"Let there be LIGHT!" And there was Light. And Vanity. Vanity. All is Vanity.

Sometimes, I wonder, how people decide on their pet peeve, and (in this specific case) what "triggered" (I do not like to use this word, but hey, I need to show I'm current, right?) this missive to the Forum Page (or Voices in Today's paper). Let's see if we can spot the trigger...

Why does Singapore need so many lights on?

By Lee Teck Chuan

19 December, 2019

As Singapore moves ahead with its eco-friendly drive, have we overlooked how much electricity we are using, especially from lighting?

Are we guilty of light pollution?

Lights have proliferated unchecked along pavements, covered walkways, bridges, corridors, stairways, and in bus stops, car parks, lifts, void decks, playgrounds and parks.

["Proliferated unchecked? He makes lights sound like some runaway weed. "Unchecked"? He thinks light fixtures are free?]

HK unrest shows why Singapore must guard against class divisions and curb rising private-property prices

By Jeremy Teo Chin Ghee

09 November, 2019

A key factor in the recent unrest in Hong Kong has been unaffordable housing for the younger generation.

In Singapore, we are fortunate to have the Housing and Development Board (HDB), but this alone may be insufficient for social harmony. Measures must be taken to ensure continued social mobility and prevent inequality from giving rise to a two-class society causing social division.

Unfair to say SG Climate Rally does not take into account societal concerns: Organisers

By Ajay Nair, SG Climate Rally

01 December, 2019

I am writing on behalf of my co-organisers of the SG Climate Rally. We refer to the commentary, “In calling for action on climate crisis, it is not enough to say ‘listen to the science’” (Nov 25).

SG Climate Rally acknowledges the need for climate movements to listen to broader social concerns. As part of these efforts, we published a statement last week in support of the food delivery workers affected by the ban on personal mobility devices on footpaths. 

[Lip service followed by an example of tokenism.]

6 in 10 S'poreans think Government should regulate prices of new condos: Survey

[Note that this is NOT a letter to the Forum Page. Stupid letter writers are getting fewer. I would like to think it is because of this blog, but I am not that egotistical.

However, that does not mean that there are no stupid writing. Or writing about stupid ideas. Or expressing stupid ideas.

Except now they get PAID to write them.

Whereas this blog is still... not bringing in any income for me.

So I guess I'm the stupid one? 

Well, the poorer one.]

By Janice Lim

About half of the respondents who took part in a survey by PropertyGuru said that they expect private property prices to continue going up in the second half of 2019.

16 October, 2019

SINGAPORE —  A higher proportion of Singaporeans would like the Government to regulate prices of new private homes compared to six months ago, based on a survey by property portal PropertyGuru. 

Out of 794 respondents polled in the first half of this year, 58 per cent said that there should be more price regulation — up from 49 per cent in the second half of last year. 

The survey, which is conducted half-yearly, also found that a majority of Singaporeans — eight out of 10 — were dissatisfied with the current real-estate climate chiefly because they felt that private property prices were overpriced. 

[Let me tell you what that statistic tell me: It tells me that 8 out of 10 Singaporeans do not own private property. Or want to buy private property. Put it another way: If you own a private property for investment, is private property prices too high?]

Based on the third-quarter flash data from the Urban Redevelopment Authority, private property prices have gone up by 0.9 per cent since the last quarter.

The quarter-to-quarter increase was 1.5 per cent previously.

About half of those surveyed by PropertyGuru expect private property prices to continue going up in the second half of this year.

[And they expect this because...?]

Comparatively, only about one-third felt that the prices of Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats would go up. This could be due to ongoing concerns about the depleting leases of HDB resale flats. 

Commenting on the prices of property in Singapore, Dr Tan Tee Khoon, country manager of PropertyGuru Singapore, said that the property market here continues to be "positively differentiated" from other markets in the region and it is a "relative safe haven given its political stability and good governance". 

[Wow. so the country manager of a real estate agency, the same one that carried out this survey and revealed these findings, thinks the property market here is safe. So, no shame about conflict of interests? That's like a restaurant giving out Michelin stars to themselves.]

"Investors with diversified portfolios continue to see Singapore’s real estate as an asset class that can ride out volatility in the medium to long term,” he said.

When it comes to buying a property, the PropertyGuru survey found that Singaporeans were more cautious. The Property Purchase Intent index — which measures the likelihood of respondents buying a property here in the next six months — fell to an all-time low since the survey started nine years ago. 

The overall sentiment, which took into account other concerns such as affordability, the general real-estate market climate, interest rates, property prices and perceived government intervention in the property market, was also less upbeat.

This corresponds to the gloomier outlook of Singapore's economy, with 51 per cent of the respondents feeling that the economy was not performing well — up from 37 per cent in the second half of last year. 

[Must be a slow news day for the newspaper to publish such fluff. Or maybe it is "sponsored content"? Or a paid advertorial?]

To cut waste, set up supermarket selling overstocked, expiring goods

By Doreen Lai Bin Hui

26 September, 2019

I was happy to read TODAY’s Trash Talk features on how Singaporeans can do their part to reduce waste.

I have two ideas that I hope can bring Singapore closer to its zero-waste target.

Despite being a developed country, our environmental consciousness trails even some developing nations.

[Note: what she considers "environmental consciousness" is basically the latest fads promoted by so-called "environmentalists". More later.]

Recently, I took a six-month break. [Just curious. Did you fly, or bike, or take a "zero-emissions" boat? Whatever that is.] Through my travels, I saw how the effects of global warming and erratic climatic changes have caused glaciers to recede at an alarming rate, and places such as Alaska becoming much warmer than they should.

[Oh yes. Come see the glaciers before they are all gone!]

We need to step up our environmental consciousness to safeguard our planet for future generations.

During my travels, I encountered many excellent ideas of how we can help to reduce waste.

START A GROCERY OUTLET

In the United States, there is a successful supermarket chain called Grocery Outlet selling heavily discounted brand-name groceries and products that are either overstocked or close to their use-by date.

[In Singapore, there is a chain of budget shops called "Value $ Shop". Their tagline is "Closing Down Sale!" and "Fire Sale"! And they are NOT the only bargain budget shops.]

I patronised this supermarket often because its items were cheap and I was going to consume the produce pretty soon anyway.

It makes sense for one of the big supermarket chains here — or, better still, an alliance of them — to create such an outlet to reduce waste. It can also be a part of their corporate-social-responsibility efforts to bring affordable groceries to the masses.

[Or see what they are already doing. From a Facebook comment:

Supermarkets are already doing this for some products. Fresh meat have a shelf life (or a sell by date) of just 3 days. [When] they are close to their sell-by date, some supermarkets slash their prices. But you often have to use the meat on the same day. This is not always possible (for me), so I cannot take advantage of this. And this (offering discounts within the store) is a better solution than having a specialty store selling say 2-day old meat. This requires the originating store to send the meat to the specialty discount store, who will need to check that the meat (or other products) are still saleable, re-tag the merchandise, and put it on display. All these take time, transport, logistics, and labour and adds to the costs. Re-tagging the soon to expire meat within the originating store is speedier (unless the specialty store is right next to the originating store and a subsidiary of the originating store or parent company).

DEPOSITS FOR BOTTLES AND CANS

In Europe and North America, it is common to see glass or plastic bottles and steel or aluminium cans being sold with a deposit. Consumers can get their money back when they return these to a machine that is usually at the entrance of supermarkets.

This scheme will boost recycling collection rates and attitudes towards recycling.

[Hate to break the news to you but... Recycling is a scam. But don't take my word for it. Find a recycling plant in Singapore. Not a recycling materials collection and sorting facility. These simply "export" our "recyclables overseas. Where a large proportion of them are either left to rot, burned haphazardly, or tossed into the oceans. Find an ACTUAL plant that takes recyclables (say aluminium cans), and actually process the recyclables and make NEW products with it. There are no such plants in SG. (I got a hint that there is a "local steel mill" that can recycle ferrous metal - not aluminium. But I have NO idea where it is, or if recycling is a major component of its business model.)

As for plastic, it helps to believe that you can recycle plastic. But the truth is, it is very difficult to recycle a plastic bottle and imagine that it would come back as a bottle. Plastics are hard to recycle. The best you can do is down cycle it.]

Recent news that supermarket chain NTUC FairPrice is charging for plastic bags in a trial at selected stores is also a step in the right direction.

Singapore is already behind many countries in this area. Others, including many African states, have banned single-use plastic bags. A report from the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Resources Institute found that at least 127 out of 192 countries have adopted some form of legislation to regulate plastic bags as of July last year.

I sincerely urge Singaporeans to be more environmentally conscious because every little step matters.

[More from the FaceBook comment:

As for other goods (over-stocked goods) this is already being done if the writer would simply open her eyes and understand what she is seeing. "Value $ Shop" with their perpetual "Closing Down Sale" or "Fire Sale" (despite the lack of evidence of fire, unless they are exploiting the Haze) ARE in fact discount stores for overstocked goods. Yeah, sure they have lots of parallel imports from countries with lower costs of living (Vietnam, Indonesia, Cambodia, Malaysia), but they also have overstocked goods. "Halls XS" are about $1.40 at Fairprice. They were once sold at Value $ Shop for 50 cents (no stock now).

This letter is an example of "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" or at least a useless thing. Or will get you to do useless things that will make you feel good about yourself. 

The War on Plastic is futile. And people are doing it for the wrong reasons. If we stop using plastic, the world will NOT become a better place. We would NOT stop climate change or global warming. If you think giving up plastic will save the world from climate change, you are a victim of "a little knowledge" and the wrong kind of knowledge.

Same for giving up plastic straws.]

Want people to return trays at hawker centres? Reward, educate them

19 July, 2019


Earlier this week, Jamie Tan (letter below) suggested that the authorities forbid cleaners from clearing tables at hawker centres that charge refundable 50-cent or S$1 deposits for trays. This will compel patrons to do it themselves. Ms Tan also proposed that tray deposits, which are optional, be made compulsory at these food centres.

Her letter set off a lively debate online, with some readers saying hawker centres should instead reward patrons for returning trays. Others said going back to the basics, such as educating users, was the way forward.

Stop cleaners from clearing tables at hawker centres that charge deposits for trays

By Jamie Tan 

17 July, 2019


Hawker centres that charge deposits for trays do not appear to be relying less on cleaners.
At these facilities, users pay a 50-cent or S$1 deposit, and receive a refund after returning the trays with their used crockery and cutlery.
When the practice began at two hawker centres last year, the National Environment Agency said the move would allow cleaners to be “better able to focus on table-cleaning, allowing for a faster turnaround of tables”.
I patronise the hawker centre at Block 628 Ang Mo Kio Avenue 4, which has automated tray-return stations, at least twice weekly on average.
I often see patrons carry hot soupy dishes to their tables because they decided against forking out a deposit for a tray.
They would find a table near a stall, and walk back and forth with dishes in hand.
At these hawker centres, cleaners are still seen clearing the tables. This runs counter to the self-service system the authorities want to encourage.
Patrons could easily lapse into the mindset that “it will be cleared anyway and it is just a matter of who does it”.
The leniency shown by the authorities in continuing to hire cleaners has reduced the effectiveness of the system.
They should take a big gamble by stopping cleaners from clearing the crockery. The cleaners should instead focus on centralised dish-washing.
This will leave no room for patrons to take advantage of the notion that cleaners would clear their dishes.
This way, the Government’s objective to raise labour productivity can be met, too.
The authorities should also make it compulsory for all diners to place a deposit for trays at these food centres. This is optional now.
By making it mandatory, we will likely see cleaner tables at the hawker centres, as most Singaporeans do not wish to incur extra costs.

And below are the comments and responses first posted to TODAY’s Facebook page or sent to Voices. TODAY has edited these comments for clarity, accuracy and length. I just cut and paste.

Do it the other way around. Give S$1 for every tray returned. DAVID QI

This is a good policy, but a bad system. We should use incentives: Those who return their trays will be given a 10-cent coupon that can be used to buy food from vendors. Getting consumers to pay a deposit is not helpful at all. DAMIEN TAN 

The concept is flawed. Hawker centres should make it mandatory for patrons to have a tray if they buy food. They can get their money back when they return the tray with their plates, bowls and utensils. Alternatively, incentivise people to clear the tables by giving them 50 cents, or offer S$1 to those who return two trays and two persons’ bowls, plates and utensils. LAWRENCE SOH 

I do not know who came up with this tray-deposit system. It is so troublesome. And I have seen an elderly person who did not even know he paid 50 cents for a tray until I asked him. JOSH SIM 

In a fast-food outlet during off-peak hours, I see almost 90 per cent of patrons clear their tables before they leave. But the tables are not cleaned. They are soiled with spillage or condensation from cold drinks, ketchup, chilli sauce, and so on. And here you are saying “stop cleaners from clearing tables and concentrate on centralised dishwashing". Then who cleans the tables? LAWRENCE TAN 

No. Hawker centres will become a dump. Also, I wonder where the good habit of returning our utensils, which we cultivated in school, had gone? VINLEON ANG

Cleaners still need to wipe the table for the next patron. TAY YONG HONG 

Even if a dish is cleared, there is spillage left behind, which has to be cleared. The tables and floors must be sanitised. Cleaners will always be needed unless people follow Japan’s system, where customers not only return trays but clean the tables. ROHAN VINEKAR

There are too many entitled people in Singapore for this to work effectively. Maybe what could change is that, with or without a deposit, cleaners should clean tables only after patrons finish and clear their used crockery and cutlery. There will be no cleaning of tables if this is not done. The authorities need to come down hard to change a habit that is worsening. SG MAVERICK

Some customers choose to hold hot soup instead of using a tray. This happened to me: A kid was running around and bumped into a customer carrying herbal soup. The hot contents spilled on to the boy, then the customer, and splashed on me and others nearby. Some people do not want a tray, as they have to fork out 50 cents or S$1. At times, the tray-return system does not work and the coins do not come out. It really annoys people. EDWINA KOH

Cleaners are still needed. But we can help by being more civic-minded and return trays after use. This minimises the chances of birds scavenging for leftovers and reduces bird droppings. It also lightens the cleaners’ workload, so they can clean the tables for the next user. Everyone has a small part to play, but the outcome can make a big impact. Let us start today. TERENCE TEO 

For those who said “do not return the tray so that the cleaner has a job", do you leave rubbish on the floor so that you can "create and maintain" more jobs for cleaners? Not returning plates and bowls, and leaving bones on the table, is plain ungracious. This is akin to leaving rubbish on the floor. Hawker tables are public amenities. Keep them clean after you dine. Do not rely on stakeholders or the National Environment Agency, and give all sorts of reasons for not doing it. If there is a tray-return station, walk a few steps and return it. What is so complicated about that? You need to have the right attitude fit for a First World nation. CHEE VIWEN 

My godson clears his trays when I take him to McDonald’s. The reason is education from the start, at age 2. At 10, he still clears. LYNETTE ENOCH

Ironically, there is no such problem at the cookhouses in army camps. When national servicemen go for in-camp training, we even help to separate the plates, bowls, cups and cutlery when we return the trays to the dishwashers. Perhaps the National Environment Agency should learn from this good practice. It is also time to instil good manners at hawker centres. For example, have brand-new banners, posters and stickers on the tray-return racks and tables with simple and soft words such as: “Please return your tray — it brings out good manners in you.” SENG LOON KWEE 

Why not educate? It may take time. With volunteers — such as from grassroots or student groups — encouraging and educating patrons during mealtimes, the public may understand. Then the day will come when patrons of our food centres return their trays automatically. That would be better than using gimmicks or penalties to encourage good practice. CHEONG FOOK WENG

[I was going to point out that this is a problem that cannot be be solved quickly or easily. It requires slow, long-term socialisation and education, and inculcation of values.

But this is Singapore. We don't do slow. 

We do social engineering, and behaviour modification, and operant conditioning.

It has its limits. ]

Cross Island Line: Besides a direct and skirting route, how about a semi-direct one?

By Chew Seng Yian

21 September, 2019

I refer to the report, “Through nature reserve or around? Residents, nature groups stick to guns on Cross Island Line paths” (Sept 3).

The environmental-impact assessment carried out for Phase 2 of the project is commendable for its extensive coverage of the impact and mitigation for the two alignment options. It also shed more light on the pros and cons for the direct (Option 1) and skirting (Option 2) routes.

While the former would be more economical and efficient with a faster travelling time, nature groups are rightfully concerned about boring a tunnel right under the heart of MacRitchie Reservoir.

Let women contribute by doing NS in the community

By Cho Ming En

The writer proposes that women do National Service for a year in areas such as healthcare, eldercare, environmental conservation and community building.

TODAY

27 August, 2019

[Every few years (or months sometimes), someone with an overblown sense of "fairness" stews about the unfairness that men have to do National Service and women gets a "free ride"... and then they suggest well maybe women don't have to do military service. They could be nurses, care-givers, maybe even child-care teachers etc.

Isn't that a good idea?

No. It's a sick idea arising from a sick mind with wrong assumptions and a perverse sense of fairness.

So to right the "wrong" of men being forced to do NS, we should similarly subject women to the same "slavery"?

Like I said, sick.

Build highways for personal mobility devices, bicycles

[I will let the words of this... moron, speak for themselves. I will just highlight the more... ludicrous parts.]

By Su Sicheng

21 July, 2019

You know, it's like one day everything was fine,
and the next there were these fuckin' scooters everywhere.

There has been much talk about errant users of personal mobility devices (PMDs).

While regulations are in place to minimise inconsiderate behaviour, many pedestrians still feel that their sense of space and security is infringed upon when such vehicles pass too close or too fast.

It is too simplistic, however, to only blame users. Talk to PMD or electric-bicycle riders, or cyclists, and they will likely say they are frustrated that they have nowhere to ride freely.

The limited space on footpaths and the pace of pedestrians frustrate them.

PMDs are banned from roads, and most casual cyclists also restrict themselves to pedestrian paths, as those riding on roads must wear helmets.

It is clear there is rising demand by people here for such devices.

Waste management and Recycling

[Note: This is NOT a letter to the Editor. This is ACTUALLY an article. Written by "a Research Fellow at the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design and an Assistant Professor of anthropology at the university. As us plebes would say, "oo tak cheh eh lang". And they write like this?]

Why waste management is such a knotty issue in Singapore 

By Julienne Chen and Lyle Fearnley

There are many considerations in how to implement a system for waste management that is convenient, fair, equitable, hygienic, and cost-effective. Reuters file photo

10 April, 2019



How cities deal with household trash, or ‘waste management’ in urban planning jargon, is not a sexy topic. One thing that can make it even less palatable to talk about?

Paying fees based on how much trash we generate – a hot-button topic that’s received some coverage in the media lately.

[I may be out of touch, but I haven't read anything recently about trash collection fees based on volume. This suggests this paper was started some time ago (when "pay as you throw" was current... over a year ago?)]

Unintended ‘problems’ could surface with new curriculum for secondary schools

[So after many years and robust defence of the streaming policy, the Ministry of Education decided in 2019 that streaming has had its day, and should be retired to the chorus of cheers from parents, educators, and social commenters and pundits.

Well... 

Let's just say you can't please everyone. 

Here's an unpleased one:]


ROBIN CHEE MING FENG

06 MARCH, 2019

I refer to the report detailing the Government’s decision to abolish streaming in the near future.

While we must appreciate the Government’s efforts in slaying this sacred cow, we should not be under the delusion that this major change in policy would lead to a significant reduction in the stigma experienced by students who are less academically inclined.

Under the new system, students would no longer be labelled as belonging to the Express, Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) streams.

However, it is just an effort in repackaging or renaming the streams.