Aljunied GRC MPs Outreach...

[sengkang]

 

[sengkang]

 

[sengkang]

The Workers' Party visits Moulmein-Kallang GRC this week for its weekly Hammer public outreach. The Hammer is the official publication of the Workers' Party.

 

[sengkang]

[h=2]Parliamentary Questions by WP MPs - 12 November 2012 Sitting
[/h]
by The Workers' Party on Monday, November 12, 2012 at 11:09am ·

These are the questions that WP Parliamentarians have filed for the upcoming Parliament sitting on 12 November 2012.

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER*
*16. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Minister for Health whether the Government can consider providing additional assistance, beyond the $50 to $400 one-off Medisave top-ups, to Class C and B2 patients who have to pay MediShield deductibles of $1,500 and $2,000 respectively (a $500 increase) with effect from 1 March 2013.

*23. Ms Sylvia Lim: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) for the first ten months of 2012, whether foreign individuals or groups have been engaged in housebreakings and thefts from dwellings in landed properties in Singapore; (b) if so, on what entry permits did these individuals enter Singapore and whether the police and immigration authorities have specific strategies to deal with this phenomenon.

*27. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for Transport (a) what is the estimated budget needed to fix the faulty power cables of the Circle Line and who will bear the costs; (b) how long will the replacement programme take; and (c) whether there was a failure to anticipate the rapid deterioration of the cables during the planning and design phase or a failure to use appropriate materials for the cables.

*31. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what is the average time lag between a Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) announcement and polling; (b) what is the average time lag between LUP polling and completion; (c) whether HDB can initiate a programme to assist residents whose flats are not selected for LUP because of construction cost issues due to the design of their flats.

*37. Mr Pritam Singh: To ask the Prime Minister in light of our current population of 5.31 million and his view that Singapore can accommodate 6 million people in the future (a) how many of the 690,000 additional arrivals are envisaged to comprise new citizens, permanent residents and non-residents respectively; (b) whether the Government has made any social assessment of the impact of these additional arrivals; and (c) what is the projected impact of these new arrivals on prices of public and private houses.

*38. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Prime Minister (a) whether the existing infrastructures, such as those for public transport, healthcare and housing, discounting those that are under construction, are adequately designed to support the current population of 5.31 million; (b) what is the target population density in 5, 10 and 15 years' time; and (c) whether the Government has conducted a survey on the quality of life vis-a-vis the increase in population density.

*39. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Minister for Communications and Information and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) whether the AVA and Singapore Mosques Qurban Committee (JKMS) are exploring the possibility of allowing sheep supply from Malaysia and Indonesia in an eventuality when Australia is no longer able to supply sheep to Singapore; (b) why is the current supply of sheep for Qurban not acquired from our neighbouring countries, namely Malaysia and Indonesia; (c) what are AVA's criteria or guidelines for the accreditation of a sheep supplier; and (d) what is the breakdown of the cost for each sheep which currently stands at $460.

*43. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Acting Minister for Manpower how many P1, P2 and Q pass (employment pass) holders downgraded to S-passes in the first half of 2012 and how do these figures compare with the previous year.

*44. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Acting Minister for Manpower in light of the 14,200 increase in S-passes in the first half of 2012 (a) what is the Government's targeted rate of increase (or decrease) of S-pass numbers per year; (b) which industry sectors have the sharpest spikes in S-pass numbers in the first half of 2012; and (c) what measures does the Government plan to take to tighten S-pass numbers.

*47. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Minister for Transport (a) which stage of the Downtown Line (DTL) contributed the most in the $8.7 billion cost spiral; (b) which contractor filed the most claims in additional cost; (c) why are the DTL contracts structured to subject LTA to fluctuation risk in construction cost; and (d) are the contracts for the Thomson Line structured the same way as well.

*48. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for Transport (a) if he will provide a breakdown of the costs arising from the major changes from the original plan for the Downtown Line that have led to the huge increase in the construction budget; and (b) what are the lessons learnt in terms of budgetting, planning and structuring of contracts for future train lines.

*49. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Acting Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the number of families who have benefited from the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme since its introduction; (b) what is the ethnic breakdown in absolute numbers of the beneficiaries; and (c) whether the HOPE scheme remains relevant today, especially in light of Singapore's declining population.

*65. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Acting Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the current prevalence rate of people with disabilities (PWDs) in Singapore; (b) what is the number of PWDs in full-time and part-time employment respectively; (c) how many companies and PWDs have benefited from the Open Door Fund and how much was disbursed each year since the Fund was launched; (d) what are the schemes available for PWDs to undergo job retraining to keep them economically viable and how many PWDs have benefitted from them in the past five years; (e) what efforts have been made to improve public transport facilities for PWDs; and (f) what are the available schemes or grants for taxi costs for PWDs.

*69. Mr Pritam Singh: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) whether the ethnic limit of 25% for the Malay ethnic group at the block level in all HDB rental flats has been reached and, if so, when; (b) whether HDB has plans to increase this limit for the Malay ethnic group at the block level; and (c) whether HDB will consider allocating rental flats on a strict needs basis only to avoid rejection or delay as a result of the applicants' preference of rental zone.

*70. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for Education (a) what are the criteria used to select foreign scholars at pre-tertiary and tertiary levels; (b) what programmes are in place to monitor, develop and integrate foreign scholars into Singaporean society throughout their years of study here; (c) under what circumstances can the Ministry recover monies invested in foreign scholars should a scholar be found to have behavioural issues or poor performance; and (d) how many times in the past ten years has the Ministry taken action to recover monies from foreign scholars or to terminate their scholarships.

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN ANSWER
1. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Prime Minister from 2001 to 2011, what is the number of Singaporeans who have renounced their citizenship, broken down according to ethnic groups.

4. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance for each of the past 10 years, what is the average income and total income (including income from employment, trade, dividends, interest, property rental, royalties, estate/trusts and capital gains) of the top 1% of income earners in Singapore.

6. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how many Singaporeans are currently under direct employment by the two casinos; and (b) whether the Government or the two casinos set a target percentage of Singaporean workers to be employed by them in their winning bids.

11. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what are the exact plans and timeline that ASEAN has to exert commercial pressures on plantation owners to practise responsible land clearing; and (b) if the Ministry will consider amending the Environmental Protection and Management Act to give powers to our authorities to prosecute Singapore-linked companies or Singaporeans who are found to have practised illegal burning activities in neighbouring countries.

19. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for Transport (a) how are the quantum of ERP rate changes determined at each quarterly review; (b) whether a maximum ERP fee is set at any single gantry; and (c) how does the Ministry look at the traffic congestion data for the planning of road capacity.

24. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Acting Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Government is intending to sign the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which recognises the competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to investigate, report and make recommendations on complaints from individuals or groups who claim that their rights have been violated; and (b) what legal or administrative mechanisms will be put in place to give effect to the Convention.

25. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Acting Minister for Social and Family Development from 2010 to October 2012 (a) what is the number of annual casino entry passes sold per year by each of the two casinos; and (b) what is the amount of casino entry levies collected by each casino per year.

31. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Acting Minister for Manpower how many workers in Singapore currently earn less than $1,000 per month (for full-time work) or less than $5.25 per hour (for part-time or daily rated work), with a breakdown by Singaporeans, permanent residents and work pass holders.

 

[sengkang]

[h=1]Speech on Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill – MP Sylvia Lim[/h]

by MP for Aljunied GRC, Sylvia Lim

---

This amendment bill has several purposes. I shall first deal with the application of the death penalty, followed by some queries about other aspects of the bill.

Retention of the mandatory death penalty
In July this year, DPM Teo Chee Hean told the House that though the government had been reviewing the death penalty for drug trafficking for some months, it had concluded that “the mandatory death penalty should continue to apply in most circumstances”. Indeed, as explained by DPM Teo just now, this bill retains the mandatory death penalty for trafficking and importation of drugs, except in two circumstances which I will touch on later.


Deterrence has long been central to the government’s stance on having the death penalty and making it mandatory for certain offences. However, how far the death penalty actually deters crime has long been the subject of debate internationally. There have also been conflicting studies on whether the death penalty deters crime or not, though most of these studies were on homicide offences (e.g. Ehrlich, I. (1973). The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: A Question of Life and Death. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no 18; contrast Zimring, F. et al (2010). Executions, Deterrence and Homicide: A Tale of 2 cities. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 7:1. 1-29.)


I would like to ask the government whether it relied on any particular studies or its own data to conclude that the death penalty or mandatory death actually deters crime and in particular, drug trafficking.


Besides deterrence, capital punishment is sometimes justified from a retributive perspective, i.e. death is considered a just punishment for an offence which is deemed very serious. Which offences “deserve” death may be subjective, and this is a matter of judgment for each society to make. Singapore is understandably tough on drugs, having been through the 1970s when drugs caused untold harm to many families and threatened society in general.
Today, it is not my purpose to canvass the pros and cons of the death penalty per se, but to highlight the real problems caused in our system by its mandatory nature.


As the Workers’ Party has pointed out in the past, giving the sentencing judge no choice in the sentence is undesirable, as the case outcome is determined by the choice of charge, which vests in the Public Prosecutor. Discretion is thus pushed upstream. Moreover, unlike a judge’s decision, which is reached in open court, reasoned and subject to appeal, the Public Prosecutor’s decisions are opaque, not reasoned in the public, and un-appealable.


I am certain that the Public Prosecutor and all his deputies in the Attorney-General’s Chambers are very mindful of the consequences of their decisions on the choice of charge in mandatory death cases. Former Attorney-General Walter Woon summed up the dilemma succinctly in a quote published in the Straits Times of October 20th. He said:


“My problem with the mandatory death penalty is that the hard decisions are taken by the prosecutor when exercising prosecutorial discretion. You cannot imagine the contortions we had to go through to find some way to not charge a person (with a capital crime) because the judge had no discretion but the prosecution did. We did our very best to not charge people with capital offences if we could help it”.



Drug cases highlight the extent of prosecutorial discretion. The PP can decide to prefer heavier or lighter charges based on any set of facts. The PP can even artificially reduce the amount of drugs in the charge to below the actual amount found, to enable the accused to escape death. This practice was expressly recognized as legal by the Court of Appeal in Ramalingam Ravinthran v PP [2012] 2 SLR 49. It would be interesting to find out how many accused facing the death penalty on the facts have escaped death due to the PP’s decisions.


As it stands, the inherent discretion of the Public Prosecutor is already very wide. Retaining the mandatory death penalty arrogates to him the additional discretion of determining the punishment the accused should face, which is not his role; it also emasculates the judges whose role it is to mete out justice based on the facts. I submit that if the death penalty was not mandatory but left to the sentencing judge, the system would be seen to be more transparent and open to public scrutiny.


In the alternative, it would also be open to the government to provide that, for the most serious crimes, death would be the presumptive sentence, leaving an escape clause for the judge not to impose death in special circumstances. There are many precedents in other countries for using presumptive sentences e.g. in Western Australia, the presumptive sentence for murder if life imprisonment but the relevant section allows the judge not to impose it if that sentence “would be clearly unjust” given the circumstances of the offence and the person; and the offender is unlikely to be a threat to society upon release. The government could consider such a device for the most serious offences instead of mandatory death.


Amendments regarding couriers


Under the new S 33B, a courier can escape the death penalty and be sentenced to life imprisonment instead, if his case falls within 2 strictly-defined circumstances.


Certificate of assistance
The first circumstance involves couriers whom the PP will certify have co-operated with the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB). I have some concerns about this provision.


First, the new S 33B (2) requires the accused to prove that his involvement was restricted to being a transporter, sender or deliverer of the drugs in question. Does this therefore mean that S33B will only apply in cases where the accused admits or pleads guilty to a capital drug charge? Will this provision be available to those who claim trial but, during the trial, decide to admit to being a courier? Put another way, is the PP prepared to issue a certificate of assistance even when the accused claims trial to a trafficking charge?


Secondly, the PP must certify that the accused has “substantially assisted the CNB in disrupting drug trafficking activities within and outside Singapore”. The Explanatory Note to the Bill expressly clarifies that information which does not enhance the effective enforcement of the Act “will not suffice”. According to this wording, a low-level courier who knows nothing about the drug network will go to the gallows, while another courier who has more information (and is presumably closer to the higher echelons) can escape death. This would be a perverse outcome, a point highlighted by Mr Edwin Tong earlier. In addition, the phrase “substantially assisted the CNB in disrupting drug trafficking activities” suggests that the CNB should show some success in its drug operations based on the accused’s information. Is this what is intended? This would not be fair to the accused, as operations may fail due to the information being outdated or due to law enforcement incompetence. Why not simply require full co-operation, without the additional requirement of substantial assistance to disrupt drug trafficking activities?


Thirdly, the PP’s certificate of co-operation cannot be challenged except for bad faith or malice. This means that, in actual fact, the judge’s discretion under S 33B is very limited. However, it is foreseeable that some accused persons may not receive the certificate even if they were willing to provide the CNB with whatever information they had. Since this certificate is truly a life and death matter, is it not better for the judge to decide on the question of co-operation if there is a dispute? In other words, if the defence says that the accused co-operated fully with the PP but yet did not receive the PP’s certificate, the PP should provide the reasons to the court and the court could make a finding? If there is concern is about the sensitivity of operational information given, we could provide for non-publication of the details.


I have one final clarification, on cases where the couriers have already been sentenced to death. If the accused had not shared information previously with the CNB, is it open to him to do so now and hence bring himself within S 33B? It would seem just to give him this avenue, since it was not available to him previously for his consideration.


Mentally vulnerable couriers
The intention behind this change is good. However, I would like to ask why the government decided to follow the wording of diminished responsibility in the Penal Code, when this has been the subject of academic criticism and law reform in other countries? (Stanley Yeo, “Reformulating Diminished Responsibility: Learning from the New South Wales experience” [1999] 20 Sing LR 159; Michael Hor, “Murder: The Abnormal Mind – Mad or just Bad?” (2008) 20 SAcLJ 662).
For instance, during a law reform exercise in New South Wales, psychiatrists there felt that requiring them to confirm the specific cause of a person’s impairment of mind was too difficult and arbitrary. Instead, the NSW law was changed to simplify the defence to require that “the offender’s capacity to understand events, or to judge whether his actions were right or wrong, or to control himself, was substantially impaired by an abnormality of mind arising from an underlying condition, and the impairment was so substantial as to warrant liability (to be reduced)”.



It should also be remembered that accused persons who may not suffer from any psychiatric condition and yet be vulnerable and easily manipulated. In the case of Rozman bin Jusoh [1995] 3 SLR 317, an accused of subnormal intelligence was entrapped by CNB officers into delivering cannabis i.e. CNB officers instigated him to supply drugs to them. Evidence was placed before the court that his cognitive capacity to reason was borderline in that he would be unable to reason things like persons of average intelligence; that he might easily fall into difficulties and even allow others to hurt or misuse him. The Court of Appeal held that he had no defence. There should be scope in such cases for the death penalty not to be imposed.

I would urge the government to do further review of this provision in due course.


New offence of arranging / planning gatherings
Cl 4 introduces S 11A which makes it an offence to arrange or plan a gathering, knowing that a controlled drug was / was to be consumed at the gathering, if a gathering of 2 or more persons takes place. The wording only requires that there is a gathering, and not that there is a gathering where drugs are in fact present or consumed. Is it the intention to include cases where so long as a gathering takes place, the planner or arranger who thought drugs would be consumed there would be guilty even if eventually no drugs were brought?


Enhanced punishment for influencing young or vulnerable persons to traffic, import drugs
Cl 5 sets out S12A which creates a new offence of procuring a young or vulnerable person to traffic in drugs, which will attract a harsher punishment by way of a stiffer minimum penalty. I agree that an increase is justifiable at this point of time, since the government has found recent evidence that more young abusers are being introduced to drugs by their neighbours and friends who are repeat abusers.


Hair tests
Cl 11 introduces S 31A allowing CNB to conduct hair tests to determine if the suspect should be placed under supervision. The government has explained that the hair test is superior to the urine test because it has a longer detection window of 3 months after the drug is consumed, whereas the urine test has a window of about one week. According to MOS Masagos’ speech at the CNB Workplan Seminar in April, the purpose of introducing the hair test is to “deter CNB supervisees from relapsing into drug abuse as it will be very difficult to avoid detection”.


While MOS has stated that hair tests will be used on existing supervisees, it would seem that hair tests can be used on fresh cases as well. Under S 31A, so long as an officer suspects that a person has consumed drugs, he can order him to provide a hair specimen. How would this work in relation to someone who has consumed drugs overseas? Should a Singaporean who consumes cannabis in Amsterdam two months ago expect to have his hair tested upon arrival at the airport? I note that the existing S8A of the Act criminalises drug consumption overseas by Singapore citizens or permanent residents if their urine tests are positive upon return; however this amendment bill does not amend that section to say these returning residents are subject to hair tests too. Could this be clarified please?


Conclusion
This amendment bill enhances various tools and punishments to tackle trends of concern, and also takes a step in mitigating the harshness of the mandatory death penalty regime. To that end, it is to be supported. However, as mentioned at the start of my speech, I believe the government needs to continue its review of the death penalty in particular its mandatory nature. In addition, the courier clauses appear to be problematic and should be monitored closely for further review.

 

[sengkang]

Speech on Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill – MP Pritam Singh : The Workers’ Party of Singapore
wp.sg


The amendments proposed by the government are a step in the right direction insofar as it loosens the application of the mandatory death penalty under two specific conditions. However, this move also represents a missed opportunity to remove the mandatory death penalty from our statute books complet...

 

[sengkang]

The Workers' Party


The Workers' Party wishes all who celebrate the Festival of Lights a Happy Deepavali!
இனிப்பைபோல் தங்கள் வாழவும் இனித்திடஇனிய தீபாவளி நல்வாழ்த்துக்கள்!

 

[sengkang]

Economical and Cultural Examination. 我们的新加坡还需要什么？- 经济与文化之检视。演讲主办者是南洋孔教会。

 

[sengkang]

Yee Jenn Jong

One of the issues Png and I raised in parliament today.


[h=1]Downtown Line cost may not hit revised $20.7b[/h]


By Maria Almenoar
The construction cost for the Downtown Line will increase from the original budgeted $12 billion but it may not go as high as the revised estimate of $20.7 billion if market prices remain at the current levels.
Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said this in Parliament on Wednesday when asked by members why the budget for the line had increased so significantly from the original estimate in 2007.
Mr Lui in responding to MP (Hougang) Png Eng Huat and Non-Constituency MP Yee Jenn Jong, said that higher construction costs came primarily from the increase in prices of key materials like steel bars and concrete.
Additional enhancements made to the line, like extra station entrances, also added to the extra cost. Mr Lui explained that price fluctuation clauses were included in all major construction tenders.

http://www.straitstimes.com/microsi...n-line-cost-may-not-hit-revised-207b-20121114

 

[sengkang]

Yee Jenn Jong


IB vs 'A' Levels. A Sec 4 student writes about having IB in government schools.

Are we ready for IB? Is IB better than 'A' levels? Or it doesn't matter?


IB diploma: Does it cater only to the elite?
[url]www.todayonline.com


I am a Secondary 4 student eager to embark on the International Baccalaureate (IB), which is...


[/URL]

 

[sengkang]

Speech on Casino Control (Amendment) Bill – MP Chen Show Mao : The Workers’ Party of Singapore
wp.sg


Mr Speaker, Sir, this is the Casino Control (Amendment) Bill. Casino. Control. Now that we have the casinos as part of integrated resorts, or IRs, and they have been in operation for two years, we should try to better control their effects on our lives, our economy and our society.

 

[sengkang]

Speech on Casino Control (Amendment) Bill – NCMP Gerald Giam : The Workers’ Party of Singapore
wp.sg


Let me state categorically that I have always been strongly against having casinos in Singapore – and I have held this view long before I entered politics. Before the Government allowed in casinos seven years ago, I had written several letters to the Government, voicing my strong objections. I took ...

 

[sengkang]

Speech on Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill – MP Pritam Singh : The Workers’ Party of Singapore
wp.sg
The amendments proposed by the government are a step in the right direction insofar as it loosens the application of the mandatory death penalty under two specific conditions. However, this move also represents a missed opportunity to remove the mandatory death penalty from our statute books complet...

 

[sengkang]

Speech on Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill – MP Sylvia Lim : The Workers’ Party of Singapore
wp.sg


This bill provides for the Court of Appeal to automatically review all death sentences passed, in cases where the accused does not lodge an appeal. I welcome this additional check by our highest court, which will confirm whether each death sentence was correctly imposed before we send anyone to the ...

 

[sengkang]

"This amendment bill makes an important and overdue change regarding the sentencing of homicide cases. Overall, this is good step towards a more just sentencing regime for homicide, and I support it. Nevertheless, there are still serious issues requiring law review which I believe the government should look into in due course." - Sylvia Lim


Speech on Penal Code (Amendment) Bill – MP Sylvia Lim : The Workers’ Party of Singapore
wp.sg


This amendment bill makes an important and overdue change regarding the sentencing of homicide cases. Overall, this is good step towa

 

[sengkang]

[h=1]13.11.2012 - Serangoon Division Deepavali Goodies Distribution[/h]Updated <abbr title="Friday, November 16, 2012 at 1:14am" data-utime="1352999680" class="timestamp">6 hours ago</abbr> · Taken in Serangoon New Town




"As part of Serangoon Division Deepavali celebration, rations, lunch pack, cakes and Diwali sweet desserts were distributed to low-income Hindu families. In line with Singapore’s multi-racial society to join in the Deepavali celebration, Muslim and Chinese low-income families were also invited to receive the goodies. Earlier in the week, MP for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, also went door-to-door wishing Hindu low-income families in Serangoon Division, Happy Deepavali. Red packet (Hong Bao) and greeting card were also distributed to these families." - Way

 

[sengkang]

13.11.2012 - Serangoon Division Deepavali Goodies Distribution


"As part of Serangoon Division Deepavali celebration, rations, lunch pack, cakes and Diwali sweet desserts were distributed to low-income Hindu families. In line with Singapore’s multi-racial society to join in the Deepavali celebration, Muslim and Chinese low-income families were also invited to receive the goodies. Earlier in the week, MP for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, also went door-to-door wishing Hindu low-income families in Serangoon Division, Happy Deepavali. Red packet (Hong Bao) and greeting card were also distributed to these families." - Way

 

[sengkang]

13.11.2012 - Serangoon Division Deepavali Goodies Distribution


"As part of Serangoon Division Deepavali celebration, rations, lunch pack, cakes and Diwali sweet desserts were distributed to low-income Hindu families. In line with Singapore’s multi-racial society to join in the Deepavali celebration, Muslim and Chinese low-income families were also invited to receive the goodies. Earlier in the week, MP for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, also went door-to-door wishing Hindu low-income families in Serangoon Division, Happy Deepavali. Red packet (Hong Bao) and greeting card were also distributed to these families." - Way

 

[sengkang]

13.11.2012 - Serangoon Division Deepavali Goodies Distribution


"As part of Serangoon Division Deepavali celebration, rations, lunch pack, cakes and Diwali sweet desserts were distributed to low-income Hindu families. In line with Singapore’s multi-racial society to join in the Deepavali celebration, Muslim and Chinese low-income families were also invited to receive the goodies. Earlier in the week, MP for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, also went door-to-door wishing Hindu low-income families in Serangoon Division, Happy Deepavali. Red packet (Hong Bao) and greeting card were also distributed to these families." - Way

 

[sengkang]

13.11.2012 - Serangoon Division Deepavali Goodies Distribution


"As part of Serangoon Division Deepavali celebration, rations, lunch pack, cakes and Diwali sweet desserts were distributed to low-income Hindu families. In line with Singapore’s multi-racial society to join in the Deepavali celebration, Muslim and Chinese low-income families were also invited to receive the goodies. Earlier in the week, MP for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, also went door-to-door wishing Hindu low-income families in Serangoon Division, Happy Deepavali. Red packet (Hong Bao) and greeting card were also distributed to these families." - Way