Yesterday I was at Paya Lebar (PL) station at about 6.30pm. I was on my way to Ang Mo Kio, so I had to transit at City Hall.

At Paya Lebar, the station was really full with people. I rarely take trains from this station, so I was quite surprised that even in PL, it was so jam-packed. I managed to get on the train – going shoulder to shoulder with my fellow passengers.

When we got to City Hall, as usual, the station was also jam-packed with people. When the train came, everyone had to squeezed in to the carriages. I experience this almost everyday but yesterday was different. I have never had to squeeze so tightly before. It was quite an atrocious experience – especially for the women who I noticed were not very happy.

And in the middle of all of this was this Chinese woman with a baby in a pram. She had a real hard time trying to negotiate the pram with her kid in it.

The situation was like this all the way to Ang Mo Kio – packed like sardines with no room to move at all. Passengers getting off at their stations had to push and shove their way out.

I think the PTC needs to wake up. And the bus companies should be publicly chastised for not doing anything to improve the situation.

But the person who should be held accountable is the Minister for Transport, Raymond Lim. This situation has been going on since last year, for goodness’ sake!!

What the hell is the minister doing?

I would be aghast if the PTC allows the transport companies to raise fares this August!!

—————–

I attended the Internet Regulatory Reform Seminar this afternoon at the URA Centre at Maxwell Road.

It was quite a lively forum, with many faces from academia, media and the blogs. The most notable was Cheong Yip Seng, ex-Editor In Chief of SPH and currently head of AIMS – Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society- convened by MICA. He’s been appointed to come up with recommendations to the govt on the regulation of New Media.

You can view the full list of the members of AIMs here: http://www.nrf.gov.sg/nrf/strategic.aspx?id=156

Mr Cheong is an affable and friendly character, to be sure and he was quite supportive of the bloggers’ initiative. This is good to see and know.

Also present were Arun Mahizhnan, deputy director at the Institute of Policy Studies, Cherian George, Tan Tarn How, Alex Au, Martyn See, Bernard Leong, Choo Zheng Xi, Ng Ejay, etc.

I went away feeling that the road ahead is a long one fraught with uncertainties. This is because of the confusing and mixed signals which the govt is sending, especially of late.

For one, statements by the govt are cloudy – such as saying that the govt is looking into how to adopt a “lighter” touch vis a vis New Media, but arresting and charging a blogger for ‘insulting a judge’ just last week, for something he wrote on his blog.

Personally, I feel that the govt does not really know what to do with New Media, especially bloggers. Hence, the year-long feedback and research being conducted by AIMs.

At the end of the day, I am not sure if bloggers will care even if the govt comes up with all sorts of legislation to tame this wild beast called the blogosphere. This has been shown and demonstrated by bloggers in the last general elections, where the govt banned all political films, election advertising, podcasting and so on. Bloggers didn’t care and went ahead and did all these anyway.

I would really like to see the govt grow up. It’s about time that ‘nanny’ took a break, and let ‘the kids’ breathe for once. The apron string is choking ‘the kids’ to death. And any further tightening of the apron string will result in even more severe consequences.

The best way for the govt to handle New Media is to let it move forward on its own. In time, the blogosphere will find its own set of ethics, its own set of community rules and mores.

What the govt should do is to trust Singaporeans. This, really, is the crux of the problem. We have a govt which is obsessed with control, developed over half a century of an all-encompassing power which, at times, it garnered through sheer force.

Such will not be readily accepted by S’poreans anymore.

In short, let the bloggers be. Yes, there will be, from time to time, some who will be insane and irresponsible and spout nonsense. We already have laws for such things. Certainly, we do not need more laws and legislation to choke the life out of what is still an infant blogosphere.

————-

This is a report from Malaysiakini. (You have to be a subscriber to access their reports.)

Tarani Palani | Jun 11, 08 7:50pm

A fledgling website in Singapore hopes to emulate its counterparts across the Causeway in bringing democracy to the island state.

The Online Citizen, which often considered as the closest thing to Malaysiakini in

Singapore, was set up two years ago by a group of volunteers.

Editor-in-chief Choo Zheng Xi said that his site, launched in December 2006, provides independent writers a platform to express their views on burning political issues.

Its contributing writers, all of whom are volunteers, include students, professionals and retirees.

Choo, who despite his important title in Online Citizen, is himself a full-time university student.

One of its most notable contributors is Tan Kin Lian, the ex-chief executive of insurance cooperative NTUC Income.

Choo did not minced his words when describing the state of press freedom in his country.

“Reporters Without Borders ranks Singapore between 140th and 150th position regularly. In terms of press freedom, Singapore may as well be first from the bottom,” he told an international forum on new media in Petaling Jaya today.

Choo also talked about the legal framework which creates a hostile environment for political expression in

Singapore.

He said that

Singapore’s concept of ‘eastern democracy’ meshed with Confucian ideology has created a culture of political compliance in the island state.

“The Confucian ideas of respecting your elders and political leaders, that the people in charge are there because they are the most merited, and most importantly, that the nation comes before the individual, have been used as justifications for authoritarian rule in

Singapore.”

Choo said that this concept of democracy is reflected in the country’s litany of restrictive laws which deters political expression.

An example is the Parliamentary Elections Act, which among others allows the minister in charge to regulate election advertising over the Internet during the polls campaigning period.

In addition, websites of political parties and their candidates as well as other ‘political’ websites are required to register with Media Development Authority, an agency linked to the government.

An uphill task

Choo said that his Online Citizen is fighting an uphill battle in changing the mindset of Singaporeans.

“But even if we don’t see big results from our action, it does not mean that there is no impact.”

The recent increase of salaries for ministers – who are already among the highest paid in the world – saw disgruntled citizens voicing their objection through the online media.

“The effect snowballed and mainstream media could not ignore the public’s discontent and ended up discussing the issue.”

The challenge, said Choo, is to get more Singaporeans to speak out.

“You can bring one person down but you can’t bring down the whole online community. We want to show that individuals can catch the ear of the government,” he stressed.

Apart from Choo, other speakers at the two- day Asian New Media Forum include academics, bloggers and journalists from Thailand, Burma, Philippines and Malaysia.

The 50 participants, some coming as far as

Bangladesh and Iran, are mostly representatives from independent media in their respective countries.

Among the topics for discussion at the forum are business sustainability, video journalism and new media in Web 3.0.

The dialogue is the second of such forums organised by Malaysiakini’s Southeast Asia Centre for e-Media (Seasem).

—————-

In the recent saga of the WP’s Organising Secretary revealing that he voted for the PAP, I did a report for The Online Citizen titled, “Political suicide or political maturity?”. I believe that I was fair and balanced in that report, including as many of the comments and responses I received from WP members as space permitted.

Here, I’d like to thank them for taking the time to answer my queries.

What do I personally think of the episode?

I have had the pleasure to work with Shin Leong during the General Elections in 2006. I was part of the supporting team for the WP’s GRC team. Shin Leong is a passionate person. You can see it in his tirelessness during the elections (and outside of the election period as well). The words that come to my mind if asked to describe him would be: honest, sincere and attentive.

He is one of the WP members I know who tries to push for things to happen within the party.

There are two things to consider about the Yaw Shin Leong saga:

1. Why did he vote for the PAP?

2. Why did he reveal it on his blog?

The first question is the harder one for him to explain. Despite saying that his reason was because he voted, in his views, for the better candidate, it does not sit well with opposition supporters – for one reason; he had rallied, urged and perhaps even convinced some Singaporeans to vote against the PAP during the elections.

Thus, the emotional reaction is: How can he then vote for the PAP himself?

There are no explanations which would satisfy anyone who’s upset with him presently.

As for the second question, I understand (rightly or wrongly) that he was prodded or provoked into revealing it. But he could have – and should have – told the “provoker” that he has the right to the secrecy of his vote and wishes not to reveal it.

That would have been the end – and this whole saga would not have happened.

But now that it has, what’s the WP to do?

I do not think they will do anything, actually. It will not surprise me if I hear the WP say it’s time to ‘move on’. Personally, I would have preferred that the party faced this issue head-on and lead the debate into a wider issue, which was brought up by Choong Yong in the interview. That is, lead the discussion into one of ‘responsible voting’, which fits in nicely with the WP’s claim of being a ‘responsible party’.

But alas, it seems that being a ‘responsible party’ means keeping quiet.

Someone asked me if I felt Shin Leong should step down as Organising Secretary. Yes, he should. The party should not sack him because I do not think there are any grounds to do so. But I would think that Shin Leong realizes what his actions have done to the party’s image and reputation.

If he were still the OS come the next elections, and lead a GRC team again, his confession on his blog will be a noose around his head.

And those of ever one of his team mates as well.

No one is above the party.

Right?

————–