Government Generosity

First, the good news: the much maligned Housing & Development Board (HDB) is finally pricing one of its public housing flats at $16,000. Needless to say, there are hoops you have to jump through to land one.

The first batch of two-room flats (in non-matured estates only) are reserved for eligible singles. As in earning $5,000 or less, aged 35 years or older, and applying under Joint Singles Scheme (JSS) to qualify for the $40,000 Additional CPF Housing Grant (AHG). The AHG for Single Singapore Citizen Scheme (SSC) is only $20,000.

That's how the 2-room flats, normally priced at $76,000 (35 sq m) to $133,000 (45 sq m), can be knocked down to $16,000. Okay, okay, two full grown adults will have to share 35 sq m to avail themselves of the Government's generosity. You can't exactly throw a big house warming party, but do note the standard size of a jail cell is usually 5.5 sq m.

The important thing to remember is that what HDB used to sell for $76,000 can actually be let go at $16,000. Without raiding the reserves, or risk HDB going bankrupt. The sour taste in your mouth comes about when you start thinking of the fat profit margins they have been raking in all these years.

Here's another bit of good news that they have been keeping for themselves. The young men serving two years of National Service can have their wisdom tooth removed for free. If it's a matter of simple extraction, the savings may not be much, private dental clinics charge a maximum of $150 per pesky wisdom tooth. But if the wisdom tooth is impacted, and oral surgery is required, we are talking about $1,200 to $1,600 per tooth. If your son or brother was not informed of the dental benefits, and had to go to the government clinic after ORD, the subsidised charges could be $600 to $800 per wisdom tooth removed under local anesthesia. You would think the doting parents are told about this during BMT, right? Wrong! You want freebies from this bunch of Scrooges, you need to learn to squeeze blood out of stone.

Hearing From The Court

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) said, “AGC would like to take the opportunity to reiterate that the proper forum in which factual issues in a pending matter before a court should be determined, is the court itself.”

Yet, in its statement of 29 July 2013, the same AGC said it has completed its review of the investigation papers relating to a cartoonist and decided not to take action against him under the Sedition Act. Meaning, the serious matter of sedition - overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order - has been decided upon without the determination of the court.

The court, a panel of one's peers (as in jury system), or panel of appointed judges in Singapore's case, is meant to hear and determine disputes between litigants, and in criminal matters, to determine the liability of accused persons and their sentences if they are convicted. It's always a collective assessment of minds to deliberate aired arguments about what is truly at stake. Not the whim and fancy of one sole individual.

In the bad old days, yes, we had one Chief Justice who's attitude of the law depended on his satisfaction of what he had for breakfast. Same chap who ruled that some molest or rape offenders will have their sentences doubled if their lawyers persist in asking questions that harass or embarrass the victim. In another benchmark case, he said that offices, clubs or restaurants may be open to the public, but a visitor can still be hauled up for trespassing if the management had banned him from entering the premises. Those were the bad old days.

Law academic Thio Li-Ann, in an article in the Hong Kong Law Journal, noted that the courts here have tended to protect the public interest of upholding the integrity of government leaders, rather than make judgments that protect the right of individuals to make public criticisms of conduct by public figures. Whatever your take of the system, at least those outcomes resulted from a publicly convened court of law. At least we get to hear both sides of the story.

Bad Example

Fresh after the retelling of Lim Swee Say swiping half a box of toothpicks from a Din Tai Fung Chinese restaurant - because he could - and depriving other paying customers of their entitlement, we are regaled by another anointed favourite with a narration of his own ungracious demeanor:
"We found him at the hot dog stand - patiently putting ketchup, onions, condiments, et cetera, et cetera onto the three hotdogs! I expected him to bring the three "naked" hot dogs to us. The officer failed the hot dog test. No more future trips with us."

The poor staffer was not rewarded by Philip Yeo for attention to detail - supposedly the teaching point of Lim Swee Say's toothpick heist - but penalised for not playing the obsequious errant boy role to perfection. Those who have worked under the abusive tyrant recognise the trait. Worse, they actually learn from him.

The president of a GLC decided to introduce us, his marketing team, to the EDB counterparts at the fancy Raffles City boardroom. EDB bigshot walks in.
GLC President: "Hello, Tan, ho say boh! Long time no get business from your side!"
EDB Director:  "What the f**k do you f**king mean? Since f**king when are we supposed to f**king generate business for your f**king operation? What the f**k do you think you are f**king paid for?"
GLC President: "Don't be like that, leh!"

All of us, the GLC and EDB minions, didn't know where to hang our heads. Later, we learnt from the EDB secretary the expletive laden director was a "nice guy", always going to lunch with his staff. We don't know whether he hoards toothpicks.

Everybody has a horror story about "PY". Just ask Member of Parliament Chng Hee Kok, who was told to resign  because he dared to voice disagreement about the shame-the-bond-breaker tirade. Then MP, Tan Cheng Bock was incensed: the EDB chairman was getting "too big for his boots". Ngiam Tong Dow had choice words for such characters: "There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in. Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews."

Minister in the Prime Minister's Office Lim Swee Say claims, "I learnt from him some very important values: never say die, always dare to be different, always want to make a difference." Mavericks are not always viewed in positive light - McCain sure made a heck of a difference with his choice of a running mate in Palin. A maverick is an unbranded range animal, especially a stray calf that has become separated from its mother, a name coined after Samuel A. Maverick (1803-70), a Texas rancher who did not brand his cattle. After all these years, they still can't tell the difference between good and bad values.

Beyond Reproach

The Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) is absolutely right when it says commentators "appeared to have misunderstood" how the process works. Problem is, none of us is really sure of how it does work.

On the one hand, the lawyers and parents of Changi Prison inmate Dinesh Raman Chinnaiah were told by State Coroner Imran Abdul Hamid that no coroner’s inquiry on the circumstances of his death will be held.

Then, in response to queries from The New Paper, an AGC spokesman had replied via e-mail: “In view of the conclusion of criminal proceedings, the inquiry has been discontinued.” Was the inquiry in progress, then stopped, or never got started in the first place? The classic chicken and egg conundrum. The latest AGC statement says that "The coroner has a discretion to discontinue the proceedings before him if he determines that there is no longer a need for an inquiry to determine the cause of and circumstances connected with the death." Bearing in mind that the prosecution has no powers to compel the coroner - or so we are told - to exercise this discretion, wouldn't it settle all quibbles and disrepute about the AGC if the coroner establishes transparently once and for all Dinesh wasn't unduly pepper sprayed, arm locked in a choke hold, and have a couple of ribs cracked in the process? You know, the whole Shane Todd thingy that demolished conspiracy theories for the whole wide world to see.

The same AGC, supposedly to protect the administration of justice in Singapore and uphold the integrity of one of our key public institutions, is initiating legal proceedings in the High Court against a cartoonist for contempt of court by scandalising the judiciary of Singapore. The offending cartoon strips are alleged  to carry imputations that are scurrilous and false. Imputations that can be destroyed easily if the actual situations depicted are indeed above and beyond reproach. If the intent is to burnish it's shiny image of justice administration without fear or favour, there has to be a better approach then sweeping everything under the carpet with a $10,000 fine.

Lawyers for the cartoonist explained their strategy, "To succeed in our defence, we must show that there is no real risk in the public confidence of the independence of the judiciary." Stripping away the legalese, that's like saying the AGC is built of stronger construct, not some thin skinned wimp with skeletons in the cupboards to hide. Now that is a concept we can understand, and hold our heads high for.

Game Over

According to Teo Chee Hean, minister in charge of the civil service, a study commissioned by the Prime Minister's Office found that 1 in 5 Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) probes involved public service officers. Of the 39  cases each year, two thirds led to persecution or disciplinary proceedings. These highly paid civil servants, from a Senior Research Officer (2002) to a Senior Special Investigator (1997), had discovered that their paychecks, even when indexed to private salary scales, are never ever enough.

During a house search for a posting in Manila, the sales agent said that the security of the gated compound was more dependable than the local police. Apparently a businessman kidnap victim, freed after his relatives paid off the ransom, had proceeded to the nearest station to file the report. The first person he saw was one of his kidnappers, wearing an officer's uniform.

The situation in Singapore, mercifully, has not degenerated to that stage. It is disconcerting, though, when a millionaire minister has acknowledged publicly that he purloined half a box of toothpicks from a fancy restaurant. Toothpicks which were meant for the use of other patrons as well, not just his gauche fetish of picking teeth in public.

The 15-year CPIB veteran and Assistant Director of Field Research and Technical Support was overheard by photographers muttering "game over, game over" as he left the Subordinate Court after being charged for embezzling the watchdog CPIB of over $1.7 million. He must have thought it real funny to be awarded a Commendation Medal (Pingat Kepulian) from the Prime Minister's Office in 2010, when he had already gamed the system of $1,200 (2008), $94,703 (2009) and $56,002 plus $50,825 (2010). Medal in hand, he was emboldened to help himself to more, $323,613 and $370,755 in 2011 and $716,768 in 2012. And where did he spend most of the free money? The biggest gaming center of all, the casino at Marina Bay Sands, brought to you by those ministers on the pretext of creating more jobs for locals.

We can't play those games. Grab more than a handful of the sugar satchels from MacDonald's, and you might end up in cuffs. Kleptomania, an obsessive impulse to steal regardless of economic need, will cut no ice with the judge. Edwin Yeo, the CPIB black sheep hogging the headlines, had no problems with a $500,000 bail while many can only dream of going for early lunch at 10.30 am.