, it was slightly before lunch time and we had to evacuate the building and mill around outside the building (I remembered one of my friends protesting as her boyfriend dragged her out, "my email, I need to finish my email, client is expecting it before lunch!" and when she was downstairs and outside the building, "can we go back now? I need to send out my email." and her boyfriend hushing her)  Just when we returned from an early lunch, however, another set of tremors shook the building, and the management decided to declare a half day holiday - I stayed on in the office because I had work, and also because I had class later in the evening. My head of department appeared at the door to my office and asked me to go home - I am not sure if it is out of concern or because the firm wanted to avoid any liability should the building collapse while I am still inside.

The second time it happened was an evening, around 7 pm or so. And I was darn miffed because I was trying to finish an advice and go on study leave thereafter (it was close to my exams). My room-mate had to pull a protesting me out of the office and I was grumbling all the way because the security guards will not allow us to return to the building until it has been verified to be sound, which took an hour or so. You should see how many lawyers were panicking over unfinished work on the lawn outside the building - especially the litigators who have court deadlines. 

( The First Time We Were Afraid, The Second Time We Were Cheesed Off, The Third Time .... )

 If you love Singapore too much, first it will break your heart, then it will break your soul.

The above statement has been attributed to Alfian Sa'at, often referred to as the enfant terrible of Singapore's literary scene.

I love Singapore, it is a love that needs no justification, nor any explanation. I grew up here, it is my home, and the home of my family and many of my friends. It is the only home I have ever known. How can I not love her?

And yet, today, when I was doing my usual rounds of blog-surfing, I came across a blog post that commented on an advertisement for a job-opening. This is the advertisement, which is for a Sales Development Engineer:



Did you read the last line? It stated "Preferably non-Singaporean (PR welcome)"

I cannot even being to say all the things that are wrong with this and what it tells us about our country. All I can say is, when I read that line, I felt something break in me. And the line by Alfian Sa'at came to mind.

I was at Marina Barrage this evening, ostensibly as part of a photography group outing, but I got separated from the group early on, as I got lost in my photo-taking. This is my first actual photography outing with my Nikon D90. I have been carrying the camera around for a few weeks, but have not gone out with the primary aim of picture-taking.

I like photo-taking. Nobody bugs me when I am taking pictures. It is me and my camera and the view. I can fiddle with the camera, testing out different settings, trying to visualise in my mind's eye how the final picture should look, and comparing that against the picture I finally got. I just sit around and observe - there is no need to make polite small talk, no need to put on a front. And I realise that the older I get, the more I crave, hunger for this "alone" time.

I also love night photography - I like to see the changing colours as the sun sets and the effects of all the city lights. One of the driving force behind my upgrading from a prosumer to a DSLR is the inability of a prosumer camera to take decent night shots.

Anyway, enough rambling, here is a selection of some of the results of my very first photo outing for your enjoyment!




( Marina Barrage )

One of the most interesting things I have learnt in my Teochew lessons is that Teochew has a written form. I have always thought that Teochew (and the other dialects) have the same written form but due to regional and geographical distances, are spoken differently. I was wrong apparently.

A friend sent me the passages below earlier this week. It is a rather amusing monologue of an irate schoolgirl ranting about her teacher. The monologue is in Classical Chinese (wenyanwen), Mandarin (putonghua), Cantonese (Yueyu) and Southern Min (Minnan). While Teochew belongs to the Minan school, the interesting thing is that I actually find that the words used in Classical Chinese version more familiar, because I have come across them in my Teochew classes. Of course, I understand the Mandarin version - had to struggle with it for at least 10 years of my life!

( A Schoolgirl's Rant  )

Thou shalt not be a victim.
Thou shalt not be a perpetrator.
Above all, thou shalt not be a bystander.
             ~Holocaust Museum, Washington DC

It was inspirational. It was awesome. I have never seen such a gathering of intelligent, witty, passionate and knowledgable women in my life, and if you had told me just two months ago that such a gathering is possible, that there are 1,414 women in Singapore who will willingly spend their entire Saturday holed up in a cold convention hall where only water is provided simply to kick out a bunch of Christian fundamentalists who thought that they will be able to successfully pull off a take-over of a secular NGO, I would have laughed in your face.

This is not a bunch of ladies who lunch and chat politely and quietly about how to do good over tea and scones, it is a bunch of ladies who have learnt how to fight for their rights, to stand their ground, to defend their turf, to bang tables and demand to be heard. It is a bunch of women who understood whether instinctively or through bitter experience that to "SHUT UP & SIT DOWN" will not get you anywhere. And if in the process, they were told off for being "rude" or acting like "hooligans", well, so be it. I did not, and I am sure most of the women in that hall did not, get to their current position in life as independent knowledgeable women, by being meek and subservient.

The Christian fundamentalists were simply outclassed. They were out-organised (what on earth happened to the red-shirts mid-way through the EGM, only the white-shirts remained to keep the crowd under control), out-prepared (one self-declared "Feminist Mentor" whose claim to the title is her being cited on page 73 of a book on outstanding women, and one research paper on the superiority of abstinence over condom use by some academic in Utah of all places does not good preparation make) and out-voted (what happened to the busloads of bible-toting ladies?). Women who spent their lives fighting inequality whether it is for themselves or for women in general, women who never joined AWARE previously but whose lives have been touched by AWARE, women who refused to allowed the name of Christianity to be sullied by the actions of a gang of bullies, women who believed in the importance of a secular state for a diverse community, women whose inate sense of fairness has been offended. All these women turned up, and queued for hours, first to get into the meeting hall, and later to get to the sole microphone to give the Christian fundamentalists a sound dressing-down. The depth of knowledge and experience these women represented - lawyers, academics, NGO activists, event organisers, students, social workers - is breathtaking. Collectively they knew so much about feminism, the fight for equality, comprehensive sexual education, activism, social issues etc etc - listening to them speak at the microphone was like having a crash course in civil society work. I think even the Old Guard were surprised at how many of us turned up - as one of them said, you gals came out from the woodwork, we don't know where you came from. The new Exco, inexperienced, unable to defend their views or (with the exception of Josie Lau who earned respect for keeping her cool under relentless fire)  even to maintain their composure, did not have a chance.

We Singaporeans always mock ourselves for being apathetic. On 2 May 2009, we have proved ourselves wrong.

I was having drinks with a friend and we were discussing the AWARE saga - and as things now stand in the saga, we started talking about the role of woman in the family and Christianity (disclosure: I am an atheist, she is a Christian). And I remembered something I once read in the Bible (a long time ago when I read and re-read the Bible day after day) - there was a passage that I particularly like because it spoke about the role of a woman. I did a search when I came back and realise it is Proverbs 31:10-31.

( Who can find a virtuous woman ... )

I find that I still like this passage on re-reading it. It portrays a woman who is independent, skilled, hardworking and resourceful. Very much what a modern woman still aspires to be.

My friend also mentioned a passage in Tales of Narnia that she felt was very insightful as to just what is a true Christian. I just looked it up in my copy of The Complete Chronicles of Narnia and I think (we were drinking at that time yah?) the passage she referred to is this:

( If any man does a cruelty in my name, then though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves ... )

( Response from MOE (Emphasis added) )</div></div>

I usually disagree with Chua Mui Hoong of the Straits Times. Heck, I disagree with the Straits Times on a lot of things. But this time round, this time, I am with her on the points raised in her article. For once, I honestly hope that her views reflect the views of the government. And I say this as an atheist and as a woman who still has fond memories of her church-going days.

We the citizens of Singapore
pledge ourselves as one united people
regardless of race, language or religion
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation

So the cat is finally out of the bag. Or as mrsbudak quoting someone said "The Sith Lord has finally come out of the woodwork."

The takeover of AWARE is an organised coup by a group of Christian fundamentalists (I am not even going to call them conservatives anymore) who believe that their way is the only right way and everyone else is wrong. 

Blogging about religion is always a rather risky business in Singapore, given how sensitive we are about the potential for religious dissent. However, I think it is time that we all buck up - if we can tell members of the Islamic faith to stand up and speak up against Muslim fundamentalists, I really do not see why we can't say the same about the Christians (or for that matter, the Buddhists and the Hindus and the Jews etc etc).

I don't think I am being unreasonable - all I am asking for is respect - respect for the human race in all its diversity. I suspect that my own personal views on many things will be considered conservative in nature, but what draws a bright shining line between me and fundamentalists is that I respect that there are other people, some in circumstances that I cannot even begin to imagine, who thinks differently or choose courses of action that I do not condone for myself. And I accept that, because I am in no position to tell another person with respect to his or her own actions affecting himself or herself, what is right and what is wrong. I accept that the world is imperfect, and to pretend otherwise is simply to live in an ivory tower that does nobody any good.

AWARE is a secular NGO that promote gender equality, furthering women's rights. Is a lesbian not a woman? Is an abused wife not a woman? Is a teenage girl with an unwanted pregnancy not a woman? Is a divorced woman not a woman? Is a single woman not a woman? Is a single mother not a woman? Is it fair to a young girl struggling with her sexuality to keep her ignorant of means of birth control? Can you, as a women rights group, pretend that there are no lesbians, no single mothers in Singapore? Is there only one way to be a good woman, a good human? Is there only one way to lead a good life? Good by whose standards anyway? And who are you to judge?

The AWARE EOGM is taking place on 2 May 2009. I am asking all women of Singapore (men can't vote sorry), please, register as members of AWARE, and turn up to vote on that day. I am not asking that you vote for any one side. I am asking that you come and listen and vote according to your convictions and your beliefs.  AWARE is the most prominent woman rights group we have in Singapore with the ability to influence legislation. It needs to representative of us, not of only one interest group. Christians (including Catholics) form less than 15% of our population, which means Christian fundamentalists form a much less significant proportion of that. Why should they speak for us, or act in our name?

Even if you are apathetic and think that this does not concern you, chew on this poem that has been making its rounds around the internet lately:

Give these fundamentalists an inch, and where will you and your children be in ten years time?

One of the good things that have come out of the on-going leadership tussle at AWARE - I have never ever seen so much discussion among my friends and colleagues about the role of women and the role that NGOs such as AWARE should play in Singapore society, and how this interfaces with religion. 

Personally, I think that one's religious convictions is just that, personal and no one's business but her own (with an important caveat carved out for persons who think that terrorism and mass murder are accepted means of practising their religion). Christian conservatives have as much right as any other person to run for office in any organisation, including AWARE. Similarly however, I expect Christian conservatives to adhere to the fundamental principles of the organisation they are participating in as much any other person. A Buddhist who joins a church with a view to converting its members to Buddhism is acting in bad faith, to put it mildly. And ditto for persons who seek to join a secular organisation with a view to changing it to one that advances a religious agenda.

Thus far, I have not found anything that the new Exco has published or issued regarding its agenda. Given how its members have in effect, staged a power-grab, I find it rather curious that the new Exco is unable, until now, put forward its plans for AWARE. I want to know where the new Exco stands on a host of issues because these directly impact on the programmes that AWARE has been running, including its views on:

1. work-life balance;
2. sexual harrassment in the workplace; and
3. family planning (including abortion and use of contraceptives).

I consider the whole anti-gay hysteria to be a bit of a red-herring. As far as I am aware (pardon the pun), AWARE has never actively championed gay rights, save for its endorsement of the (ultimately failed) campaign to repeal section 337A of the Penal Code (which criminalise gay sex). There are individuals in AWARE who champion gay rights, but as far as I know, they have never succeeded in pushing this agenda through AWARE. And that brings me back to my original point, I really don't care whether the Exco members include gay activists or Christian conservatists, so long as their personal agenda are not imposed onto a secular NGO whose stated mission is to advance gender equality.

The new Exo is legitimately elected under the constitution of AWARE, and while the background of the Exco collectively gives rise to questions, I am of the view that we need to give this Exco a chance to explain its agenda (which it has not) before blindly casting our vote to throw them out. I am hoping that such a chance will arise at the EGM on 2 May, but until then, I will reserve my vote as an AWARE member. I need to know more.

The Singapore Ministry of Finance has announced that it will adopt the OECD exchange of information standard through our double tax treaties. ( Press Release from MOF Website )

 

The Exchange of Information Article, Article 27 in the OECD Model Tax Treaty states:

 

( Exchange of Information under OECD Model Tax Treaty )

 

There has been so much news in the media recently about tax havens, and Singapore being a low-tax jurisdiction aiming to be a private wealth centre is finding itself in the spotlight more than it (I assume) desires. I thought I'll post the links to some of the stuff here since it is so interesting:

Singapore
10 February 2009: Singapore is no tax haven
29 February 2009: Singapore is not a tax haven: George Yeo
8 March 2009: S'pore endorses OECD standard
11 March 2009: S'pore, HK on tax blacklist

United Kingdom
4 March 2009: Look for onshore, not offshore scapegoats
9 March 2009: Higher regulatory standards than London and New York

Australia
24 February 2009: Bid to close tax haven loopholes

United States
3 May 2001: Tax Havens Haters: The OECD's hypocritical campaign against low-tax countries.
22 August 2005: A Death Knell for Tax Havens?
March 2008: Foreign Policy - Why tax havens are a blessing
28 November 2008: Tax haven drains poor nations, OECD says
22 December 2008: Tax Havens in the Crosshairs
2 March 2009: Statement of Senator Carl Levin on Introducing the Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act 

Blogs & Other Websites
Tax Research UK
Tax Justice Network

I had a run-in with Starhub late last year, which I blogged about here. Today, I had an absolutely ridiculous experience with Singtel Mobile.

My family have been Singtel Mobile subscribers for the longest time. All mobile and land line subscriptions were made in my father's name, except for mine which I transferred to my own name when I started work. Now that my dad is retired and not getting any income, I figured it makes sense to transfer all the subscriptions to my name so that I get everything in one invoice instead having to remember to ask my dad if his invoice has come in.

I called up Singtel and was told that Singtel's policy is to allow a subscriber a maximum of two mobile phone subscriptions and if I want to have more than two subscriptions, I need to wait for six months before I get a third subscription, and a further six months after that to get a fourth subscription and so on. Each transfer of a subscription attracts an administrative fee of S$20. As we have four mobile subscriptions, this means that it will take me a year to have everything transferred to my name and will cost me S$60. According to the customer service officer, it is Singtel policy because Singtel wants to make sure that the subscriber is able to pay the subscription fees.
 
I tried to explain that I have been paying the bills anyway, so this is really just for administrative convenience but was told that this is the company policy and Singtel looks to the subscriber on record for the fees and this is based on the NRIC number. Singtel can, however, consider waiving the administrative fee for some of the transfers in my case.

So, I asked, Singtel prefers a retiree with no income to be the subscriber on record to look to for fees on three mobile subscriptions and one land line instead of a working adult? If something happens to the retiree over the course of the year and can no longer make payments, what is Singtel's proposed remedy? I may be the person paying the bills but I have no legal obligation to do so unless I am the subscriber on record. I was quite amused, and told her that if that is the way Singtel prefers to run its business, I have no quarrel with it.

There was a stunned silence, before the customer service officer said that she will try to get a waiver of this requirement from her superiors in my case. 

Idiots.  

So, our most esteemed Health Minister is saying that we should  consider putting our elderly Singaporeans in Johore Bahru, which is in Malaysia, i.e. just in case you don't get it, another country, because "it would be cheaper, yet be near enough to Singapore for family members to visit and for residents to return for medical care if necessary."

Very pragmatic words, no? After all, what is citizenship when you can make a dollar stretch a bit longer. The fact that Singaporeans are finding health care becoming so unaffordable that we have to start looking at other (not very-welcoming) countries for affordable health care is just a fact of life, not something that the government should be concerned about. Or at any rate, the government has done its best by suggesting alternatives in other countries, countries that owe Singaporeans no obligations whatsoever.

But of course, this option "is not for the poor, who are heavily subsidised in Singapore", in fact, according to the Minister, "everyone can afford health care in Singapore whether acute care or long-term care," and the suggestion was "aimed at middle-income families who need to pay for the care themselves." [quotes in bold and italics are the Minister's words according to the newspaper report, quotes in italics are by the reporter who wrote this article].

The implication of the above is that our health care now cost so much that only the rich can afford it, the middle-class can't afford it and the poor can afford it only because they are heavily subsidised. How that gels with the statement that everyone can afford health care in SIngapore whether acute care or long-term care I have no idea. Just in case the Minister is mis-quoted and also to get an idea of the context in which the above issue arisen, I tried to search the Hansard but can't find the relevant parts, will try to look for it again and update when I find it.

Under our current system of taxation, the middle class probably pay the bulk of the taxes - investment income is generally not subject to tax, foreign-sourced income of individuals are not subject to tax, hence, it should not be too far off to suggest that for individuals, the main item of income that is subject to tax will be employment income and trade or business profits, which are the primary sources of income for the middle class. So after paying taxes, you are now told, sorry, our health care is too expensive for the likes of you, go Malaysia (where I have personally not been to more than 10 times in my life) instead for cheaper health care. You mean that after setting aside 30% of my salary as enforced savings, after paying my taxes, after paying you bunch of politicans more in salary than the President of the United States of America himself (who has a far more stressful and more shitty job than the load of you guys), I cannot have affordable health care in the land of my birth, where I had stayed and worked and lived my entire life? Come on guys, you gotta be kidding right?

A number of interesting articles on Singapore and tax, and in all three of our English-language papers too!

( Business Times - Singapore looking at OECD standard to tackle tax evasion )( Today - Why Singapore is no tax haven )


( Straits Times - Low comapny taxes but Singapore not a tax haven )

Today is Thaipusam, which is a Hindi festival celebrated by the Tamil community and me and my friend, decided that it will be great fun to take pictures of the procession. It was an incredible experience - people were chanting, singing and dancing down the streets, sitting on walls, standing and sitting by the sidewalks, all cheering on the participants in the procession, and there were booths set up to give out free drinks for all passersby (including interlopers like ourselves). Even though there was a most horrendous traffic jam since some lanes were blocked off, the passengers rolled down the windows and waved and smiled at everyone, and the young boys giving out the free drinks at the booth ran up to the cars to offer drinks to the occupants. Even the drivers were smiling - one shouted cheerily out to me - "did you get any good shots?". We had a great time!

( Click for photos ...  )</div>