Double-standards by the PAP government

[Loofydralb]

If maids can murder their employers and get away from being hanged, so what is a little shoplifting by pretty angmoh girls?

 

[A Singaporean]

Do not blame the judge. Blame yourself for not being a foreigner.

 

[Papsmearer]

The fact the 6 Aussie girls were stealing Victoria Secret sexy items means they are ready to get fucked and lose their virginity. Maybe already lost. They should be sentenced to 6 months of being comfort women for our NS boys in their camps. Make it a benefit for serving NS.

 

[Hypocrite-The]

The fact the 6 Aussie girls were stealing Victoria Secret sexy items means they are ready to get fucked and lose their virginity. Maybe already lost. They should be sentenced to 6 months of being comfort women for our NS boys in their camps. Make it a benefit for serving NS.

Why have the Oppies been quiet on this?

 

[bobby]

It pays indeed to be a foreigner in SG....

 

[Hypocrite-The]

It pays indeed to be a foreigner in SG....

And foreigners aka new immigrants no need do NS

 

[parrardee]

Unfortunately Sinkieland has again showed no balls where whites are concerned. Its shameful.

 

[Papsmearer]

Why have the Oppies been quiet on this?

Because, as I have been saying for many years. They are fake wayang oppo, especially the Wayang Party aka Workers Party

 

[Hypocrite-The]

Because, as I have been saying for many years. They are fake wayang oppo, especially the Wayang Party aka Workers Party

That is why I have no respect for the Wankers Party

 

[birdie69]

I have recently noted that most pf the reporters i come across the news articles were prepared by Ceca. Why?

CECA Indians journalists have been in ST quite long time after CECA agreement effective, they create better and high pay journalist jobs for locals

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

6 Australian schoolgirls nabbed for shoplifting in Orchard given warnings: Police​

The girls were suspected of stealing lingerie from a Victoria’s Secret store, as well as a pair of Crocs footwear. PHOTO: ST FILE

Samuel Devaraj


NOV 23, 2022

SINGAPORE – Three Australian schoolgirls who were here for a netball competition and arrested after shoplifting in Orchard Road have been given a 12-month conditional warning.
Three others received a stern warning, the police said on Wednesday in response to The Straits Times query, adding that they had administered the warnings in consultation with the Attorney-General’s Chambers.
“This took into account, among other factors, their ages and the extent of their individual involvement,” said the police. They were alerted to the case of theft in 333A Orchard Road at about 4pm on Nov 13.
Australian media reports said the girls were suspected of stealing lingerie from a Victoria’s Secret store, as well as a pair of Crocs footwear. They identified the girls as Year 10 students from Bacchus Marsh Grammar, a private school about 60km north of Melbourne in the state of Victoria.
Following investigations by the police, the six girls aged 14 to 16 were found in possession of stolen items.
A stern warning is issued in place of prosecution after a criminal investigation is concluded.
But a conditional stern warning allows the authorities to prosecute the accused for the original crime if conditions in the warning are breached within a specified time period, which in this case is 12 months.

Australian media reports on Tuesday, quoting the school’s principal Andrew Neal, said the matters had been resolved and all the girls had returned home after leaving Singapore last Saturday.
“Everyone is here and they all came in on the same flight… All matters have been resolved and the girls were allowed to proceed to the airport with no further action,” he added.
He earlier said the school had 18 students who were in Singapore to compete in a regional netball competition.
He had recorded the school’s appreciation of the Singapore police for their professionalism, saying in a statement that they have been firm, fair and thorough.

 

[The Crow]

PAP govt is not double standards... it really is no standard.

Double No standards...

 

[blackmondy]

If the thieves were sinkie schoolgirls, I'm sure the punishment wouldn't be that lenient.

 

[countryman]

If the thieves were sinkie schoolgirls, I'm sure the punishment wouldn't be that lenient.

It wouldn't even be in the news...

 

[Singapore Dancing Spirit]

I have recently noted that most of the news prepared by CECA reporters. Why?

Cuz’ u can’t get a neutral news as Indians twists the facts with their own ideologies and opinions!!

 

[blackmondy]

I have recently noted that most of the news prepared by CECA reporters. Why?

Cuz’ u can’t get a neutral news as Indians twists the facts with their own ideologies and opinions!!

Any news leeported by CECA shitskins should have backup dancers.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

It is hard to believe that Ng Ser Miang only interfered in World Sailing and nowhere else.
Will the Singapore Government, PAP and the Corrupt Practice Investigation Bureau must investigated his affairs in his previous appointments?

Chairman of TIBS International Pte Ltd (1975);
President of the Automobile Association of Singapore (1988-1996);
Member of the Singapore Insurance Ombudsman Bureau (1990-1996);
Chairman of NTUC Choice Homes (1996-2010);
Singapore Ambassador to Hungary (2000-2013) and to Norway (2001-);
Member of Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Business Advisory Council (2001-2008);
nominated Member of Parliament (2002-2005);
Chairman of NTUC FairPrice (2005-2014); Justice of Peace (2005-);
Director of Singapore Press Holdings (2007-);
Chairman of Rowsley Ltd (2015-)

S’pore’s IOC vice-president Ng Ser Miang warned, fined for interfering in World Sailing election​

International Olympic Committee vice-president and Singapore National Olympic Council board member Ng Ser Miang has been found guilty of interfering in the World Sailing 2020 election. ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG

Deepanraj Ganesan

Jan 4, 2023

SINGAPORE – International Olympic Committee (IOC) vice-president and Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) board member Ng Ser Miang has been fined €1,000 (S$1,418) and served with an official warning after being found guilty of interfering in a World Sailing election.
In a notice put up on its official website last Friday, World Sailing (WS) detailed the charges facing Ng and former World Sailing Ethics Commission chairman Dieter Neupert. WS noted both had been found guilty of failing to act with integrity and interfering in the 2020 election which saw then-president Kim Andersen of Denmark narrowly defeated.
When contacted by The Straits Times, Ng, 73, said on Wednesday: “I resigned from the World Sailing Ethics Commission in December 2020. I served the World Sailing Ethics Commission as a volunteer and have done so without fear and favour, and in full compliance with its rules and regulations.
“World Sailing has no jurisdiction over me after December 2020. I have not taken part in any of their proceedings and reject any allegations and sanctions made against me by World Sailing.”
The Singaporean, who was vice-president of the International Sailing Federation (WS’s predecessor) from 1994-1998, is a veteran sports administrator and has served the IOC as a member since 1998. He was vice-president of the SNOC from 1990 to 2014 (he is now chairman of its games appeals committee and finance committee) and chairman of the Singapore Sports Council – now national agency Sport Singapore – from 1991 to 2002. He was also president of the 2010 Youth Olympic Games organising committee.
Ng was accused of failure to act with utmost integrity, honesty and responsibility and acting in a manner that is likely to compromise the impartiality of the Ethics Commission. The decision was reached by a three-member independent panel, chaired by London-based lawyer and former English Premier League footballer Gareth Farrelly. The other two members were John Shea and Laura McCallum.
In November 2020, China’s Quanhai Li was elected as the new WS president after defeating incumbent Andersen. Li’s victory came after a bitter election campaign where Andersen faced three ethical complaints against him. The World Sailing’s Ethics Commission dismissed two while the third was withdrawn. Andersen however, claimed that the complaints were part of a smear campaign against him prior to the election.

In September 2020, prior to the election result, Andersen lodged complaints against Neupert, a Swiss lawyer, and Ng relating to their conduct whilst they were members of the World Sailing Ethics Commission, alleging that their conduct was in breach of the world governing body’s regulations. He alleged that Ng and Neupert, who were part of the Ethics Commission, should not have taken part in judging his cases.
Andersen also accused Ng of misusing his IOC membership to interfere in the presidential election.
The independent panel said in its judgement that both Ng and Neupert should have stepped aside once accusations of conflict of interest had been made. Instead, Neupert managed correspondence from Andersen and continued to consult with his representatives, as well as other members of the Ethics Commission, despite the fact that the complaint was against him and Ng.
Ng and Neupert resigned from the Ethics Commission in Dec 2020 and Jan 2021, respectively.
The independent panel also noted that Ng failed to answer questions from two different disciplinary investigation officers (DIO) as they conducted their inquiries.
In its judgement, finalised on Nov 29, 2022, the panel noted: “This case was by no means straightforward. It is clear that this case was highly politicised within World Sailing and related to governance issues in relation to the operation and functioning of the Ethics Commission.
“The DIO noted that the allegations against Mr Anderson at the time, which were not substantiated, but which caused damage to his reputation, and which Mr Anderson complained with good cause, showed that there had been a campaign to influence the election and damage his reputation.”

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Commentary: The nature of MP Tin Pei Ling’s new role at Grab muddies perception​

Member of Parliament Tin Pei Ling has defended taking a new job at Grab. Corporate governance expert Mak Yuen Teen weighs in on the online frenzy and the actual and perceived conflicts.

MP Tin Pei Ling joined Grab Singapore as its Director of Public Affairs and Policy in January 2023. (Photo: Grab Singapore, Facebook/Tin Pei Ling)

Mak Yuen Teen​

06 Feb 2023

SINGAPORE: The news that Member of Parliament (MP) Tin Pei Ling has joined tech giant Grab in a full-time role as director of public affairs and policy at Grab Singapore has been widely reported in the local and international media, and lit up the Internet.
In Singapore, many MPs have other full-time or part-time roles.
Prior to joining Grab, Ms Tin was CEO of Business China, a non-profit organisation that had the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew as its founding patron, with five current ministers as advisers, and a board of directors that includes several senior ministers of state and civil servants.
Before joining Business China in May 2018, the People’s Action Party MP - who was first elected to Parliament in 2011 - was group director of corporate strategy at Singapore firm Jing King Tech Group.
There was no online or media frenzy on those occasions.
However, this time the reaction has been vastly different. In her LinkedIn and Facebook posts responding to concerns of conflict of interest, she said:
“The company has established clear rules of engagement to ensure that any possible conflict of interest will be properly declared and avoided. Likewise, the People’s Action Party has a published set of Rules of Prudence, as well as mechanisms in place for declarations of interest and the avoidance of conflicting interests.”
She added: “I am absolutely clear that when I am discharging my duties as an MP, my constituents and Singapore come first. When I am working on behalf of Grab, I will have to ensure that Grab’s interests are safeguarded.”
It is not so straightforward.

GRAB’S CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICS​

As a company listed in the United States, Grab Holdings is required to have a code of conduct for its directors, senior officers and employees, which must be made publicly available.
Grab’s 13-page code of business conduct and ethics covers general principles relating to honest and ethical conduct and specific topics. There is a short one-paragraph section on Conflicts of Interest that serves to prevent actual and perceived conflicts, and reference to a separate Conflict of Interest Policy.
However, the code does not appear to specifically cover the situation of an employee who concurrently holds a position as a government official, such as an MP. It acknowledges that the code is not a complete list of legal or ethical questions and/or situations that may be faced, and said that it “must be used together with your common sense and good judgment”.
However, a code of conduct is mainly aimed at protecting a company’s interests. The concern here is not the company’s interest but the public interest.
I am surprised that Grab, being a company listed in the US, would employ an MP, who is considered a politically exposed person. Perhaps Grab’s head of ethics and compliance and general counsel deemed this a non-issue because she is not a board director or senior officer and her appointment is Singapore-based.

PAP’S RULES OF PRUDENCE​

On the Government’s side, the PAP’s Rules of Prudence are communicated through a letter from the Prime Minister to PAP MPs after each election. It was last done for all PAP MPs in 2020. The rules are comprehensive, but they still require the MP to use their own judgment.
As for mechanisms for declaring interests, every MP is required to disclose to the Prime Minister, in confidence, their directorships, business and professional interests, latest employment and monthly pay, all retainers and fees that they are receiving, and whether their job requires them to get in touch with officers of government ministries or statutory boards on behalf of employers or clients.
It is unclear whether declarations must be made before accepting a job or appointment but regardless, it would be difficult to ensure compliance with the letter and spirit of the rules purely through self-declarations. Again, much would depend on the individual doing the right thing.

ADDRESSING CONFLICT OF INTEREST SITUATIONS​

The Integrity Coordinating Group in Western Australia (WA) published a guide some years ago titled Promoting and Strengthening Integrity in WA Public Bodies which is useful for public officials to personally evaluate and address conflict of interest situations.
It recommends that an individual asks the following questions, which I have slightly adapted, to identify potential conflicts of interest:

1. Do I have personal or private interests that may conflict, or be perceived to conflict with my public duty?
2. Could there be benefits for me, now or in the future, that could cast doubt on my objectivity?
3. How will my involvement in the decision/action be viewed by others?
4. Does my involvement in the decision appear fair and reasonable in all the circumstances?
5. What are the consequences if I ignore the conflict of interest? What if my involvement was questioned publicly?
6. Have I made promises or commitments in relation to the matter? Do I stand to gain or lose from the proposed action/decision

It also suggests the following possible actions to resolve conflict of interest:

1. Disclose the interest or conflict
2. Restrict involvement in the matter, which may include not receiving information on the matter, not participating in discussions, and not being involved in making the decision
3. Involve an independent third party to participate in, oversee, or review the integrity of the decision-making process
4. Remove oneself altogether from the matter
5. Dispose of the private or personal interests
6. Resign from the organisation

Very importantly, it recognises that even perceived conflicts can be problematic. Further, declaring an interest or conflict is the minimum - it merely makes others aware of the interest or conflict but often does not resolve it.
Previous

MP Tin Pei Ling meeting residents during a walkabout at MacPherson. (Photo: Tin Pei Ling's Facebook Page)

File photo of Tin Pei Ling in Parliament.

People's Action Party candidate for MacPherson SMC Tin Pei Ling removing her mask just before her address on Nomination Day on Jun 30, 2020. (Photo: Try Sutrisno Foo)

TREADING A CAREFUL LINE​

The Rules of Prudence tell MPs the following: “Separate your public political position from your private, professional or business interests. MPs who are in business, who occupy senior management positions in companies, or who sit on company boards should be especially vigilant. You must not exploit your public position as Government MPs, your close contacts with the Ministers, or your access to government departments and civil servants, for your personal interest or the benefit of your employers. Your conduct must always be above board.”
Even if Ms Tin’s role is not Singapore-based and does not involve interactions with the government bodies and officials here, perceptions of conflicts will likely remain because Grab is ubiquitous in Singapore and facing potentially increasing regulation impacting its business, particularly regarding the rights of gig workers.
Also, how would Ms Tin address perceptions that information she receives as an MP may be used to benefit Grab, even if unconsciously?
As director of public affairs and policy, the potential conflicts are intensified because her job responsibilities are likely to require her to oversee government relations and ensure that Grab’s views are communicated to the Government.
All MPs face challenges when treading the line in balancing roles, but in this type of position, the challenges are even more acute.
Mak Yuen Teen is Professor (Practice) of Accounting at the NUS Business School where he specialises in corporate governance.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Forum: Tough job for MP to fulfil duty to public and employer​

Feb 8, 2023

I am a Singaporean living overseas, and many of my foreign friends have marvelled at our efficient and incorruptible Government, which has been credited as a key ingredient behind our country’s success.
Many Singaporeans are proud of the Government’s integrity and the political stability we enjoy. There is a high level of public trust in our society. These are qualities that set Singapore apart from many other countries.
In this regard, Member of Parliament Tin Pei Ling’s recent appointment as director of public affairs and policy at Grab Singapore came as a surprise to me. Wouldn’t Ms Tin, in her new role, be required to advance Grab’s commercial interests by engaging with the civil service and lawmakers? This role will likely put Ms Tin in a position where she will have to switch between acting in Grab’s interests and that of her constituents, a point she recently acknowledged (MP addresses conflict-of-interest concerns after taking up Grab role, Feb 3).
In this context, I find it hard to understand how an MP can effectively fulfil his elected and appointed responsibilities to both constituents and company. For example, if the MP recuses himself from voting in Parliament on sensitive legislation that would impact the interests of his constituents and his company, to what extent has he fully discharged the responsibilities required?
Dispelling the perception of conflicts of interest is as paramount as avoiding them altogether when it comes to discharging one’s official duties. This is particularly important for MPs, who are subjected to high levels of public scrutiny as elected officials.
If doubts linger over the ability of an elected official to act in the best interest of his constituents, I worry it is not simply the integrity of the MP but that of the Government that could be jeopardised.


Liu Yi

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

MP Tin Pei Ling joins Grab: Conflict of interest or much ado about nothing?​

Many MPs from both the ruling party and opposition hold other jobs. So what makes Ms Tin’s case different, and why the public outcry now?​

Grace Ho
Deputy News Editor

Member of Parliament Tin Pei Ling joins Grab as director of public affairs and policy. PHOTOS: MCI, LIANHE ZAOBAO

FEB 5, 2023


At a time when Singaporeans are wondering how Grab rides became so expensive, last week, they were confronted with another question about the ride-hailing giant: Why was MP Tin Pei Ling allowed to join Grab as its Singapore director of public affairs and policy?
Is there any conflict of interest between this and her role as a politician?
Bear in mind that most MPs here hold day jobs, and sit on boards and committees.
For example, Sembawang GRC MP Mariam Jaafar is a managing director at the Boston Consulting Group. Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC MP Saktiandi Supaat is an executive vice-president at Maybank Group, and Sengkang GRC Workers’ Party (WP) MP Jamus Lim is an associate professor at Essec Asia-Pacific, just to name a few.
Bukit Panjang MP Liang Eng Hwa is a managing director at DBS Bank, and chairs the Finance and Trade and Industry Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC). West Coast GRC MP Ang Wei Neng is president of Strides Mobility, a subsidiary of transport operator SMRT, and a member of the GPC for Transport.
The issue is not unique to Singapore.
In 2021, attention was drawn to British MPs’ second jobs, when former North Shropshire MP Owen Paterson was found to have had misused his political position to benefit two companies he worked for.

By definition, a conflict of interest means a person has competing interests or loyalties because of his duties to more than one person or organisation.
But there is no actual, potential or apparent conflict of interest simply by being an MP employed in the private sector, Singapore Management University (SMU) associate law professor Eugene Tan told me.
“The issue is more of when a conflict of interest arises… An MP who does not promptly remove himself from (such a) situation does so at his peril,” he said.


Professor Lawrence Loh, director of the Centre for Governance and Sustainability at NUS Business School, said that it is “only when the rubber hits the road” that a specific case can be assessed to determine if there is any concern for conflict.
Ms Tin has not shown any actual conflict of interest. So why the public fuss over her?

Rules of right behaviour​

Today, MPs can recuse themselves from a matter if they have concerns about conflicts of interest, or declare upfront their private roles, such as during Parliament debates.
There are also established party rules on how to deal with conflicts of interest, although it is the respective political parties’ prerogative to decide what goes into them.
The WP’s rules of prudence, for example, do not contain a section on the separation of business and politics, unlike the People’s Action Party’s (PAP).
In Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s letter to PAP MPs on rules of prudence in 2020, PM Lee wrote that MPs who are employed by companies or industry associations may at times have to make public statements on behalf of their company or industry association.
If they have to do so, they must make it clear they are not speaking as an MP, but in their private, professional or business capacity, he said.
“Do not use parliamentary questions or speeches to lobby the Government on behalf of your businesses or clients.”


According to the PAP’s rules of prudence, MPs are allowed to sit on boards of private and publicly listed companies. But they should decline the role if the company is not reputable, or they do not have a meaningful contribution to make.
Section 32 of the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962 also states: “A Member shall not in or before Parliament or any committee take part in the discussion of any matter in which he has a direct personal pecuniary interest without disclosing the extent of that interest and shall not in any circumstances vote upon any such matter.”
One way to enhance this provision is to require MPs to disclose any potential conflict of interest to the public, said Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) law lecturer Ben Chester Cheong.
But he acknowledges that it is “impracticable” to get the public to vote on every potential conflict of interest an MP has.
At the end of the day, MPs are elected by and accountable to the public, said Mr Cheong. “A consequence of failing to satisfy the electorate’s concern could be the possibility that one may not be re-elected.”
There seems to be little risk of this happening to Ms Tin.
In 2020, the much-loved politician romped home to electoral victory with 71.74 per cent of the votes in her MacPherson single-member constituency seat, an improvement of over 6 percentage points from her vote share in the 2015 election.

Changing attitudes​

But a more deep-seated issue may be that Singaporeans’ attitudes are changing.
Citing the longstanding practice of seconding high-ranking administrative officers in the civil service to work in the private sector, SUSS Associate Professor Walter Theseira said the Government’s strategy has always been to “embrace close coordination” between the state and key industries.
“I expect Ms Tin’s hiring by Grab was seen no differently (by the Government),” he said. “But it doesn’t necessarily look to the public like that is the right way to do things anymore.”
A legitimate concern is whether people are trading on their MP status to get jobs that others cannot, he said, adding that some members of the public may desire a more arms-length relationship between politicians and industry.
Another big concern flagged by SMU’s Prof Tan is that, leveraging her position as MP, Ms Tin could enable her company to have access to decision-makers and information not in the public domain. Could this give her company an advantage over its competitors?
As Prof Tan said, her corporate title has become “the proverbial lightning rod”.
In this instance, a director for public policy is normally responsible for monitoring, reacting to, and – where feasible – providing input on government policy. The nature of Ms Tin’s role may have affected public perception.
But there may be double standards here, given that there seems to be less public outcry over MPs being practising doctors or lawyers.
“One does get the feeling the public is more accepting of some MP jobs than others,” said Prof Theseira, suggesting that some constituents may feel that their MPs can more flexibly manage their affairs with such jobs.
History also plays a part. Former PAP MP and Progress Singapore Party chairman Tan Cheng Bock’s political “legend”, for example, was partly built on him being a rural doctor to poor farmers who paid him in kind with eggs, vegetables and chickens.
In the end, MPs who are professionals across diverse industries can bring different views and perspectives to Parliament, so that policy issues are better represented and debated.
But, as Prof Theseira pointed out, being an MP in a small country like Singapore makes it impossible to be treated anonymously.
The ultimate safeguard is still the MPs’ own conscience and judgment. Hence, on relevant matters, they must declare their interest promptly, and recuse themselves from being further involved.