SDP should be doing this instead

[leetahbar]

they shouldn't be kaypohing about sheng siong and persistently intimidating them or pestering them. SS is doing a leegal biz while SDP are just a bunch of too free public clowns.

instead they should try to stop upgrading of hawker centres. there's an imminent one for them to take action. i believe many would support them cos after upgrading hawker food shall surely increase in price and decrease in quality/quantity. this concern many heartlanders too.

ALEXANDRA VILLAGE hc is proposed to be upgraded soon. for the time being, u can still find $2 fishball noodle selling there which is good and in generous portion.

unless the SDP is scheming and anticipating some kind of drastic action that might land them in tussle with our law, or worst being charged again to be jailed which is an anticipation and a showoff to the forthcoming APEC meeting in NOV to prove (wrongfully, as usual) to president obama's presence, SDP is just too naive to think the residents there would appreciate their hypocritcal activity.

Supermarket chain Sheng Siong has declined an invitation to meet with the Singapore Democrats, citing the reason that it is “inconvenient” to do so. The SDP had written to the company to meet with its representatives over its takeover of wet markets in Singapore.

The SDP had written to Ms Tan Ching Fern, head of Corporate Matters, asking to meet with the company's representatives. (See here) The party wants to hear from Sheng Siong what its plans are for the markets.


Information about Sheng Siong's plans are sketchy and confusing. The supermarket chain is reported to have said that it will not rule out changing the operations of the wet markets after acquisition, including airconditioning the facilities and turning them into 24-hour operations.

Other reports cite that the chain has promised that it will not turn the markets into airconditioned ones.

Given such contradictory reports the Singapore Democrats wanted to hear from the company itself what the real situation is.

But Ms Tan did not reply even after a follow-up email from SDP's Chairman Gandhi Ambalam. She only indicated that the company did not want to meet after Mr Ambalam called her on the telephone.

Mr Ambalam had indicated in his email to Ms Tan that the SDP wanted to be sure that the takeover would not affect the stallholders' livelihoods and that consumers would not be further burdened financially.

“If I do not get a response...I will conclude that Sheng Siong will not respond and does not want to engage the SDP, and by extension the shoppers. We will then proceed with our own plans accordingly.”

Now that Sheng Siong has refused to meet, the SDP can and will conclude that the company cannot give the assurance that its acquisition of the wet markets will not lead to higher costs of food items and that it also cannot assure stallholders that their livelihoods will not be affected.

For these reasons, the SDP opposes the sale of the wet markets to Sheng Siong and we will write to the Housing Board (HDB) to halt the takeover. The Straits Times reported on 22 Oct 09 that the HDB will decide in January next year whether to let the purchases go ahead.

We also call on Dr Teo Ho Pin, MP for Bukit Panjang, to do the same for the wet market at Fajar Road.

 

[leetahbar]

how can this mamak get all his facts wrong?? shish!! sdp!! what craps! have those clowns really done their homeworks? sheng siong things sold are much cheaper than wet market and even NTUC! obviously SDP is "selling dog's soup by hanging a mutton head"!:oIo:

Dear Dr Teo Ho Pin,

I write to let you know that the SDP opposes the sale of the Fajar wet market to Sheng Siong. This is because the company cannot give assurances that the stallholders will not be adversely affected by the sale.

In addition, there is a very high likelihood that residents at Bukit Panjang will have to bear the increase in prices of food items after the takeover by Sheng Siong.

In view of this, the SDP opposes the sale of the Fajar market to Sheng Siong. We ask you to join us in opposing the sale. We will be writing to the HDB to not approve the transaction and call on you to do the same.

We hope that you will not equivocate on this matter, and state plainly and publicly that you oppose the takeover by Sheng Siong and will do all you can to stop the sale.

I look forward to your reply.

Gandhi Ambalam
Chairman
SDP

 

[leetahbar]

by the way, don't u find SDP's attitude quite co-descending - a favorite term they love to use against the paps. aren't their paps little pirate copies too?
BryanT - Price Control or Freedom to Decide? Tue 27 Oct 2009 8:07 PM
SDP should recognise that stating that it is “inconvenient” is merely SS’s way being courteous. There no need to be derogatory about it. It’s the Asian way of saying “mañana”, so that no bridges are burnt. Who knows, one day SS’s wet-market could be in a constituency run by SDP.

Provided it stays within the contractual obligation of the purchase, SS is not legally obliged to reveal its plans to anyone – HDB, SDP or PAP MP. As I said, it definitely is not morally obliged to provide it to any political party, and be constrained by the latter.

If it buys over the wet-market, SS manages the property and if it is obliged to retain the current business model, it will continue to rent out the stalls. Obviously it will decide on the rent to charge stall-holders.

However, it probably CANNOT give any assurances about higher costs of food items because it DOES NOT and SHOULD NOT fix the prices at which stall-holders sell. I hope nobody is about to suggest the notorious idea called "price-control".

I really don’t see the point of SDP barking up this feckless tree.

 

[leetahbar]

finally, here comes the comment from my pet bishan snake. as usual, more prejudices and (un)reasons for their hooligan type of behaviour. tsk! tsk!

ngejay - inconvenient?? Tue 27 Oct 2009 5:15 PM
Inconvenient to meet?

Why can't Sheng Siong be man enough to admit they are AFRAID to meet?

This case is another example of how Big Business is allowed to crowd out the small guys (individual consumers and SMEs) because the Govt colludes with them and neglects the interests of citizens.

So many times we hear people complain that the SG economy is too regulated. It is not that it is too regulated for all, but most of the regulation is directed at the small guys while the big guys are allowed to slip under the radar and gain an unfair advantage.

Heartland business form the backbone of any well-diversified economy, but not for Singapore. We are an unsustainable economy.

In this case, the Govt is responsible for looking out for the interest of stall owners and consumers in the heartlands, but it has shirked its responsibility and instead allowed Sheng Siong to crowd out the little guys and have the ability to raise prices at will.

The only ones who appear to be speaking out for consumers is the SDP.

lamei and chiatilik love shopping in sheng siong by the way. quite contradicting, hor?

 

[leetahbar]

finally, here comes the comment from my pet bishan snake. as usual, more prejudices and (un)reasons for their hooligan type of behaviour. tsk! tsk!

ngejay - inconvenient?? Tue 27 Oct 2009 5:15 PM
Inconvenient to meet?

Why can't Sheng Siong be man enough to admit they are AFRAID to meet?

This case is another example of how Big Business is allowed to crowd out the small guys (individual consumers and SMEs) because the Govt colludes with them and neglects the interests of citizens.

So many times we hear people complain that the SG economy is too regulated. It is not that it is too regulated for all, but most of the regulation is directed at the small guys while the big guys are allowed to slip under the radar and gain an unfair advantage.

Heartland business form the backbone of any well-diversified economy, but not for Singapore. We are an unsustainable economy.

In this case, the Govt is responsible for looking out for the interest of stall owners and consumers in the heartlands, but it has shirked its responsibility and instead allowed Sheng Siong to crowd out the little guys and have the ability to raise prices at will.

The only ones who appear to be speaking out for consumers is the SDP.

lamei and chiatilik love shopping in sheng siong by the way. quite contradicting, hor?

if SDP is really speaking for consumers, they should start with the hawker centres unnecessary upgrading. but because sheng siong is currently given more media attention, SDP's intention could be to steal some limelight from them, get themselves arrested later for staging some silly public protest which they craftily schemed to coincide with the arrival of delegates especially obama during APEC meeting in NOV.

the greater intention might not be sheng siong but to attract the attention of those delegates so that once again chee could use their arrest - which they dreadfully hope for - to highlight about all their usual craps on human rights, free speeches and democrapsy stuffs.

BRYANT T has exposed their plot and already given us some fortune telling about what to expect from sdp circus of clowns.

 

[leetahbar]

by now, everyone should know what's really is SDP's "free speeches, human rights and democrapsy".

all these privileges are only entitled to them SDP IB and their nasty coward and loser clones deployed by my pet snake who's a mastershapeshifter itself.

any intention, if it's authentic, honest & straightforward, everyone could see easily and appreciate it. the SDP has already create such foul name for themselves that every of their antic is nothing but a public flea circus of clowns.

their action hides a very sinister intention about trying to exploit again the innocent peasants into their diabolical ploy which they hope to use to smear our gov and hence our singapore.

so DO NOT BE FOOLED by them!

 

[leetahbar]

this morning after sumptuous dim sum with my li'l brother LEETAHSAR and a couple of retirees, the subject about SDP cropped up.

well, there wasn't any good comment from those uncles and aunties. everyone disliked SDP. i now shared with u a phrase that kept ringing in my mind:

"chee soon juan is a very intelligent guy," one uncle began, "but the way he does thing is damn bloody stupid!!"

one laukuaybu chipped in. " yalor! alway go bang himself against walls dunno for what? if i got this type of son, i rather lay a char siew bao instead." and the whole table of us laughed while chomping our delicious char siew baos.

finally, another lauhan added, "he sibei xia lan! always tekan people. u see chiam see tong almost kena beh tong from him. piangz! this cb kia really bo ka see!"

of course, u guys might not believe it. why don't u check with some heartlanders and see if u hear the same things from them too. go ahead. u can start with the taxi uncles.

 

[Orochi]

Dear Dr Teo Ho Pin,

lanjiao sucking unemployed parasite old fart faggot fake monk PAP dog Bob Sim Kheng Hwee,

temple thief, swindler, fraudster, cheat, con-artist, liar, hypocrite, deceiver, betrayer, all rolled into one!

you stole temple donation money and the chief monk told you to fuck off!

you bashed your 80 y.o.father until bloody when he threw away your gay porn!

you called your mother LAUCHEEBYE when she reprimanded you for doing fuck all at home except prostituting yourself round-the-clock in cyberspace!

you also stole handphones and claimed that handphones waved at you!

you steal others forum password!

you tried to con a forummer's property!

you tried to con the same person to include your name in his will when he discovered you tried to con his property!

you cursed an old man at his death bed!

you tried to con laukwayboos but you end up only con some free makan!

 

[sand_ban]

[COLOR="_______"]You are free to form & register your own political party and recruit your own members to do whatever you believe in. Mr. JBJ did it before he died. You have the rights to do this. But you have no rights to tell other people's party to do what you believe in, because you are not even a member!
[/COLOR]

 

[TeeKee]

You are free to form & register your own political party and recruit your own members to do whatever you believe in. Mr. JBJ did it before he died. You have the rights to do this. But you have no rights to tell other people's party to do what you believe in, because you are not even a member!

this one good point! up you.

 

[leetahbar]

[COLOR="_______"]You are free to form & register your own political party and recruit your own members to do whatever you believe in. Mr. JBJ did it before he died. You have the rights to do this. But you have no rights to tell other people's party to do what you believe in, because you are not even a member!
[/COLOR]

of course i m not a member. but so are many of those jokers who choose to remain PARTYLESS, supporters and activists but NEVER a SDP member.

why?

 

[leetahbar]

[COLOR="_______"]You are free to form & register your own political party and recruit your own members to do whatever you believe in. Mr. JBJ did it before he died. You have the rights to do this. But you have no rights to tell other people's party to do what you believe in, because you are not even a member!
[/COLOR]

isn't SDP now demanding that sheng siong refrain fr their takeover of wet markets? what rights have they got? sheng siong is doing a leegal biz. what does sdp doe? bully SS but spare NTUC?

 

[sand_ban]

isn't SDP now demanding that sheng siong refrain fr their takeover of wet markets? what rights have they got? sheng siong is doing a leegal biz. what does sdp doe? bully SS but spare NTUC?

You asked wrong person. Sorry WRONG NUMBER.

 

[sand_ban]

of course i m not a member. but so are many of those jokers who choose to remain PARTYLESS, supporters and activists but NEVER a SDP member.

why?

The question to be asked is to yourself. WHY must be with a party? You so hard up to have a party & no party wants you or what?

It IS absolutely normal for people to remain as voters or supporter or just individuals. What's the problem with yourself?

 

[leetahbar]

The question to be asked is to yourself. WHY must be with a party? You so hard up to have a party & no party wants you or what?

It IS absolutely normal for people to remain as voters or supporter or just individuals. What's the problem with yourself?

well, u look at those spokeperson who blah-blah in SDP clips. initially, u tot "wah, sdp member so garang one..."

then u read: WE ARE ACTUALLY PARTYLESS....

isn't that confusing? or does it mean anyone can also speak on behalf of SDP and then claim they are just partyless and only supporter but not SDP member?

why is the commitment missing here?

 

[PakLaoPeh]

hooray!!! most disgusted chee bye kia bob sim kheng hwee is banned!!! cheers!!!

 

[sillygoonz]