Chiam, Sitoh in spat over facilities
Residents upset both are unwilling to repair damaged footpath lights
By Aaron Low
Aug 03, 2006
The Straits Times
NEARLY three months after the General Election, some residents in Potong Pasir are feeling the effects of their votes as the People's Action Party (PAP) man scales back aid to the constituency.
The latest facility to suffer are the lights that guide residents along a concrete footpath as they walk home at night from the Potong Pasir MRT station.
Six of the eight solar-powered lights have been vandalised and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, the PAP candidate who lost in the ward in the May election, has no plans to repair or replace them. The lights had cost $20,000 to install.
Earlier, he had also stopped other amenities, including the extra Meet-the-People sessions and the $2 abalone porridge.
Last night, Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong, who won with 55.8 per cent of the votes, made it plain that he too will not fix the lights.
Their responses have annoyed several residents, including Mr Andrew Leow, who accused them of playing a cat-and-mouse game.
Said the 37-year-old accounts manager: 'The lights have been broken for a few weeks and at night, people are walking in the dark. Why can't anyone fix them?''
Another resident, Ms Lee Li-Cheng, 35, had written to The Straits Times Forum page to complain about the danger the situation posed to children and the elderly.
'I understand that Potong Pasir residents had made a choice and now have to live without upgrading frills, but these lights are a basic amenity, offering security for residents returning home late,' the human resource manager said.
Mr Chiam told The Straits Times last night that fixing the lights with town council funds would be illegal as the area in question is not under the council's control.
Mr Sitoh had leased the land from the Singapore Land Authority early last year to set up the lights. The adviser to Potong Pasir grassroots organisations said he would not be fixing the lights as the lease for the land would run out on Oct 31.
He told The Straits Times yesterday that grassroots organisations were formed to organise events for the community and they do not provide amenities.
But he and his grassroots leaders made an exception last year and raised funds for the lights.
Recently, some were vandalised, with one losing its solar panels. It would cost about $5,000 to repair the lights, said Mr Sitoh.
'But if I am running the town council, I would apply to take over this piece of land and build a brightly lit covered walkway immediately. I will not wait,' he added.
Mr Chiam, when asked whether he would raise money to repair the lights, retorted: 'This is his baby. He did it to show voters that he is such a caring person.'
'But now what has happened? It just shows he was doing it for the election, no more, no less.'
Mr Chiam added that he had put up spotlights at Block 147 facing the poorly lit pathway, to alleviate the situation.
But residents like technician Tan Yi Da, 23, are not impressed, saying that the lights do not help much at night as they are placed too far away to be of any use.
When asked if he was not doing all the extras he used to do before the election because he had lost, Mr Sitoh replied that he 'tried very hard to convince the residents' that he wanted to run the town council and make it a 'better place'.
'But the residents made their decisions and I have to respect them.'
Like some residents, Mr Leow is disappointed at how things have panned out.
He said: 'Now that the election dust has settled, both have refused to acknowledge that more needs to be done for the residents of Potong Pasir estate. Instead, we get them playing a cat-and-mouse game.''
Mr Chiam, who told residents during the campaign that voting for him meant voting for the services of two MPs, laughed off such concerns.
'When the time comes, it will be two-for-one again. Things are just quiet now,' he said.
Residents upset both are unwilling to repair damaged footpath lights
By Aaron Low
Aug 03, 2006
The Straits Times
NEARLY three months after the General Election, some residents in Potong Pasir are feeling the effects of their votes as the People's Action Party (PAP) man scales back aid to the constituency.
The latest facility to suffer are the lights that guide residents along a concrete footpath as they walk home at night from the Potong Pasir MRT station.
Six of the eight solar-powered lights have been vandalised and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, the PAP candidate who lost in the ward in the May election, has no plans to repair or replace them. The lights had cost $20,000 to install.
Earlier, he had also stopped other amenities, including the extra Meet-the-People sessions and the $2 abalone porridge.
Last night, Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong, who won with 55.8 per cent of the votes, made it plain that he too will not fix the lights.
Their responses have annoyed several residents, including Mr Andrew Leow, who accused them of playing a cat-and-mouse game.
Said the 37-year-old accounts manager: 'The lights have been broken for a few weeks and at night, people are walking in the dark. Why can't anyone fix them?''
Another resident, Ms Lee Li-Cheng, 35, had written to The Straits Times Forum page to complain about the danger the situation posed to children and the elderly.
'I understand that Potong Pasir residents had made a choice and now have to live without upgrading frills, but these lights are a basic amenity, offering security for residents returning home late,' the human resource manager said.
Mr Chiam told The Straits Times last night that fixing the lights with town council funds would be illegal as the area in question is not under the council's control.
Mr Sitoh had leased the land from the Singapore Land Authority early last year to set up the lights. The adviser to Potong Pasir grassroots organisations said he would not be fixing the lights as the lease for the land would run out on Oct 31.
He told The Straits Times yesterday that grassroots organisations were formed to organise events for the community and they do not provide amenities.
But he and his grassroots leaders made an exception last year and raised funds for the lights.
Recently, some were vandalised, with one losing its solar panels. It would cost about $5,000 to repair the lights, said Mr Sitoh.
'But if I am running the town council, I would apply to take over this piece of land and build a brightly lit covered walkway immediately. I will not wait,' he added.
Mr Chiam, when asked whether he would raise money to repair the lights, retorted: 'This is his baby. He did it to show voters that he is such a caring person.'
'But now what has happened? It just shows he was doing it for the election, no more, no less.'
Mr Chiam added that he had put up spotlights at Block 147 facing the poorly lit pathway, to alleviate the situation.
But residents like technician Tan Yi Da, 23, are not impressed, saying that the lights do not help much at night as they are placed too far away to be of any use.
When asked if he was not doing all the extras he used to do before the election because he had lost, Mr Sitoh replied that he 'tried very hard to convince the residents' that he wanted to run the town council and make it a 'better place'.
'But the residents made their decisions and I have to respect them.'
Like some residents, Mr Leow is disappointed at how things have panned out.
He said: 'Now that the election dust has settled, both have refused to acknowledge that more needs to be done for the residents of Potong Pasir estate. Instead, we get them playing a cat-and-mouse game.''
Mr Chiam, who told residents during the campaign that voting for him meant voting for the services of two MPs, laughed off such concerns.
'When the time comes, it will be two-for-one again. Things are just quiet now,' he said.
. . . . Tuesday, August 08, 2006 ; 11:18 PM
RSF slams Govt for intimidating foreign press
AP
7 Aug 06
Reporters Without Borders (Reporteurs Sans Frontier) has condemned Singapore for imposing conditions on five international publications in a move that the media watchdog says amounts to pressure for self-censorship.
The statement from the group came after Singapore's Information Ministry announced that the five would be classified as "offshore newspapers," meaning they must appoint legal representation and post a 200,000 Singapore dollar (US$127,173; ?98,780) security deposit in case any lawsuits arise.
"The authorities are looking for effective ways, including fear of prosecution and heavy fines, to intimidate these publications into censoring themselves," the worldwide press freedom organization said. "This is the latest threat against the foreign media, which are the only means of reporting independently on political and economic events in the country since the local press is controlled by the government."
The Far Eastern Economic Review was singled out by the ministry, saying it had until Sept. 11 to meet the conditions. The other four publications - International Herald Tribune, Financial Times, Newsweek and Time - were operating under an exemption to the terms of the newspaper act and will have those exemptions lifted when their current permits expire.
The ministry noted in a statement this week that "it is a privilege, and not a right, for foreign newspapers to circulate in Singapore. They do so as foreign observers of the local scene and should not interfere in the domestic politics of Singapore."
No direct reason was given for the reclassifications, but the statement noted that the latter four publications "regularly report on political issues in the region and Singapore."
The move came after a recent interview in the Far Eastern Economic Review with opposition leader Chee Soon Juan, who the magazine called a national "martyr" because of the many lawsuits against him.
Singapore has a low tolerance for criticism and tightly restricts media and political speech. Ruling party leaders have successfully sued several opposition politicians and journalists for defamation over the years. They say they sue to protect their reputations.
The Economist, International Herald Tribune, Bloomberg, Far Eastern Economic Review and the then-Asian Wall Street Journal - since renamed The Wall Street Journal Asia - have paid large fines or had their circulation restricted in lawsuits brought by Singapore's ruling party stalwarts.
Note: Reporters Without Borders ranked Singapore 140th out of 167 countries in its 2005 worldwide press freedom index.
7 Aug 06
Reporters Without Borders (Reporteurs Sans Frontier) has condemned Singapore for imposing conditions on five international publications in a move that the media watchdog says amounts to pressure for self-censorship.
The statement from the group came after Singapore's Information Ministry announced that the five would be classified as "offshore newspapers," meaning they must appoint legal representation and post a 200,000 Singapore dollar (US$127,173; ?98,780) security deposit in case any lawsuits arise.
"The authorities are looking for effective ways, including fear of prosecution and heavy fines, to intimidate these publications into censoring themselves," the worldwide press freedom organization said. "This is the latest threat against the foreign media, which are the only means of reporting independently on political and economic events in the country since the local press is controlled by the government."
The Far Eastern Economic Review was singled out by the ministry, saying it had until Sept. 11 to meet the conditions. The other four publications - International Herald Tribune, Financial Times, Newsweek and Time - were operating under an exemption to the terms of the newspaper act and will have those exemptions lifted when their current permits expire.
The ministry noted in a statement this week that "it is a privilege, and not a right, for foreign newspapers to circulate in Singapore. They do so as foreign observers of the local scene and should not interfere in the domestic politics of Singapore."
No direct reason was given for the reclassifications, but the statement noted that the latter four publications "regularly report on political issues in the region and Singapore."
The move came after a recent interview in the Far Eastern Economic Review with opposition leader Chee Soon Juan, who the magazine called a national "martyr" because of the many lawsuits against him.
Singapore has a low tolerance for criticism and tightly restricts media and political speech. Ruling party leaders have successfully sued several opposition politicians and journalists for defamation over the years. They say they sue to protect their reputations.
The Economist, International Herald Tribune, Bloomberg, Far Eastern Economic Review and the then-Asian Wall Street Journal - since renamed The Wall Street Journal Asia - have paid large fines or had their circulation restricted in lawsuits brought by Singapore's ruling party stalwarts.
Note: Reporters Without Borders ranked Singapore 140th out of 167 countries in its 2005 worldwide press freedom index.
. . . . ; 11:14 PM
Totally in the groove
. . . . Sunday, August 06, 2006 ; 7:46 PM
Hey Hey Hey
. . . . ; 7:46 PM
Dunno wots her name
. . . . ; 7:45 PM
Need to Pee? No, just singing.
. . . . ; 7:45 PM
Lol blurry
. . . . ; 7:43 PM
Joan's Talent Segment
. . . . ; 7:39 PM
Duet (Eventual winner on the right)
. . . . ; 7:36 PM
