tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-104738792024-03-07T17:05:20.034+08:00IllusioDo you believe in the game?akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.comBlogger511125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-47208444920303276482023-08-28T21:15:00.000+08:002023-08-28T21:15:34.907+08:00Choose your own president<span class="content1"><p>It is the morning of 1 September 2023. Having learned your lesson in the pandemic general election, you wake up early today to beat the queues at the polling station. Because voting is compulsory, you cast your vote, then head back to laze the rest of the public holiday away.</p><p>Even though voting is secret, what you overhear in public, what you read online, and what you and your friends discuss over the course of the day jump out at you: you have chosen the same candidate as a majority of the electorate.</p><p>Put this way, it is a statistically unremarkable event. But what if instead, there was a secret in the voting booth that aligned the majority of voters to your choice?<span></span></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj1GxiBOp7wysrvR-nPTb5b7tD3Ldh_2wHy32D6CfMDw7jO-edjr_uyIY1Mq5JWC8c3W4oZ3nHS-SLnYt7IPYt-WU2lSc97uzdgadiZQB4iJGKrS8y8bVJWQOEtCfE8FnXUuHdueiYrxssPK9z5WmRd1ogr6pBPkHOH1a6Iwkb4wKTC31jKks6Y_A" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1758" data-original-width="1458" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj1GxiBOp7wysrvR-nPTb5b7tD3Ldh_2wHy32D6CfMDw7jO-edjr_uyIY1Mq5JWC8c3W4oZ3nHS-SLnYt7IPYt-WU2lSc97uzdgadiZQB4iJGKrS8y8bVJWQOEtCfE8FnXUuHdueiYrxssPK9z5WmRd1ogr6pBPkHOH1a6Iwkb4wKTC31jKks6Y_A=w332-h400" width="332" /></a></div><p></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p>So who did you choose as the next Elected President of Singapore?</p><p><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2023/08/you-chose-tharman-shanmugaratnam.html" target="_blank">Was it Tharman Shanmugaratnam?</a></p><p><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2023/08/you-chose-ng-kok-song.html" target="_blank">Was it Ng Kok Song?</a></p><p><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2023/08/you-chose-tan-kin-lian.html" target="_blank">Was it Tan Kin Lian?</a></p><p style="text-align: center;"><br /></p></span>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-14721953404622690172023-08-24T15:45:00.043+08:002023-08-24T23:53:27.375+08:00Is Singapore's Elected Presidency too broken to be fixed?<p><b>How broken is Singapore's Elected Presidency?</b></p><p>Once upon a time, Singapore had a president who was its ceremonial head of state. Like all Commonwealth heads of states, this president presided at annual military parades, gave the President's Speech to open each parliament session, gave assent to legislative bills, approved the national budget, pardoned prisoners, and signed off on the appointment of key positions in the civil service - all on the advice of the government.</p><p>Then in 1991 after 5 years of debate in parliament, Singapore had an "elected president". Is he a "check on a rogue government" and "guardian of the reserves"? Depending on who you asked and when you asked, the purview and powers of this president has dramatically waned over the years. The image below is an attempt to summarise the public communications of Singapore's leaders on the elected president over the years, and the growing public disquiet they have engendered.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEheXAi4iibf2GUNvdPS8C_5Gpf2Yc3CWv2cbuOxxi5ATJ0x0It3jfokiowzs572YxIJi50gh0FYZNZD95iqb1A6w1BgKyA7ovLBp8VpS6FAsoEnPBYvvHk5bSCDsVMw-3jhqKI32BwWDPjnxqa6QqquRzp8KFqdxfAGd4GuTRi8OGb_U7tcSFYFTw" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="532" data-original-width="500" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEheXAi4iibf2GUNvdPS8C_5Gpf2Yc3CWv2cbuOxxi5ATJ0x0It3jfokiowzs572YxIJi50gh0FYZNZD95iqb1A6w1BgKyA7ovLBp8VpS6FAsoEnPBYvvHk5bSCDsVMw-3jhqKI32BwWDPjnxqa6QqquRzp8KFqdxfAGd4GuTRi8OGb_U7tcSFYFTw=w377-h400" width="377" /></a></div><br /><span><a name='more'></a></span>The presidency has been subject to such strenuous fettering that a <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/govt-may-wish-consider-whether-more-fundamental-change-presidency-needed-commission" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">public commission headed by the Chief Justice</a> in 2016 recommended Singapore reinstate the ceremonial president, to be advised by a council of state. To the extent that <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2011/08/much-ado-about-elected-president.html" target="_blank">Singapore's law minister described his legal theory of the elected presidency</a> in <a href="https://www.mlaw.gov.sg/news/speeches/speech-by-minister-for-foreign-affairs-and-law-mr-k-shanmugam-at-the-institute-of-policy-studies/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">terms of constitutional scholar Walter Bagehot's concept of the ceremonial monarch of the UK</a>.<p></p><p>The Electoral Department of Singapore <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/what-the-president-can-or-cannot-do-eld-explains" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">recently attempted to educate voters on the role of the presidency</a>, even when it is not the proper or relevant authority on this matter. That was in addition to requiring candidates to sign a declaration that they "understand the position". Given that Singapore's leaders have an even more fluid and situational understanding of the role of the presidency over the years, this comes across as ironic and hypocritical. If not an outright clown show.</p><p>We at Illusio would not be laughing so hard if we didn't also understand that the damage to the valuable institution of the presidency is real, lasting, and severe.</p><p><b>But why is Singapore's elected presidency broken?</b></p><p>It is easy to state that there is an internal contradiction in the elected presidency that undermines its function and legitimacy in the eyes of the people. It is still relatively easy to argue that this internal contradiction is made apparent from the repeated manoeuvring of the PAP government to refine or redefine the presidency over a period of 30 years. The difficult part is to identify the nature of this internal contradiction. Because it is a two-fold contradiction.</p><p>The first contradiction is mechanical; what some political economists might dub the <b>internal contradiction of political accumulation</b>. That is, a government in an enduring one-party state is unlikely to cede power to install a presidency that can effectively check it, and not for long. It is unlikely to resist the urge to increase its monopoly of power over the powers of such a president, in order to evade these checks. It is far more likely that a strong government will constrain such a president by requiring that he only act on the advice of a coterie of mostly retired civil servants, quango mandarins, and GLC parachutees pantomining a Council of State, and thus revert the elected president to a ceremonial head of state.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjoedeR7hed6eDg5s-A437AiB0FA-MPBgs0Dd3ANpGZ5qT2hDaglMbEwSoaH9zBVWTMCJCnqGiFUIzUkA19jrSR_V-Cjy39i4r7O4T6rZxFMZd3BGBOxFkMVXN0mtFa81IG7qc570zekElpXvkKwroGrgd3sluWlxsTLrzZo5Yu6rvIcK5gJWHm8A" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="969" height="264" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjoedeR7hed6eDg5s-A437AiB0FA-MPBgs0Dd3ANpGZ5qT2hDaglMbEwSoaH9zBVWTMCJCnqGiFUIzUkA19jrSR_V-Cjy39i4r7O4T6rZxFMZd3BGBOxFkMVXN0mtFa81IG7qc570zekElpXvkKwroGrgd3sluWlxsTLrzZo5Yu6rvIcK5gJWHm8A=w400-h264" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">William Henry Brooke, "Dispute between Monopoly and Power",<br />in <i>Satirist</i>, 1 March 1813</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div>The second contradiction is political; what some political scientists might dub the <b>internal contradiction of political externalisation</b>. Let us consider the question of the elected president as "guardian of the reserves".</div><div><br /></div><div><b>The Budget is a policy decision</b>; the government of the day, having won the mandate at the voting box, proposes what to spend on and how much to spend, including the reserves. What a government proposes with the reserves is a political decision and it should rightfully take responsibility and exercise transparency in making such decisions. Since 1993, Singapore's government occludes the national reserves from normal accountability, disavows its ultimate responsibility, and hoists it theoretically unto an elected president, all while whittling down his powers. This is the first externalisation. <br /><p></p><p>What to do with the reserves is inherently a policy and political decision. To illustrate, there are swathes of the populace in Singapore (typified by the "return my CPF" movement) who feel that the PAP government has enforced too much savings, reducing their means of investing their own savings on themselves and the economy, and returning too little of the reserves to the people. When most Singaporeans say they want a president who can check the PAP government, when most candidates promise they will demand the government to fully account and publish its reserves, they are externalising a political disagreement on reserves policy onto the office of an "independent", elected president. This is the second externalisation.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEh2_RVILs5_dHTvu__4XJFfb71mcuThWm6C2n44s_AEyUUYgPROwcpa-WmQcuoNctpJB5BZoBVgBsTNJZTs6ttSjxCD7QhoZP1v7nnLhv-yondvcDpNhW5I6BjjFqrcmQ4MscIhRnuxg36UcukrVDITnLqmhlKXXl2NEjncW2eNJibwXcRE67bP9Q" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" data-original-height="236" data-original-width="421" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEh2_RVILs5_dHTvu__4XJFfb71mcuThWm6C2n44s_AEyUUYgPROwcpa-WmQcuoNctpJB5BZoBVgBsTNJZTs6ttSjxCD7QhoZP1v7nnLhv-yondvcDpNhW5I6BjjFqrcmQ4MscIhRnuxg36UcukrVDITnLqmhlKXXl2NEjncW2eNJibwXcRE67bP9Q=s16000" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Externalising transparency, responsibility, and accountability to a third party;<br />then taking away the third party's powers!</td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p><b>Is the elected presidency a danger to the elected president?</b></p><p>Given the vast internal contradictions afflicting the office of Singapore's elected president, it is no mystery why <a href="https://www.academia.sg/academic-views/elected-president/" target="_blank">each holder of the office has faced legitimacy and mandate issues</a>. We argue that every holder of this office has either acted to overcompensate for these shortcomings by adopting an overactive persona, or to overplay the ceremonial aspects of the presidency. Either the government is angered or voters grow even more disillusioned with the elected presidency. Either way, every holder of the office acts as if the presidency cannot otherwise hold, and mere anarchy is unloosed upon Singapore. Either way, the elected president fails to be an effective adviser and counseller to the government, or fails to be the symbol of national unity and dignity.</p><p>As such, we at Illusio consider the elected presidency a most cruel and unusual punishment, and will therefore refuse to endorse any candidate in 2023. For all these reasons, we also endorse the proposal by the <a href="https://www.academia.sg/academic-views/elected-president/" target="_blank">2016 constitutional commission to revert to a ceremonial head of state</a>.</p></div>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-38446299795974657012022-07-14T15:00:00.002+08:002022-07-15T13:31:11.232+08:00Did the New Naratif Civil War destroy New Naratif?<p>In April 2022, <a href="https://us16.campaign-archive.com/?u=5cb021d6f2c1dbd9275bcf10e&id=d2fcfc5da7" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">New Naratif raised the alarm</a>. For the very first time, despite several years of releasing "accountability reports" to his subscribers and the public at large, Dr PJ Thum, the <a href="https://newnaratif.com/about-us/#team" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">managing director of the website</a> and director of its holding company <a href="http://www.checkcompany.co.uk/company/10747160/OBSERVATORY-SOUTHEAST-ASIA-LIMITED" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Observatory Southeast Asia Pte Ltd</a>, admitted to a crippling financial shortfall. <a href="https://us16.campaign-archive.com/?u=5cb021d6f2c1dbd9275bcf10e&id=cebb1d9b94" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Subscriber numbers have been misreported, subscription fees not collected, leading to a corrected revenue shortfall of USD 40,000</a>. Not soon after, he appears to have let go almost all his editorial staff. Even now, New Naratif's restructuring is still in progress as it pivots to a different business model, publishing angle, and reason for existence.</p><p>This is par for the course for any financially distressed enterprise—until the staff laid off by Dr Thum chose to fight it out in the public. <a href="https://medium.com/@formernewnaratif/former-new-naratif-team-members-respond-to-recent-announcements-758b64700e39" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">They allege that Thum misled both his readers and staff</a>. <a href="https://newnaratif.com/a-statement-on-recent-events-and-new-naratifs-future/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Thum accused the staff</a> of attempting to subvert his management, and furthermore accused them of waging a disinformation campaign. <a href="https://medium.com/@formernewnaratif/former-new-naratif-team-members-respond-to-nns-19-may-statement-70918e84f4b7" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The staff stand by what they said</a>, noting that documented evidence (presumably in the reports and subscriber emails) supports their narrative, not Thum's.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwVI0vmsklBD-C5wdhOvS0tbbucZ5LfBVtUlan3iBb_QPO2nvlM8tREWTiDaYCEy-fNo-9sdBZ1yK1e6t397La7v1kpIjA5wj-GKs57RUjvbfo9FZwkEVFlvytyHcr5QayBCLHk9fGNTyKtCS2IOoQsGKPTWvJg2Fe3gGpgCZvQ9nl_QQNug8/s630/roundhead%20v%20cavalier%20dogs.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="384" data-original-width="630" height="244" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwVI0vmsklBD-C5wdhOvS0tbbucZ5LfBVtUlan3iBb_QPO2nvlM8tREWTiDaYCEy-fNo-9sdBZ1yK1e6t397La7v1kpIjA5wj-GKs57RUjvbfo9FZwkEVFlvytyHcr5QayBCLHk9fGNTyKtCS2IOoQsGKPTWvJg2Fe3gGpgCZvQ9nl_QQNug8/w400-h244/roundhead%20v%20cavalier%20dogs.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">English Civil War woodcut in pamphlet, c.1643</td></tr></tbody></table><p>In a fit of madness, Thum and his former employees have fired off the equivalent of ICBMs in a mutually-destructive civil war. Both sides may refuse to issue further responses but the damage is done.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a><b>Why was New Naratif an obvious failure?</b><p></p><p>Even though they disagree on why it happened and what should have been done, both factions agree that the project was in financial distress. It is possible to independently confirm this fact from publicly available information, largely from New Naratif's previous "accountability reports" and its last reported <a href="https://newnaratif.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Report-and-Financial-Statement-Year-31-March-2021.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">annual returns</a> and <a href="https://newnaratif.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Financial-Report-April-21-Sept-21-1.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">bi-annual reports</a>.</p><p>How many staff did New Naratif employ? How many articles did it publish, and how frequently? Did its articles even reach its intended audience? Did its articles have any real, measurable impact? By any measure, the metrics do not paint a picture of success but rather prove that this project is unsustainable.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4Y3se-AO-qi9NAdWqHF5G9Ajbygemqf-GQW4L1xop2XCOyJ4P-ouT1Hh03XqrIihue1AHVdbsOwrDqqwfecFFsf7psZJnsGZbalQ31UT52lvGcc15oOgKp3l4zrSPkljl2EKIq-knZgY1pnFWn4zZvFMNmhgheLrcbeCHpfiwzkGlz-Y2ess/s3000/what%20really%20happened.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1695" data-original-width="3000" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4Y3se-AO-qi9NAdWqHF5G9Ajbygemqf-GQW4L1xop2XCOyJ4P-ouT1Hh03XqrIihue1AHVdbsOwrDqqwfecFFsf7psZJnsGZbalQ31UT52lvGcc15oOgKp3l4zrSPkljl2EKIq-knZgY1pnFWn4zZvFMNmhgheLrcbeCHpfiwzkGlz-Y2ess/w400-h226/what%20really%20happened.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><p></p><p><a href="https://newnaratif.com/reporting-in-1-april-2021-30-september-2021/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Before the redundancy exercise</a>, New Naratif had 12 permanent staff members. Yet New Naratif published 82 "pieces of content" in that half-year period. There were 6 "editorial staff" or actual content producers, 5 management staff, and himself. From these numbers, we can already identify three management blunders made by Dr PJ Thum, managing director of New Naratif:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Too many staff hired to publish too little content (less than 2 articles per content creator per month)</li><li>Too many management staff hired to oversee content creators (1:1 ratio of managers and workers)</li><li>All staff paid too much for what they were delivering (1,000 USD per month per person might be a pittance, but really a princely sum after factoring in the output expected and the cost of living in Southeast Asia ex Singapore, where most of the writers appear to be based)</li></ul><p></p><p>Impact-wise, Dr Thum's "accountability report" offers a count of "unique pageviews" of the most read pieces of content in the last 6 months. But he has offered a meaningless and irrelevant factoid instead of answering: What is the average count from its own website as well as its other social media platforms? What is the <a href="https://blog.hootsuite.com/calculate-engagement-rate/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">average engagement rate</a> for each platform?</p><p>New Naratif's FaceBook, Twitter, and Instagram pages have engagement rate that fall far, far below the acceptable industry standard of 1-5% for the number of purported followers on each platform. This indicates any or all of the following:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>New Naratif's reported subscription rate and its follower rate on social media are unreliable. Indeed, the last available "accountability report" admits to "an inaccurate count of members... inflating the numbers".</li><li>Its followers are mostly fake accounts and bots, a common occurence in social media publishing.</li><li>The "unique pageviews" of its most popular content are likely the result of bot activity.</li><li>Its subscribers are simply not interested beyond just supporting the project through the act of subscribing.</li></ul>Dr Thum attributes his revenue shortfall and inaccurate subscriber count to many subscribers who "signed up for a membership but never sent in their payment", "paid for their first year/month by bank transfer but... did not renew", submitted "credit card information invalid so autorenewal could not process their payment". Setting aside the possibility of deliberate accounts fraud, it is likely that some New Naratif subscribers simply bolted after realising the paucity of content.<br /><p></p><p><b>Were the staff wrongfully dismissed?</b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1Fal6_lVkLtMC-LqvUybw91Wi5Trn6VrnziE71bhvHa8K5dJfXw0GpxKJJEoQjO_xGXoZHJiQiYBLWt_C6CM6Wap-CcUsmNUwNmY7XrS231cnRv7LgZJsCybUhHAgGKU9JjyicBH1wtvU_QdlzzANPpsyC-2yVKREeY_XDEA80Rw1UKzcxWg/s647/pink%20slip.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="647" height="309" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1Fal6_lVkLtMC-LqvUybw91Wi5Trn6VrnziE71bhvHa8K5dJfXw0GpxKJJEoQjO_xGXoZHJiQiYBLWt_C6CM6Wap-CcUsmNUwNmY7XrS231cnRv7LgZJsCybUhHAgGKU9JjyicBH1wtvU_QdlzzANPpsyC-2yVKREeY_XDEA80Rw1UKzcxWg/w400-h309/pink%20slip.png" width="400" /></a></div><p>A cull of New Naratif staff was most certainly in order, given the situation. Thum should have asked most of the management staff to take a hike and then halved the editorial staff or content creators, instead of firing the entire editorial team. Nonetheless, we will examine the objections of the former staff to their firing.</p><p><b>Wrongful dismissal?</b> Regardless of the deteriorating relation between Thum and his managers on one hand and the editorial staff on the other, an offer was <b>made </b>to immediately end their employment with one month's pay in lieu of notice, and <b>accepted </b>by the editorial staff. <a href="https://asklegal.my/p/boss-fire-employee-notice-period-malaysia" target="_blank">That is the standard and lawful form of termination in Malaysia</a>, which is the operating jurisdiction for Observatory Southeast Asia Sdn Bhd, the entity that employs and pays the New Naratif staff to provide content that New Naratif, owned by Observatory Southeast Asia Pte Ltd, subequently publishes.</p><p><b>False pretext?</b> The former staff allege that PJ Thum was not completely truthful to them about the reasons for the financial distress of New Naratif. They also allege Thum offered a slightly different account in his <a href="https://us16.campaign-archive.com/?u=5cb021d6f2c1dbd9275bcf10e&id=cebb1d9b94" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">update to subscribers</a>. We point out again that immediate termination with one month's salary was made in lieu of written notice, entirely in line with <a href="http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/uploads/files/Publications/LOM/EN/Act%20265%20-%20Employment%20Act%201955.pdf" target="_blank">The Employment Act 1955</a>. Perhaps none of the former staff (all millennials?) have not experienced working for formerly lucrative web publishers who had to downsize, pivot, or even foreclose when the tech/web bubble burst; the common practice is to offer a measure of charity towards one's former employer and allow them to craft whatever narrative they need, to count their blessings for having gotten years of above-average wages for delivering below-average work, and to leave on good terms knowing their stint at the publisher is a gold star on their CV.</p><p><b>Abusive behaviour?</b> The staff allege that upon receiving their requests for more information on the books and unsolicited advice on restructuring New Naratif, PJ Thum brought in a lawyer to read them the riot act, claiming that communicating with one other was grounds for termination. This pales in comparison to horror stories of actually abusive bosses. Note however, that Thum did not cite this in his eventual termination of their employment; it was done legally with 1 month's pay in lieu of notice. For PJ to accuse his staff later in public as perfidious, treasonous, and mutinous is perhaps an indication that at long last, Thum is in thrall to the idea that it is fair for self-declared liberals to resort to illiberal, even underhanded means in order to defeat their illiberal enemies...</p><iframe allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="true" frameborder="0" height="571" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fzenjournalist%2Fposts%2Fpfbid0CZK2tKNi11zGKMrfQXCxCeEAAp4Mg9tyNmf4EDP6X6zz1JzeS2osfwHhjg7J97N4l&show_text=true&width=500" style="border: none; overflow: hidden;" width="500"></iframe><p><b>Original Sin: The rise of New Naratif and the long shadow of George Soros?</b></p><p>In their allegation of unfair dismissal, the former staff made much of the 40,000 dollar billing error. What they're really sore about isn't the billing error, but everything else it entails.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQMeb8wM-h4QD7h0Dj0jgQT9oC-Vud36vVDKdrw60FNVjsixeiKKXGFC1eBAaPzbD9jrEq6gzPjkyJy5sFkMHkCQvPR3KoDzeeT250CEnxydLcDM07aZXPyXlKo0INsGhjiSkm1Ab5A2ICIUMZbcsWQdlYAwx83V3cBpUQhuHzAUWk9nbiNEE/s800/george%20soros.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="800" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQMeb8wM-h4QD7h0Dj0jgQT9oC-Vud36vVDKdrw60FNVjsixeiKKXGFC1eBAaPzbD9jrEq6gzPjkyJy5sFkMHkCQvPR3KoDzeeT250CEnxydLcDM07aZXPyXlKo0INsGhjiSkm1Ab5A2ICIUMZbcsWQdlYAwx83V3cBpUQhuHzAUWk9nbiNEE/w400-h200/george%20soros.jpeg" width="400" /></a></div><p>The <a href="https://newnaratif.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Financial-Report-April-21-Sept-21-1.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">half-year financial statement</a> indicates that New Naratif outsources its book-keeping to a third party accountant once a year. For many years, that accountant apparently failed to notice a shortfall of expected revenue and the bank balance of the company account. The bigger question is who then controlled the company bank account? Who then prepared the half-yearly "financial statements" to New Naratif subscribers? Who failed to notice that persistent and growing shortfall, and reported figures that didn't actually tally with the real world bank account? How did New Naratif manage to receive "grants" (from undisclosed third parties, no less) who normally would demand regular full audits and not just an unaudited financial statement? Why is Thum so reluctant to begin proceedings to retrieve the subscription shortfall from the third-party subscription service? And why would <a href="http://www.checkcompany.co.uk/company/10747160/OBSERVATORY-SOUTHEAST-ASIA-LIMITED" target="_blank">the company secretary</a>, a Malaysian resident in the UK and <a href="https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/V4Xq7JpXlUOuxImA3cmXrF93VlY/appointments" target="_blank">owner of a corporate secretarial firm</a>, extend a loan of 14,000 GBP (as reported in its "<a href="https://newnaratif.com/a-statement-on-recent-events-and-new-naratifs-future/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">accountability report</a>") to a financially distressed client?</p><p>It is likely the former employees were aware that they were overpaid and their company stuffed with too much management fat, all while implausible accounting errors were made for months and years. How can a company continue to pay for all this while running itself into the ground? For all this to happen, a reasonable conclusion might be: New Naratif has always had secret, undeclared, perhaps unlimited sources of funding. In that case, some employees might believe that the company has a responsibility to ensure that the gravy continues to flow to everyone, and not fire anyone at the drop of a hat. And if you believe that, you'd also believe that the announcement of a 40,000 USD billing error is no more than a manufactured crisis.</p><p><a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/new-naratif-funded-by-a-number-of-foreigners-and-clearly-has-a-political-agenda-acra" target="_blank">Outside New Naratif, would any reasonable person believe that the website had secret, undeclared sources of near unlimited funding</a>?</p><p><b>Can PJ Thum and New Naratif pivot or will they sink?</b></p><div><b>Rehiring writers?</b> It is a pity that Dr PJ Thum has followed up his sacking of the entire editorial team with <a href="https://twitter.com/Bonnibel_R/status/1542871308001636353" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">yet another management level hire</a>. New Naratif is now at 1 content creator (Thum himself) and 7 managers (As Thum would count twice as both a content creator as well as manager), and still zero other editorial staff. New Naratif cannot resolve its problem of too much management fat overseeing a team of writing staff producing too few articles. This is an unsustainable structure that will sink New Naratif.</div><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcT64WDtRNCDp-9IymiyHzn3lRPj1NCdTrUUf47FYML-62glFHC91IvrcvbTVdwnbso3Dr9B49b0Dkrw-xFd8S2TPZdWNHwlCp-sNzhh8RtbrsgJcMbGoJ3TMP5L705ZOmrnAWDTG5PZWNIbjQkug2Uf85gxu2Ud5fyXI0RqoeQPr7TISMRlQ/s735/rowing%20competition%20management.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="305" data-original-width="735" height="166" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcT64WDtRNCDp-9IymiyHzn3lRPj1NCdTrUUf47FYML-62glFHC91IvrcvbTVdwnbso3Dr9B49b0Dkrw-xFd8S2TPZdWNHwlCp-sNzhh8RtbrsgJcMbGoJ3TMP5L705ZOmrnAWDTG5PZWNIbjQkug2Uf85gxu2Ud5fyXI0RqoeQPr7TISMRlQ/w400-h166/rowing%20competition%20management.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><p></p><p><b>Pivoting to research?</b> New Naratif is offering to pay 2K USD for researchers on various topics. We believe is the real restructuring plan, to ditch publishing activities and refashion New Naratif into a private micro research institute or think tank.</p><p>There's a problem, though. 2K USD is a pittance. Sure, it can be a princely sum after factoring in the output expected and the cost of living in Southeast Asia ex Singapore, where these researchers will likely be based. But even then, New Naratif is not a credible think tank or research institute. This is no career path to an academic position. 2K USD would be a fair wage if Dr PJ Thum were a tenured professor at Oxford, the research work implicitly tied to PJ serving as mentor and guarantor of an good academic career in a western university or its think tank and research institute affiliates. As it stands, we do not expect any competent takers for the research positions offered by New Naratif.</p><p><b>Foreclosure?</b> We note that the billing error and revenue shortfall will need to be reported to Companies House, with the necessary corrections and adjustments made to the financial statements of all affected years in a directors' resolution, by the next Annual General Meeting and annual filing. Will Dr PJ Thum bet that Companies House in the UK or the Companies Commission in Malaysia will not ask any further questions of him, his accountant, or the company secretary? Or will he begin moves to shut down New Naratif?</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-83324671904646750842022-03-16T17:45:00.017+08:002022-03-17T17:19:24.737+08:00Was it wise for Singapore to impose sanctions on Russia?<p>As war wages on in Ukraine, American president Joe Biden leans on reluctant NATO allies in Europe, long dependent on Russian gas, to stand with the Ukrainians against the invasion. Russia must be punished, yet not hard enough that it could spark another World War. Biden instigates his European allies to propose and vote to condemn the war in the United Nations, while many others refrain from taking a stand. Like most of the world outside NATO, in fact.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgLPgdi9bkjw2v-HqogHXOv3EfWLRaOAXwBrUnEFUj-Iyso8H_sn5b9egFyNPkWIyeXrbPfznCiAWjSr1Cjx6IMLt7kU0NX7TbP5wrX4G_BxxhxqnXdhjCdjwv96r0Uf7-vTofvZdj4HCs-BVP6ddtu2KvkwzTVi9RmUuUCyNBCupA0jImtfWk=s2266" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1102" data-original-width="2266" height="298" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgLPgdi9bkjw2v-HqogHXOv3EfWLRaOAXwBrUnEFUj-Iyso8H_sn5b9egFyNPkWIyeXrbPfznCiAWjSr1Cjx6IMLt7kU0NX7TbP5wrX4G_BxxhxqnXdhjCdjwv96r0Uf7-vTofvZdj4HCs-BVP6ddtu2KvkwzTVi9RmUuUCyNBCupA0jImtfWk=w611-h298" width="611" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Mykhailo Khmelko depicts the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pereiaslav_Agreement" target="_blank">Treaty of Pereyaslav</a> in a 1951 painting.</td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p><span></span></p><p></p><p>The few Asian nations to impose sanctions on Russia are America's closest allies: South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. And then, there is Singapore. <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-28/singapore-to-sanction-russia-in-almost-unprecedented-move" target="_blank">This move has international observers scratching their heads. It is unexpected, uncharacteristic, and unprecedented</a>. Singapore does not live in the shadow of Russia nor is it a NATO member. Nor would most people describe it as a close ally of America. Singapore's brand of diplomacy has been quiet and low key; it rarely sticks out, if ever, from the ASEAN consensus position.</p><p>There are those who argue that Singapore should have stayed on the sidelines like its neighbours. That it should play the role of a neutral peacemaker. That Singapore's pro-Ukraine positioning is too extreme, and going further to impose sanctions against Russia is a mistake.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p><b>Did Singapore bite off more than it can chew?</b></p><p>There's a difference between expressing concern over the invasion of a sovereign nation and overdoing it like what Singapore has done. On the floor of the United Nations, the Singapore ambassador made such a <a href="https://youtu.be/P2MoQnBYCqU?t=11127" target="_blank">full throated, highfalutin defense of Ukraine</a> that the Ukrainian ambassador gave him a bear hug at the end of his speech. This is political theatre of the highest order. As a consequence, Singapore now finds itself on the <a href="https://tass.com/politics/1418197" target="_blank">Kremlin list of "hostile nations"</a>.</p><p>In a not so distant past, the Soviet Union had done far worse and yet <a href="https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/data/pdfdoc/lky19700922.pdf" target="_blank">Lee Kuan Yew continued to offer his hand in friendship and maintain and even deepen ties and communications</a>. Is Lee Hsien Loong's apparent repudiation of his father's <a href="https://warontherocks.com/2015/12/the-kissinger-effect-on-realpolitik/" target="_blank">realpolitik</a> and turn to idealistic principles the correct move?</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhWWaCXzF_keHTYZhhHKp0v9QsVrA0605d3x0zcVKpGOYOVWdAl4wlv5KsyZVFiww1-i8wup5E4kVdJtb8H-yByezi2D-0zMS63N9tf3yq9TlFY6WEbcJMA7NFqmxbwg5IowAtFFFtolTmeJjrPzUEry230GSvDMUlONMe5igtxUPIrsX2DCC4=s300" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="201" data-original-width="300" height="201" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhWWaCXzF_keHTYZhhHKp0v9QsVrA0605d3x0zcVKpGOYOVWdAl4wlv5KsyZVFiww1-i8wup5E4kVdJtb8H-yByezi2D-0zMS63N9tf3yq9TlFY6WEbcJMA7NFqmxbwg5IowAtFFFtolTmeJjrPzUEry230GSvDMUlONMe5igtxUPIrsX2DCC4" width="300" /></a></div><div><br /></div>Is Singapore's turn to idealistic principles a <a href="https://youtu.be/ik8JT2S-kBE" target="_blank">brave and courageous decision, as Sir Humphrey might put it</a>, and as Bloomberg's characterisation of its decision to sanction Russia as "unprecedented" suggests? Or is Singapore playing a different game altogether?<div><b><br /></b></div><div><b>Is there a different way to understand Singapore's actions and words?</b><p>When the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Singapore's founding father Lee Kuan Yew, while an unabashed capitalist, was wary of unbridled individualism and liberalism and sought of a set of alternate values and morality to guide Singapore. He settled on a narrative of "Asian Values", casting Singapore as a "<a href="https://www.scmp.com/article/141424/dangers-confucian-doctrine" target="_blank">Confucian state</a>". Alas, the senior Lee was taken too literally by the Anglosphere. While Confucianism officially triumphed over Legalism with the fall of the authoritarian Qin dynasty, China's succeeding rulers governed on the basis of being outwardly Confucian and inwardly Legalist (外儒内法). They promoted Confucian pieties to the public while maintaining Legalist methods of government and control, and thus ruled with an iron fist in a velvet glove.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEheDOBwT1UyA9NJGAwRgrgXs0FCjdkRzk0iJSKVdy4SswSWbNZivXNdSdiiVDm0c1Vd2msoVSMuVX5LqswrlsnBq6RiAkO8aQLmB8yeqIrd7976BEukv55xTRhx9PC-WcnAyEIxGBGoxHdB_g8iNyksbEu8blFimyo91cWxKck27coiQksxPeM=s284" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="284" data-original-width="217" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEheDOBwT1UyA9NJGAwRgrgXs0FCjdkRzk0iJSKVdy4SswSWbNZivXNdSdiiVDm0c1Vd2msoVSMuVX5LqswrlsnBq6RiAkO8aQLmB8yeqIrd7976BEukv55xTRhx9PC-WcnAyEIxGBGoxHdB_g8iNyksbEu8blFimyo91cWxKck27coiQksxPeM" width="217" /></a></div><p>Under Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore's international diplomacy takes on a similar dual logic. While Singapore promotes universal principles, it assesses global politics with stone cold realism and acts in pragmatic self interest. Singapore's diplomats often offer the public narrative that small states rely on the international rules-based order being stable and predictable. What they understand privately is that the "international rules-based order" is conditional to the Great Powers agreeing to abide by and enforce a set of arbitrary rules while also agreeing that they have the dispensation to bend them, but not to the point of breaking them.</p><p>Read in this context, the global sanctions against Russia are in fact an admission that NATO has ruled out direct confrontation and the use of force against Russia and expects Ukraine to capitulate at the peace table, sooner or later. Sanctions will not hurt Russia to the extent that Mr Putin will be deposed; the Castros and the Ayatollahs still thrive despite decades of sanctions.</p><p>Why then go through all this? The sanctions were never about Russia. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjVp9_mW9URl12IuaTFUnnNac9rC81fVHUZakhvafGGr4Xkaj13GWkJr-fNMaL1ye3DHVhOkb1ZSWRAqwnTW0IJM-WNXRAd7dlSeOZXD8Olq2in79N6_Ou0ncC7g1X0FmbBcm3GsA2l_2249lQ_vkQmdPhgUAkhQB0Hsz97bTy12zcHdlE1-Pc=s842" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="402" data-original-width="842" height="191" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjVp9_mW9URl12IuaTFUnnNac9rC81fVHUZakhvafGGr4Xkaj13GWkJr-fNMaL1ye3DHVhOkb1ZSWRAqwnTW0IJM-WNXRAd7dlSeOZXD8Olq2in79N6_Ou0ncC7g1X0FmbBcm3GsA2l_2249lQ_vkQmdPhgUAkhQB0Hsz97bTy12zcHdlE1-Pc=w400-h191" width="400" /></a></div><p>It's all about sending a message to Xi Jinping after China and Russia declared a new "<a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/russia-and-china-line-up-against-us-in-no-limits-partnership/articleshow/89351575.cms" target="_blank">no limits partnership</a>" that is "<a href="http://en.kremlin.ru/supplement/5770" target="_blank">superior to political and military alliances of the Cold War era</a>", during the opening of the Genocide Olympics in February. It is not inconceivable but highly probable that "no limits partnership" exceeding the old Soviet-Chinese alliance meant Putin and Xi have decided to declare their imminent invasions of the Ukraine and Taiwan, and to secure the Black Sea and the South China Sea. With Russia initiating its invasion, China would no doubt strike sooner rather than later. And a "no limits partnership" would quite likely entail mutual support and aid of these allies.</p><p>Realistically, economic, financial and banking sanctions may hurt Russia but won't bring it down; economic, financial and banking sanctions will cripple and destroy China's export economy and plunge the nation into chaos. Singapore's trade with Russia amounts to less than 1% of its GDP; Mr Putin may be miffed but he wouldn't even feel a sting from Singapore. It is not inconceivable that he and Mr Lee will make up easily once this is over.</p><p>Singapore's role in the global sanctions was to provide a piece of political theatre that could convince diplomats across the world to join in the cancellation of Russia. Singapore understands that a rules-based international order only works if members agree and are incentivised to enforce rules and punish transgressions, and then moved to help create such an atmosphere. In addition, this also establishes a standard for which any future act of aggression by China (such as aiding the Russian invasion or helping Russia circumvent sanctions, even if Taiwan is not yet invaded) can and will be seen as equally unforgivable and deserving of similarly harsh sanctions. And the cherry on top of all this would be to remind America that <a href="https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3030111/china-will-be-wary-us-singapore-deal-military-bases" target="_blank">Singapore is still a close partner</a> <a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/586111-biden-blundered-by-excluding-singapore-from-democracy-summit" target="_blank">despite being left out by Biden from his democracy summit</a>.</p><p><b>So what's in it for Singapore? What are its self interests in this affair?</b></p><p>As a member of ASEAN and a South China Sea neighbour, Singapore faces an existential threat from China's attempts to enforce its claims on the South China Sea.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhXdUCNCtHXSUixhyyk-7Z4nklR6VUyKNI6oBLSfE9ZG-Nvxb9SIuK7mLkPY-IyQWlBSeFRwlMQTVoJhJ1Bka5q_glkku_ke0mUReWj_swdSE0m75wfAkpJy0PWZBnsW5XFuwb9HutoxVWaC-grIp-Eu3yIU6Ey4IHWge9MHVeS6J4F-BP7NJQ=s976" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="549" data-original-width="976" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhXdUCNCtHXSUixhyyk-7Z4nklR6VUyKNI6oBLSfE9ZG-Nvxb9SIuK7mLkPY-IyQWlBSeFRwlMQTVoJhJ1Bka5q_glkku_ke0mUReWj_swdSE0m75wfAkpJy0PWZBnsW5XFuwb9HutoxVWaC-grIp-Eu3yIU6Ey4IHWge9MHVeS6J4F-BP7NJQ=w400-h225" width="400" /></a></div><p>The <a href="https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf" target="_blank">UN Law of the Sea</a> governing the freedom of navigation and exploitation of the natural resources of the oceanic region are the brainchild of Singapore ambassador Tommy Koh. China's actions not just challenge the rules that Singapore designed to protect its self-interests, but directly disrupt the foundation for peace and framework for conflict resolution in the maritime region. China's diplomatic attempts to split ASEAN directly threaten Singapore's diplomatic investments in the regional grouping. That's decades of creating a non-aligned alliance that can speak and act with one unified voice on important global and regional matters should the need arise.</p><p>Singapore is simply defending itself and the region against China. And being the only ASEAN member that does not purchase military hardware from Russia, Singapore was always the only member appropriate to join the sanctions against Russia.</p><p>Ordinarily, Singapore would not be able to stand against China but Xi Jinping's "unlimited partnership" agreement with Putin is a strategic mistake that allows <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/14/us-warns-china-against-coming-to-russia-aid-in-ukraine" target="_blank">America to stand preemptively against China</a>.</p><p>The current talks between America and China vindicates Singapore's stand: Washington's diplomats have threatened sanctions against Peking for any form of "aid" to Moscow. And by <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/14/world/europe/china-russia-military-aid-us.html" target="_blank">refusing to draw any red line on what constitutes military or economic aid</a>, America has moved into an advantageous position of strategic ambiguity and China has lost its strategic ambiguity. China has put itself in a position where any aggressive move by China, even in the South China Sea, will be viewed by America through the prism of China's new "unlimited partnership" with Russia.</p><p><b>So should Singapore start looking over its shoulder?</b></p><p>Both <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/03/russia-demography-birthrate-decline-ukraine/" target="_blank">Russia</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/17/chinas-birthrate-falls-to-61-year-low-despite-moves-to-stave-off-demographic-crisis" target="_blank">China</a> are in <a href="https://youtu.be/h-3kIsW4KEM" target="_blank">free-fall demographic collapse</a>. Nations on the eve of extinction do terrible, desperate things such as last gasp attempts at expansion, avenging perceived historical wrongs, forcibly reuniting wayward territories. Singapore acted in this manner because one of these dangerous nations poses an existential threat to it, but knowing both threats will burn themselves out if the international world order plays its cards right.</p></div>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-7931158897346013862022-02-14T15:00:00.026+08:002022-02-16T20:41:14.455+08:00When will it be safe to support the Workers' Party again?<p style="text-align: left;">On 10 February 2022, the Committee of Privileges presented its <a href="https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/selectcommittee/selectcommittee/download?id=7&type=subReport">official report</a> on <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2021/12/should-singaporeans-trust-parliamentary.html">Ms Raeesah's Khan's lies to the Singapore Parliament</a>.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Here are some of the salient points from the report.</p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj5RhFu2-jIVWzX45lA47X815q9lFdPVwHKeqxvat2Ep5nC5QxTUm5D5j00tCk389OUhKlS8wtsjcGgQM7NKirPQto5LnRgOdWoPcvAd9PKFholMHlSonxEe7p59fyfgK6a2IegPAYBBpVtfoSMXAZJaS_WOmsS_Smjtof9iGP8iVdJLay5YWE=s625" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="350" data-original-width="625" height="224" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj5RhFu2-jIVWzX45lA47X815q9lFdPVwHKeqxvat2Ep5nC5QxTUm5D5j00tCk389OUhKlS8wtsjcGgQM7NKirPQto5LnRgOdWoPcvAd9PKFholMHlSonxEe7p59fyfgK6a2IegPAYBBpVtfoSMXAZJaS_WOmsS_Smjtof9iGP8iVdJLay5YWE=w400-h224" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">For all intents and purposes, the fat lady has sung</td></tr></tbody></table><span></span><p></p><a name='more'></a>Ms Khan lied to Parliament over 3 months and did so under guidance from her party leaders, chiefly Mr Pritam Singh (105).<p></p><p style="text-align: left;">Mr Pritam Singh lied to the Committee. He lied about the content of the conversations he had with Raeesah Khan (55.1). He lied about the party's timeline for Raeesah Khan to tell the truth (55.2). He tried to discredit Raeesah Khan by painting her as mentally unstable or unsound (105). His lies were exposed by evidence Ms Sylvia Lim submitted to the committee and notes she took for the Workers' Party disciplinary hearing of Raeesah Khan (142).<br /><br />This was not even close to a his word against her word case (201). Khan had plenty of verifiable, independent and contemporaneous evidence supporting her side of the story. Singh, not so much and in fact none.</p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p></p>Accordingly, the Committee will recommend a fine for Khan and in addition, to recommend Singh to the Public Prosecutor to consider criminal proceedings for perjury, i.e. lying to the committee under oath. It appears that his automatic parliamentary immunity for giving evidence to the committee has been waived, rescinded, cancelled because he lied so many times to the committee. Any recommendations for Singh as the "key orchestrator" of Khan's lies (227) will be deferred till the Public Prosecutor is done with Singh.<br /><br />Pritam Singh, the WP IB, and their die-hard supporters may opt to launch <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2022/02/will-pap-pay-political-price-for.html">Operation Save Pritam</a> 2.0 and fight it out in Parliament, in the courts, and continue to <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/wps-attempts-politicise-committee-privileges-recommendations-regrettable-speaker-tan-chuan-jin-1814696">politicise and discredit the work of the Committee of Privileges</a>. But what should rational voters do?<br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span></span><p style="text-align: left;"><b>What does the WP need to fix?</b></p><p style="text-align: left;">Despite picking off one constituency from the ruling party every other election, it appears that the Workers' Party has expanded too fast in the run-up to 2020 and is in fact overextended. Such overextension has led to existing weaknesses in the party, its MPs, and its leadership to be shown up.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Failure of integrity</b>. In its rush to expand, the WP promoted candidates with integrity issues. This led to Raeesah Khan fabricating lies in Parliament in an attempt to discredit and defame the police force.</p><b>Failure of judgement</b>. The newly appointed "Leader of the Opposition", Pritam Singh, exercised poor judgement in his handling of Raeesah Khan. He failed to get her to tell the truth as early as possible. He and his party co-leaders failed to draw up a plan for her to tell the truth.<br /><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Unaccountable leaders</b>. Jamus Lim told the Committee of Privileges that if the WP senior leadership had instructed Ms Khan to take her lie "to the grave”, then their suppression of these facts and of their own involvement, would have been material information that had to be disclosed to the Disciplinary Committee hearing (93). Pritam Singh, Sylvia Lim, and Faisal Manap did supress these facts and hid them from the CEC as well as WP cadres until the Committee's proceedings begun. Pritam, Sylvia, and Faisal failed their party. The testimonies from Jamus Lim and Raeesah's aides show how much they trusted Singh and were reluctant to question or push him. WP leadership ran away with a blank cheque from their members. You know, the same blank check that all opposition parties say every election that voters shouldn't hand over to a ruling party...</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjkLAWmE3o5NPz6FSnSFWrS4LN7MMBgD_9qqPJOrF3q0nOlpYWNBKNpt57gnWYbxPNyb8_E3qQ2e2Ft80Hwiwc0XzQwY-bvkF59pjiK6cz2uX8wtWbMomqNtzf5x-cdizfa0M0wndnLU0qqVbuscKOoh0yTOKu5gIcVRRIKoEMGg7C8CZ0M7fE=s489" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="489" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjkLAWmE3o5NPz6FSnSFWrS4LN7MMBgD_9qqPJOrF3q0nOlpYWNBKNpt57gnWYbxPNyb8_E3qQ2e2Ft80Hwiwc0XzQwY-bvkF59pjiK6cz2uX8wtWbMomqNtzf5x-cdizfa0M0wndnLU0qqVbuscKOoh0yTOKu5gIcVRRIKoEMGg7C8CZ0M7fE=w400-h266" width="400" /></a></div><p style="text-align: left;">And why should voters owe the Workers' Party a blank cheque?</p><p style="text-align: left;">The Workers' Party had previously championed a "First World Parliament", yet its actions today indicate that its senior leadership cannot even be checked by its own members, cadres, or CEC.</p></div><div style="text-align: left;">Today's Workers' Party is not the opposition that Singapore deserves, and will certainly not grow into a ruling party that Singapore needs if voters reward the party for its failures.<br /><br /><b>What action should WP take to regain the trust of voters?</b></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><br /></b></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>Apologise in Parliament</b>. Having presented its report to Parliament, there will be a motion to enact the recommendations by the Committee of Privileges in the coming days. Instead of treating this as a political football match, WP's leadership should acknowlege the wrongdoings of Khan and itself, and apologise.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /><b>Disciplinary committee for Pritam Singh, Sylvia Lim, and Faisal Manap</b>. We note that the trio were happy to subject Raeesah Khan to a disciplinary committee once the Committee of Privilege was convened.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjJH3aidqp442tn8Y6RrDWabAiwMYidz1zuoMxK7hGT2WmxJXPxQ4GRmWOK7YFXZSGoIROD555NTDwbzSzVxlPZprdH6rKdrf5k31zchZWXH0OvRpXDb4ecN0I14yw7KEij276aPZTd4808QGGk2cyavCrieZ2UtSVHJs20QFjc4zonIumkyow=s379" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="336" data-original-width="379" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjJH3aidqp442tn8Y6RrDWabAiwMYidz1zuoMxK7hGT2WmxJXPxQ4GRmWOK7YFXZSGoIROD555NTDwbzSzVxlPZprdH6rKdrf5k31zchZWXH0OvRpXDb4ecN0I14yw7KEij276aPZTd4808QGGk2cyavCrieZ2UtSVHJs20QFjc4zonIumkyow=s320" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: left;">We have some wise words from <a href="https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?reportid=003_19951103_S0002_T0003">Mr Chiam See Tong on 3 November 1995 in Parliament</a>: "To me, opposition means that we have to be honourable; we must be honest, and not dishonest; to me, the opposition must be truthful; and not be liars and cheats; above all, in the opposition, we must be good patriotic Singaporeans." Hence,<br /><br /><b>New, honourable leaders elected</b>. Having lied under oath to a parliamentary committee, Messrs Singh, Lim, and Faisal should step down from WP leadership.<br /><br /><b>No more woke candidates</b>. The Woke Ms Khan consistently sought as a candidate and a member of parliament to divide Singapore society, to demonise and alienate Singaporeans from one another. Pritam Singh and the leadership made the mistake of pushing her for populist appeal, and voters shouldn't tolerate another identical failing from the party.<br /><br /><b>Abandon victim/bully narrative</b>. The WP's crisis is entirely self-inflicted, and the more Pritam Singh, the WP IB, and diehard WP supporters deny all responsibility and accountability in the face of evidence and findings, the more unelectable it becomes.<br /><br />Political scientists who have studied the progress of nations for centuries tell us that the strongest nations are democracies with a two-party or multiparty system. It is perhaps an accident of history that WP is seen by many as the preferred opposition party of Singapore. It is however not a mandate of heaven. If and when the PAP falls, Singaporeans will look for a suitable ruling party. If and when the WP fails as an opposition party, Singaporeans will look for a suitable opposition. Singapore will continue to benefit no matter what. Nature, like politics, abhors a vacuum.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">NB: Non functional links in this post have been restored on 16 February 2022. We apologise for the error.</div>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-63539224504546825372022-02-09T15:30:00.002+08:002022-02-14T11:20:27.034+08:00Will the PAP pay a political price for the committee of privileges?<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiHHOJmYAEepAqe6A3pQ2PTOxc2AV5aBnizb9I40q5_iitxTGBqqoyJcB7JSI0WTitTbMtKhY1FlrSkHhxephyquUn_IzB4JkOfxH1XwUTBs4AiM1KdZLDfsDsSDy2ayN1XgSzycebMUzYgcNMKZx7tW0DsqtJByyaJNuKEN2fVAs-nCsMQlDs=s500" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" data-original-height="307" data-original-width="500" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiHHOJmYAEepAqe6A3pQ2PTOxc2AV5aBnizb9I40q5_iitxTGBqqoyJcB7JSI0WTitTbMtKhY1FlrSkHhxephyquUn_IzB4JkOfxH1XwUTBs4AiM1KdZLDfsDsSDy2ayN1XgSzycebMUzYgcNMKZx7tW0DsqtJByyaJNuKEN2fVAs-nCsMQlDs=s16000" /></span></a></div><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Politics is a funny business. Both sides of the political divide
in Singapore can agree on several immutable facts: Worker’s Party
MP Raeesah Khan told several lies in Parliament for months,
eventually admitted, apologised, and resigned for lying, a complaint
for breach of parliamentary privilege was filed, and a committee of
privileges convened to investigate the matter.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">According to certain online commentators, given the same facts, it
is the People’s Action Party that must pay a political price
because the committee of privileges allowed Khan to implicate the
leaders of WP (notably Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh and
Opposition Whip Sylvia Lim) for their possible role in abetting her
lies, and then to investigate these allegations. When did they know
of the lie? What did they say to Khan over the course of 3 months?
Why did they keep silent for 3 months? Why, the PAP will pay for the
committee going in this direction, not the WP!<span></span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Such perverse logic points towards the existence of a <a href="https://fathership.co/move-aside-pap-here-comes-the-workers-party-internet-brigade" target="_blank">WP internet brigade</a>,
a WP online counterinsurgency that has been coordinating talking
points on a daily basis to protect the party in its hour of crisis,
to <b>spin a narrative</b> that it is a guilty PAP who is out to
fix an innocent WP.</span></p>
<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal;">
<span style="color: black;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"><b>So what is WP IB’s Operation Save Pritam?</b></span></span></span></p><p style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"></span></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="color: black;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiA4BPt_JJgGV9IxGvunpO5FPDKhSybdjK6-EV0fK3kqCAsjAnvDXexemZzqxVgErkSIQH0I0Qyi40KToDFUg3E8opc46WHvkL4yZzb2CnEKvlBJ2zv0TaQ0tTDmT3xwKG6BPUO3w0pa-2ZSoc2aOd40H1DxoCLy32WNEGr8wrcd3VJYcNz8pw=s700" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="700" data-original-width="600" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiA4BPt_JJgGV9IxGvunpO5FPDKhSybdjK6-EV0fK3kqCAsjAnvDXexemZzqxVgErkSIQH0I0Qyi40KToDFUg3E8opc46WHvkL4yZzb2CnEKvlBJ2zv0TaQ0tTDmT3xwKG6BPUO3w0pa-2ZSoc2aOd40H1DxoCLy32WNEGr8wrcd3VJYcNz8pw=s320" width="274" /></a></span></span></span></div><span><p style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>Discredit
Raeesah Khan</b>. A typical character assassination piece would nitpick
every new clarification and addition to her account of
her meetings with the WP leadership, proclaiming that such clarifications and additions are proof that Khan is unreliable and
has contradicted or even nullified her previous testimonies to the committee.</span></p></span><p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>Discredit committee members</b>. Paint members as <span style="font-weight: normal;">inquisitors,</span><span style="font-weight: normal;"> </span><span style="font-weight: normal;">bullies, and villains</span> for asking for clarifications from witnesses whose obstructive
responses (such as preempting questions, answering questions he
preferred to be asked instead of questions the committee put forth to him) drag
proceedings for hours.</span></p>
<p align="left" style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"><b><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;">C</span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;">heer
</span></span></span></span></b><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><b>Pritam
Singh</b><span style="font-weight: normal;">. Paint him </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">as
a hero for being a</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
difficult and obstructive witness.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="left" style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><b>Discredit the Committee of Privileges</b><span style="font-weight: normal;">. Deny it is a legitimate committee performing a legitimate duty. Paint it as </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">an
</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">instrument
of the ruling party</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">. Reduce its investigation into </span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal;"><span style="color: black;">a political boxing match between PAP and WP.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="left" style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Operation
Save Pritam is a p</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">erfect
storm </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">that
o</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">nline
WP partisans </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">hope
they can ride to blame the PAP for WP’s biggest failure in
parliament. This perfect storm brings together </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">three</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
political realities in Singapore: the low</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
political literacy </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">of
opposition for the sake of opposition supporters, who don’t
believe in parliamentary privilege or the ambit of the
committee until their preferred party becomes the government; the</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">nearly
60 years of </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">historical
</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">dominance
of one relatively virtuous party in parliament</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">,
</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">leading
to the </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">lack
of precedent</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">s
for any breaches of parliamentary privilege and </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">guidelines</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">for</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
a fair and unbiased committee; </span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">and
a lack of curiosity in opposition supporters in <a href="http://loksabhaph.nic.in/Committee/CommitteeInformation.aspx?comm_code=3&tab=2" target="_blank">how breaches of privilege have been handled outside Singapore</a></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="letter-spacing: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p align="left" style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p align="left" style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span>Operation
Save Pritam is not really about the price the PAP will pay, but more of
the price WP IB wants voters to pay; namely, </span><b>Do we tolerate </b><b>and
reward</b><b> a deeply flawed opposition just because it is not in
power?</b><span> WP IB proposes that voters should support the Little Guy
at all costs, excuse its every failing and vice, there’s no need to
worry when the monster that we feed has grown too large to control
because it won’t happen...</span></span></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiWbv7wZTjHqU28AvHyo-dNc8ZN6PS18tdRj6RIZ2AAbmc0nCtZkbcz0PSxYkTZXm20ScW0-WwPxF3tsca7XEum1UjRpZ0W55L_3gPwVHOjMrLyNFaRtelbMtrKPxNoizaMwY5plGf-OnfAulU-MLFMk09EGjcRqLGnA0tJuiv6CfsijK_TmkI=s489" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="489" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiWbv7wZTjHqU28AvHyo-dNc8ZN6PS18tdRj6RIZ2AAbmc0nCtZkbcz0PSxYkTZXm20ScW0-WwPxF3tsca7XEum1UjRpZ0W55L_3gPwVHOjMrLyNFaRtelbMtrKPxNoizaMwY5plGf-OnfAulU-MLFMk09EGjcRqLGnA0tJuiv6CfsijK_TmkI=s16000" /></span></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">From Parliament to Little Shop of Horrors - if certain diehard opposition supporters have their way!</span></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p>
<p align="left" style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; widows: 2;">
<span style="color: black;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"><b>How
might the PAP still convince voters that it should pay a political
price?</b></span></span></span></p>
<p align="left" style="font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span style="color: black;"><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;">Defeat is often snatched from the jaws of victory. When the work of the
committee of privileges is finally done, its report will be presented
to parliament. Who will be punished? What punishments will be levied?
The committee only makes <i style="font-style: normal;">recommendations</i> on the <i style="font-style: normal;">who</i> and
the <i style="font-style: normal;">what</i>. The Leader of the House presents these recommendations as a motion to be voted on by
Parliament. Most MPs will be determined to explain the rationale for
their vote.</span></span></span></p><p align="left" style="font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEguqTBcR1BEHtcL3vLZjLqPQwRcBdnTm-vqHPrj_TQt4WzKdWWTKmsktW0C5ibDSgQ-_aNAeAz-EuPBvRlTsGwhGt9RMp90qN1p4Uivt-gQMbXyv_d3Ym4ElX5FfcaJTjqQL49nWpMpXydLt1nXMPGhNHo-C-LUit3r4zk47HutRWYAOHJnOus=s1280" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEguqTBcR1BEHtcL3vLZjLqPQwRcBdnTm-vqHPrj_TQt4WzKdWWTKmsktW0C5ibDSgQ-_aNAeAz-EuPBvRlTsGwhGt9RMp90qN1p4Uivt-gQMbXyv_d3Ym4ElX5FfcaJTjqQL49nWpMpXydLt1nXMPGhNHo-C-LUit3r4zk47HutRWYAOHJnOus=w400-h225" width="400" /></a></span></span></div><span><p align="left" style="font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This
is where we will know if there’s any hint of partisan bullying or
gloating. Can MPs in 2022 convince watchers to understand and
believe, as the MPs in 1996, in the principle of parliamentary
privilege? On the parliamentary breach and the harm that was done by
Khan’s lies? To the victims of her untruthful and incriminatory
allegations who could not defend themselves in Parliament? And to the
authority and dignity of the Parliament?</span></p></span><p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Can MPs in 2022 convince watchers to understand and believe, as
the MPs in 1996 themselves did, that Parliament has an essential
authority and dignity that all MPs, regardless of affiliation, swear
to uphold and submit to be measured by the same yardstick?</span></p>
<p><span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;">Dear
Reader, we leave you with excerpts from the <a href="https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?reportid=009_19961211_S0004_T0006" target="_blank">parliamentary session of 11 December 1996</a>, on the motion on the committee of privileges
report.</span></span></p>
<p></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">“It is perfectly all right to stand up to the Government and
challenge it. Any Singaporean is entitled to question the Government
and engage it on a debate on its figures. But there must be one
indispensable condition and that is the debate must be conducted
honestly. There is nothing wrong in making an error. The process is
not designed to punish or embarrass anyone for an innocent error. But
fabrication of data, if left unchecked, will destroy the integrity of
the entire system. If either the Government, and I think this cuts
both ways, or a representor is allowed to make false claims, and gets
away with it, people will not know who to trust.” - Davinder Singh</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Sir, we have been entrusted by the people of Singapore to look
after their interests. This is a heavy responsibility which demands
high standards of personal integrity and complete honesty from each
Member of this House, and from all those who aspire to serve in it.
We must carry out the business of this House seriously and solemnly.
Only then can we retain the trust and confidence of Singaporeans.
Unless we exercise the greatest care and seriousness in examining all
matters of public interest and insist that only accurate information
be used in the conduct of business in this House, we would be
misplacing the trust and the confidence reposed on us by the people.
There can be no compromise here. This House must embody, in the
persons of its Members, the soundness of values, morals and ethics,
which not only permeates the work that we do, but also inspires and
motivates all Singaporeans.” - Wong Kan Seng</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Mr Speaker, Sir, Parliament is the highest institution in the
land. It passes laws that affect every Singaporean. Therefore, it
must be respected and obeyed. If politicians choose not to do so,
then he or she must be reprimanded and appropriate punishment meted
out. Politicians fight hard at every election to enter this Chamber
and our behaviour and conduct in this House sets the tone for other
Singaporeans. If we misbehave, then Singaporeans will not be proud of
us and this country will suffer.” - Tan Cheng Bock</span></p></blockquote>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-32962969730839547312021-12-19T18:57:00.010+08:002021-12-20T11:02:22.512+08:00Should Singaporeans trust the parliamentary Committee of Privileges?<p>Every night for the past two weeks, Singaporeans watched as the Committee of Privileges investigated Raeesah Khan, formerly MP for Sengkang GRC and leading members of her former political party, for lying in Parliament.</p><p>Is the Committee of Privileges politically motivated? Is this investigation a witch hunt and a prelude to "fix the opposition"?</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgN0VQ3nB4ZqmuYVYpRPyAVC5uJQLv9vZm87nHngxgT71jG3E-Rl99rlcWSHmbI3T6BgnpkRxVjDtXfSyBVCfvMic6sPicDh6DjA59OWQ04m4yjKxqFbmHHQuU52KXpBJIX96GTxmY2KCeyl9fFQtJ4Wl_23AEzvIJtiJO79jUNdtK8-5Xojjw=s926" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="607" data-original-width="926" height="361" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgN0VQ3nB4ZqmuYVYpRPyAVC5uJQLv9vZm87nHngxgT71jG3E-Rl99rlcWSHmbI3T6BgnpkRxVjDtXfSyBVCfvMic6sPicDh6DjA59OWQ04m4yjKxqFbmHHQuU52KXpBJIX96GTxmY2KCeyl9fFQtJ4Wl_23AEzvIJtiJO79jUNdtK8-5Xojjw=w551-h361" width="551" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Illustration of the Newcastle witch hunt of 1650 from Ralph Gardiner's account in 1655</span></td></tr></tbody></table><span><a name='more'></a></span><p><b>Why is Raeesah Khan in hot soup with parliament?</b></p><p>On 3 August 2021, <a href="https://www.wp.sg/gender-equality-motion-speech-by-raeesah-khan/" target="_blank">Raeesah Khan gave a speech in parliament about gender equality</a>. She claimed to have accompanied a victim of sexual assault to the police station, where questioning by the police officers traumatised the victim further. Khan demanded an overhaul in the training of police officers to handle such cases, and for the police force to engage indepdendent, professional counsellors.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiQ05afZ4x7j8v8G9zfrE0l9qFWM1H3S_1iZ-Myr99W7Rz9vANt6XFlK4ttZwlNluzz7sI6lWNUztX2cT_TX_9gJuLHCpMZb00kXgVYVFp2q_vRwKjtrCsFKFF-XuijEZy9F7e45MFcFE6YpUf3e0Px5-nl0wY9JytDIiJlXMLKbuCtZ9vVcfM=s830" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="468" data-original-width="830" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiQ05afZ4x7j8v8G9zfrE0l9qFWM1H3S_1iZ-Myr99W7Rz9vANt6XFlK4ttZwlNluzz7sI6lWNUztX2cT_TX_9gJuLHCpMZb00kXgVYVFp2q_vRwKjtrCsFKFF-XuijEZy9F7e45MFcFE6YpUf3e0Px5-nl0wY9JytDIiJlXMLKbuCtZ9vVcfM=w400-h225" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Following parliament's Covid restrictions,<br />Raeesah Khan gave her speech in a plexiglass box</span></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Khan was encouraged in parliament on 10 August and 4 October to provide more details to the police. It took three whole months for Khan to admit in parliament that she had been lying all along. On 20 October, the police announced they turned up nothing in an internal review. It was only on 1 November that Khan confessed in parliament her account was a lie. She was traumatised by her own experience (which allegedly took place years ago in Australia) and was recently triggered by similar accounts of other victims in a local "assault survivors group". Unimpressed by the lie and the explanation, Indranee Rajah, the Leader of the House, refered the matter to the Committee of Privileges. </p><div><a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/timeline-what-happened-raeesah-khan-resign-wp-pritam-singh-2353261" target="_blank">The sequence of events</a> plainly shows that Khan lied in parliament, repeated her lies for three months, and a complaint was filed when her lies were exposed and she admitted her guilt.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>But is lying a crime? Can parliament not be so serious?</b></div><p>Procedurally, it all seems above board. A member of parliament may have breached parliamentary privilege, a complaint was filed by the Leader of the House, and the correct committee has been convened to investigate the complaint.</p><p>Underpinning the woes of Khan and the Workers Party leaders is the concept of <u>parliamentary privilege</u>.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjn-3nrzp8TicmAV7orbpd2IPxvdzrz0NdcMzE5MlMZ4qFb-vSjO093efqY7c4QLs8zzluTlzxnTUy0Wnsu9T10flhKlV_xevuwWDNZpe2wjGRcEiztHqhSu8rLf925vBHWvyfRfkFNUGXUpZJAsrbTvv5iLjUofFGEuQsm3xomEfdH2hXF7ik=s780" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="520" data-original-width="780" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjn-3nrzp8TicmAV7orbpd2IPxvdzrz0NdcMzE5MlMZ4qFb-vSjO093efqY7c4QLs8zzluTlzxnTUy0Wnsu9T10flhKlV_xevuwWDNZpe2wjGRcEiztHqhSu8rLf925vBHWvyfRfkFNUGXUpZJAsrbTvv5iLjUofFGEuQsm3xomEfdH2hXF7ik=w400-h266" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Left: Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh,<br />Speaker of the House (and privileges committee chair) Tan Chuan-Jin<br />Right: Pritam Singh's copy of Erskine May, which he should read before appearing to the COP</span></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Singapore inherited its parliamentary system and system of democracy from the United Kingdom. The <a href="https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PPIPA1962" target="_blank">Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Power) Act</a> acknowledges our debt to the mother of parliaments.</p><p></p><blockquote><span class="prov2TxtIL">The privileges, immunities and powers of
Parliament and of the Speaker, Members and committees of Parliament
shall be the same as those of the Commons House of Parliament of the
United Kingdom and of its Speaker, Members or committees at the
establishment of the Republic of Singapore. (Section 3(1))</span></blockquote><p></p><p>The preamble to the Act explains that </p><p></p><blockquote>There shall be freedom of speech and debate and proceedings in
Parliament, and such freedom of speech and debate and proceedings shall
not be liable to be impeached or questioned in any court, commission of
inquiry, committee of inquiry, tribunal or any other place whatsoever
out of Parliament. (Section 5)</blockquote><p></p><p>This is congruent with what Erskine May sets out in his "<a href="https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/" target="_blank">Bible of parliamentary procedure</a>":</p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: inherit;">Certain rights and immunities such as freedom from arrest or freedom of speech are exercised primarily by individual Members of each House. They exist in order to allow Members of each House to contribute effectively to the discharge of the functions of their House. (Part 2, Cap. 12)</span></blockquote>Ordinarily, parliamentary privilege protects members of parliament and witnesses providing evidence to parliament committees immunity from prosecution. Erskine May explains further that parliamentary privilege can be breached or violated, and such contempt of parliament subject to penalties imposed only by parliament:<br /><blockquote>When any of these rights and immunities is disregarded or attacked, the offence is called a breach of privilege and is punishable under the law of Parliament. Each House also claims the right to punish contempts. These are actions which, while not necessarily breaches of any specific privilege, obstruct or impede it in the performance of its functions, or are offences against its authority or dignity, such as disobedience to its legitimate commands or libels upon itself, its Members or its officers. (Part 2, Cap. 12)<br /><br />Any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results may be treated as a contempt even though there is no precedent of the offence. (Part 2, Cap. 15)</blockquote><p></p><p><b>How do we know if the committee is doing its job properly?</b></p><p>The proper scope of the committee, which should appear in the preamble of the eventual report to parliament, would be to ascertain if Khan had indeed breached parliamentary privilege, if others had collaborated with her or directed her to do so (under the "abet" clause of the Parliamentary (Privileges Immunities and Powers) Act), the seriousness of the breach, and then to propose the appropriate penalty or penalties.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhCfStSXYDLQd8ZTzJ0fBUo_9-NUx--rIYjG5UYilfOPH1xoXOkZhhS_9tFI31g9p1EYy4Go9yjGg7F3ub9SBwf8--vIxJj-vQsPrkUhLNxGysiBKImpLMeB2WKx7FOEjYI_Sko9tbcWCvwr-3AptAWnvJLfGNS5bXfUnc6d2mlP6bPWBjUrhU=s400" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="400" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhCfStSXYDLQd8ZTzJ0fBUo_9-NUx--rIYjG5UYilfOPH1xoXOkZhhS_9tFI31g9p1EYy4Go9yjGg7F3ub9SBwf8--vIxJj-vQsPrkUhLNxGysiBKImpLMeB2WKx7FOEjYI_Sko9tbcWCvwr-3AptAWnvJLfGNS5bXfUnc6d2mlP6bPWBjUrhU=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p>Following Erskine May's paragraphs on privilege and contempt, Khan's lies would be considered a breach of parliamentary privilege if the committee does find that her lies either <i>obstructed or impeded Parliament </i>or its officers in its performance of its functions, or <i>lowered the authority and dignity of Parliament</i> or its officers in the eyes of the public.</p><div><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/apr/09/top-judge-attacks-growing-abuse-of-parliamentary-privilege">Western members of the Commonwealth have been loathe to conduct full-scale investigations into contempts and breaches of privileges by parliamentarians and even to impose punitive measures when guilty</a>. But in India, a wealth of case precedents and subsequently commentaries on Erskine May and parliamentary philosophy have been developed by the <a href="http://loksabhaph.nic.in/Committee/CommitteeInformation.aspx?comm_code=3&tab=2" target="_blank">Lok Sabha's committee of privileges</a> over decades. Most important is this justification for breaches and contempt of privilege to be punished:</div><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #050505; font-family: inherit; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></p><blockquote>It is against the rules of parliamentary debate and decorum to make defamatory statements or allegations of incriminatory nature against any person and the position is all the worse if such allegations are made against persons who are not in a position to defend themselves on the floor of the House. The privilege of freedom of speech can only be secured, if members do not abuse it. - 26th report of the Lok Sabha Committee of Privileges, 1983</blockquote><p><b>Why should the WP leadership be hauled up?</b> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEihwVjgzpwLKIyixLf6NDNhsaaLL98zKzzV9l4uEuKwfxAZLIY8QjoV7pYPUobXbVV1xWaDKMleH2ivtk3qgSkUEof9j-LB41bNoCsbRSvRSyh-KUkueKckEcWXNjinantBqda0xZPG9vWWnMPi7WnR1OH6XR1rYbtpfrL7ljlAFlXsxVHSB2g=s500" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="307" data-original-width="500" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEihwVjgzpwLKIyixLf6NDNhsaaLL98zKzzV9l4uEuKwfxAZLIY8QjoV7pYPUobXbVV1xWaDKMleH2ivtk3qgSkUEof9j-LB41bNoCsbRSvRSyh-KUkueKckEcWXNjinantBqda0xZPG9vWWnMPi7WnR1OH6XR1rYbtpfrL7ljlAFlXsxVHSB2g=w400-h246" width="400" /></a></div><p></p><p>We return to Singapore's Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act and look at Section 36(2):</p><blockquote><p>Any person who attempts to contravene any provision of this Act or abets
the contravention of any such provision shall be guilty of an offence
and shall be liable on conviction to the penalty to which he would have
been liable for a contravention of the provision itself.</p></blockquote><p>On her first testimony to the committee, Raeesah Khan revealed an interesting, uncommon, and quite unique practice of the Workers Party: WP MPs vet and comment on each others' speeches before they are given in Parliament. She also revealed that her parliamentary colleagues in the party already knew that she had lied by 6 August 2021. She also claimed that after seeking advice on the way forward, leaders like Pritam Singh and Sylvia Lim told her, amongst other things that "It's your call." As she saw it she could, in effect, stop discussing her story in Parliament and to say nothing else, and hopefully there would be no repercussions.</p><p>The committee would be right to invite Singh and Lim to give testimony, to ascertain if their advice, by omission or commission, directly or indirectly led Khan to continue lying for 3 months to Parliament. The wording of the advice would be important, for which any conflicts in testimony and memory can be clarified. Most important however, is that any advice made by Singh and Lim to Khan can be judged by clear standards: What is the plain meaning of the words said or written? Would any ordinary person interpret, as Khan did, that she was given leeway to continue to lie or refrain from coming clean?</p><p>If Khan had abused her privilege, was she abetted by her party leaders?</p><p>Did Khan fall short of standards expected of a member of parliament? Did her party leaders fall short of standards by giving her advice that didn't prevent her from lying, didn't make her come clean?</p><p><b>Should the committee of privileges care how Pritam Singh conducted his party's disiciplinary committee?</b></p><p>Did Pritam Singh throw Raeesah Khan under the bus?</p><p>Why was Khan only disciplined after her lie came to light and resulted in a parliamentary investigation?</p><p>Why didn't Pritam Singh tell his party disciplinary committee the full facts that he and other MPs were aware of the lie, and actively gave counsel to Khan over the three months?</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiSFknlI8fsdyuHnK_-XN3jSonpyYZwKq56LJZPT1OO3tDLXVftUO4Z2hpqSnaZIAOzb2fpzTaEzm8GFr1HkxL9_o0evavRfdFfwcBlw0Rgeu_A9_PHe8JlKEMuynYXnV2aDfzZ3bazhV8oeG0WD8pkhhnSNSMX3fWsoaj3GIUM6kyQhcaYPJM=s394" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="284" data-original-width="394" height="231" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiSFknlI8fsdyuHnK_-XN3jSonpyYZwKq56LJZPT1OO3tDLXVftUO4Z2hpqSnaZIAOzb2fpzTaEzm8GFr1HkxL9_o0evavRfdFfwcBlw0Rgeu_A9_PHe8JlKEMuynYXnV2aDfzZ3bazhV8oeG0WD8pkhhnSNSMX3fWsoaj3GIUM6kyQhcaYPJM=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p>We note that the Lok Sabha's committee of privileges had this to say in 1987, again developing on Erskine May:</p><p></p><blockquote>As per the established convention, the Chairman does not take cognizance of what transpires at party meetings.</blockquote><p></p><p>One may believe from evidence that has been unearthed from the committe sessions that Singh is the sort of party leader that can be trusted to toss as many inconvenient party members under the bus to fulfil his party narrative. This is a matter for the party, not the parliamentary committee as it is outside its scope. The committee may have unearthed this matter but should not use it as evidence to determine any breach of privileges or contempt in parliament. These revelations are a matter for Singh and the party he leads: party volunteers and potential candidates should take note and make their own decision on this matter.</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-72736742632481316322021-05-18T22:51:00.002+08:002021-05-18T23:55:50.686+08:00Who should we blame for Singapore's second Covid lockdown?<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifyksI6EmUf3Fo73o87HV2toNr7wu_Y-T0LUUXDEQw7FUuAgaS60HPND0GDvIMh8N-NqV4uf9DJz-RlWh3YVeFu-f7uRfHlhqbV1SEKLUmlyL5PHaeFkNorPy6iOAgk6wuXRW2Gg/s707/ShipofFools+frontispiecejpg.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="445" data-original-width="707" height="252" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifyksI6EmUf3Fo73o87HV2toNr7wu_Y-T0LUUXDEQw7FUuAgaS60HPND0GDvIMh8N-NqV4uf9DJz-RlWh3YVeFu-f7uRfHlhqbV1SEKLUmlyL5PHaeFkNorPy6iOAgk6wuXRW2Gg/w400-h252/ShipofFools+frontispiecejpg.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ship of fools, woodcut, 1494 Basel</td></tr></tbody></table><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;">Singapore returned to a state of lockdown on 8 May 2021. With all indoor sports, indoor dining, mandatory work from home, and social gathering severely restricted (and with all schools switching to home-based learning), this is a mere quarter-turn of the screw away from the complete lockdown ("Circuit Breaker") from April 2020.</span></div><p>Much has been made about the quality of decision-making of Singapore's Interministerial Covid Task Force in this matter. Once again like the initial dithering and delays that led to travellers from Wuhan colonising Singapore with the Covid virus, our leaders dithered for a month while <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-56742231" target="_blank">India reported its worst Covid spikes in a year</a>. Just like in the Wuhan case, Singapore's leaders sat on their hands long after <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-56798248" target="_blank">India announced the lockdown of its capital</a>. Singapore's leaders allowed travellers from India into the country, in increasing numbers, even after the Indian government blamed the outbreak not on the record crowds at the Kumbh Mela river festival but on the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-57004764" target="_blank">"India variant" of the Covid virus</a>.</p><p>It was only when the UK declared its travel restrictions on India that Singapore followed suit, on the same day. Yet why do <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2021/05/03/lawrence-wong-implies-blame-on-locals-for-covid-spread-in-january-pm-lee-does-same-thing-in-may-day-speech/" target="_blank">Singapore's leaders blame Singaporeans</a> for its own India variant Covid clusters and the subsequent lockdown?</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><b>So why shouldn't Singapore's leaders blame Singaporeans for this lockdown?</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggLS406IXfA4HsOWkgO3M6lqZscxrpykgdl5i0TWBGYlvqPFZhiBmxFTHWClgsG7fKfWV9wkXrIt6JMiJobEoSF2u0LN8b2F4kUTc2fZ-Y3LgFjyl5Ml_OpuTlOTYsS5JE-opsLA/s1300/time-spiral.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1300" data-original-width="1300" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggLS406IXfA4HsOWkgO3M6lqZscxrpykgdl5i0TWBGYlvqPFZhiBmxFTHWClgsG7fKfWV9wkXrIt6JMiJobEoSF2u0LN8b2F4kUTc2fZ-Y3LgFjyl5Ml_OpuTlOTYsS5JE-opsLA/s320/time-spiral.jpg" /></a></div><br /><p>We at Illusio note that the mistakes made in 2020 by the Interministerial Task Force are the same ones that are made in 2021. While the world has moved on from the heady days of November 2019, Singapore's leaders appear stuck in a time spiral, holding their citizens hostage in a purgatory where history repeats itself.</p><p>We have already identified the delays and dithering, the failure to take decisive action, the waiting for other nations to impose travel restrictions.</p><p>In their defense, Singapore's leadership point out that <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/border-measures-have-cascading-effect-on-spore-economy-wong" target="_blank">the island has long been dependent on a foreign labour force. As a global city, Singapore cannot remain shut to the world for long</a>. It is a challenge, therefore, to reconcile this enlightened globalist perspective to how the same leaders have insisted on segregating Covid cases in Singapore into "imported", "community", and "dormitory" categories—<a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html" target="_blank">as if the virus observes such shifting, artificial and contrived categories</a>.</p><p><b>Should Singaporeans blame their leaders for this lockdown?</b></p><p>We at Illusio warned last year that these categories were based on a foundation of sand, not science, a crude attempt at impression management, not a proper presentation of important health data. And the <b>local Changi cluster</b>, presumably seeded by a still-unidentified index case of a traveller who should've been an <b>imported case</b>, is proof that these categories do not work in the real world. The damage from playing around with Covid data and inventing ridiculous categories is real: it has induced a false sense of security, based on the mistaken notion that the "community" or "locals" can be siloed no matter how many positive Covid cases are "imported".</p><p>Post-lockdown, Singapore's leaders congratulated themselves for burning out the infection in the dormitories and failed to implement <b>random population Covid testing</b> and <b>molecular variant monitoring</b>. Choosing to believe they could manage the virus via visitor quarantines and SHNs, they decided it was unnecessary to keep an eye on developments on the ground. Yet if one truly believed that Singapore cannot but be a global city, that it must be largely porous to flows of people and goods, this would've been the exact programmes to implement straight out of the initial lockdown!</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMa2vFG1RgLfC7ygyIkPoc32kkia01V4laiUKIgbAcCuEUATKDnG1vnbvjfRYDcdjBZ1Ny6M5bKNOCWOnzMGJw554eOtDpll5q05ihWaEDsZSnx1lYDmvz8MM7bl7Y4JNV6fgHdQ/s800/napoleon.webp" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="599" data-original-width="800" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMa2vFG1RgLfC7ygyIkPoc32kkia01V4laiUKIgbAcCuEUATKDnG1vnbvjfRYDcdjBZ1Ny6M5bKNOCWOnzMGJw554eOtDpll5q05ihWaEDsZSnx1lYDmvz8MM7bl7Y4JNV6fgHdQ/w400-h300/napoleon.webp" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Napoleon was a military genius</td></tr></tbody></table><p>Let us assume that the ministers are correct in their big picture view: Singapore is a global city and needs to stay open. Then the ministers must realise they face a simple equation with three variables: levels of controlled immigration, vaccines, and Covid cases. Immigration can only proceed insofar as the level of vaccination allows for an acceptable number of Covid cases (whose definition we will come to later). Would a reasonable, respectable, reputable leader of a global city state insist on high immigration, and plan for a slow as molasses plan to <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/spore-not-under-pressure-accelerate-vaccine-programme-due-low-community-cases-pm-lee" target="_blank">inoculate the population only by the end of 2021</a>? Or would a reasonable, respectable, reputable leader of a global city state use his resources to amass as much vaccine doses as possible as fast as possible so the global city can function as a global city, before an outbreak gets so bad there's another forced lockdown?</p><p><b>Should there even be a lockdown? Did the leaders make the wrong call?</b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUMPmpqoL02nJmuBimJf3K5sn5mLXyDeVMx0gEQd_oVWoL_YOO2E9M_hx9TrgGD71kX3S_FBpGd2pUEFKMXBgQ1scUvvgpLlOSDAbKWSP2vTFkIVmn8wnpzcUYX9MparVj3_i1Hw/s612/goodnessgracious.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="612" data-original-width="600" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUMPmpqoL02nJmuBimJf3K5sn5mLXyDeVMx0gEQd_oVWoL_YOO2E9M_hx9TrgGD71kX3S_FBpGd2pUEFKMXBgQ1scUvvgpLlOSDAbKWSP2vTFkIVmn8wnpzcUYX9MparVj3_i1Hw/w392-h400/goodnessgracious.jpg" width="392" /></a></div><br /><p>The UK, which has also experienced a recent outbreak of the Indian variant, has reacted not with more restrictions but with <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-57140919" target="_blank">an increased push in its vaccination rollout</a>. It is a calculated risk but one that is <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/health-57150871" target="_blank">rooted in far more science</a> than Singapore's lockdown decision. Public Health England has also provided actual <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/covid-19-vaccines-11-700-deaths-prevented" target="_blank">data showing the effect of vaccines on the Indian strain and its double mutation.</a> Contrary to the Singapore task force's unquantified fears about the Indian strain, PHE has actual clinical data for the so-called "highly transmissible" B.1617 strain and its mutants, debunking estimates from models that they could be up to 50% more transmissible. But don't tell that to Singapore's task force ministers!</p><p>Consider this: Singapore may be locking down in 2021 just as its case numbers approach those from April 2020. Yet time has not stood still, nor has medical science since then. We should have far more knowledge in 2021 about the novel coronavirus; the world shut down in 2020 because it didn't know anything about how dangerous this virus is, how to treat the disease it causes or mitigate its spread. Consequently, the bar for a lockdown should be far higher than it was a year ago.</p><p>We should have stocked up far more medical supplies in hospitals: PPEs, drugs, oxygen tanks.</p><p>Our hospitals should be far more resilient, more prepared, and their capacity expanded to carry out tests and treat warded and critical patients.</p><p>In 2021, we have vaccines which are proven to be <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/covid-19-vaccines-11-700-deaths-prevented" target="_blank">highly effective against the normal coronavirus</a> and <a href="https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.07.21256823v3" target="_blank">still largely effective against the current strain of concern</a>. On top of that, we now have a <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/singapore?country=SGP~GBR" target="_blank">vaccination program that, per capita, is comparable to the UK's</a> though it is half of Israel's.</p><p>The Singapore decision for a lockdown thus appears to be <b>political rather than based on science or medical considerations</b>. <b>This is an unfortunate repetition</b> of last year's Covid management, with the added malus of completely failing at health economics and cost benefit analysis.</p><p>In a world armed with improving vaccines and medication, a reasonable, respectable, and reputable authority would set the goals of Covid management as low ICU admissions, low deaths, low incidents of serious Covid-19 disease. Not low community spread, as what Singapore's Interministerial Task Force has decided on.</p><p><b>What can we expect from this Covid lockdown?</b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1DmXdw_oebOax3jgRuzqADA97HTM-BSeOwLbs9g-vjBx3VvrWyPWEv1qc0_eoiezn5yUUQOIpYP_Teo6aFvLBlUd-9qaWSdiIMtTTNArur3itCkTGAyyCCDxphnZHEhBPrhRjHg/s480/clownshow.gif" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="204" data-original-width="480" height="170" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1DmXdw_oebOax3jgRuzqADA97HTM-BSeOwLbs9g-vjBx3VvrWyPWEv1qc0_eoiezn5yUUQOIpYP_Teo6aFvLBlUd-9qaWSdiIMtTTNArur3itCkTGAyyCCDxphnZHEhBPrhRjHg/w400-h170/clownshow.gif" width="400" /></a></div><p>Lockdowns work but so does sawing off the foot to treat an ingrown toenail. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QqrYugXsFg&t" target="_blank">Lockdowns work because they are an extreme and blunt tool at limiting social intercourse</a>, and Singapore's leaders formed a habit of primarily resorting to blunt tools that have no nuance.</p><p>Singapore's leaders are also willing to err on the side of caution, and offloading the costs of such decisions to their citizens. Therefore, we at Illusio expect a further extension to the lockdown to last for the entire month of June at the very least, and up to mid-July if the dominant Indian variant in this outbreak proves to be more contagious than the wild type SARS-COV-2 virus. And that's an assumption that has been debunked by the NHS</p><p>Singapore's leaders in the lockdown last year imposed new and shifting adjustments to their lockdown restrictions, often without waiting for the standard 2 weeks for the impact of policy to express themselves into Covid infection and hospitalisation numbers. We at Illusio expect the same chaotic approach from the same team this year. New restrictions will be announced every other day, even before evidence of the efficacy of older regulations show up in the data.</p><p>Due to this undisciplined and unscientific rollout of measures, there is no way to prove which measures in Singapore will or will not work, which are essential, which are overkill, and which are completely unnecessary. However, if the UK approach to its Indian variant outbreak leads to better or no worse outcomes than Singapore's lockdown, it will be clear that Singapore's leaders have mishandled this outbreak.</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-53036983171003308792021-01-13T18:00:00.011+08:002021-05-09T13:24:52.851+08:00Can we live together with TraceTogether?<p><b>Why is trust in TraceTogether at an all-time low?</b></p><p style="text-align: left;">Singaporeans should be celebrating. After nearly a year of lockdown, Singapore has entered the elusive "Phase 3" despite the inter-ministerial covid task force tripping itself over and over again with <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/can-singapores-politicians-listen-to.html">poor communication skills and crisis management</a> and a <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">tendency to allow PR agendas to trump medical-scientific expertise and set policy</a>. By refusing to hold daily televised coronavirus briefings during the initial darkest months, this team failed to reassure, educate, guide, and rally the public and to shore up the government credibility and authority during the pandemic. Yes, it's time to talk about TraceTogether fiasco, where this credibility and authority is finally found wanting by the public.</p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjbIKLNkiQlEcOm6tSBjw3vT5iIo9YiDHP0xyua-G9ZDigFM0kcNaCxrsXQg3jJJbql8_xfgA0FtOn6olciSXA7WO67MMHml0sgjwVLCVQRX1N_MFO0pDfCLcY6BAVhRSGRNDbzw/s1114/fox.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="766" data-original-width="1114" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjbIKLNkiQlEcOm6tSBjw3vT5iIo9YiDHP0xyua-G9ZDigFM0kcNaCxrsXQg3jJJbql8_xfgA0FtOn6olciSXA7WO67MMHml0sgjwVLCVQRX1N_MFO0pDfCLcY6BAVhRSGRNDbzw/w400-h275/fox.jpg" width="400" /></a></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span><a name='more'></a></span></div><p>After months of task force ministers insisting in public and in Parliament they would not sign off on Phase 3 without at least 70% adoption of the national contact tracing app TraceTogether (an <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/05/1002775/covid-apps-effective-at-less-than-60-percent-download/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">extreme exaggeration of the levels needed for contact tracing apps to ameliorate the pandemic</a> and yet another triumph of PR agendas over medical and scientific expertise), promising that it would not actually be mandatory and walking back on that promise, then promising it would be used "purely for contact tracing purposes" (promises made by, at last count, Vivian Balakrishnan, Lawrence Wong, Teo Chee Hean) and "only a very limited, restricted team of contact tracers", it has transpired through a ministerial reply in a Parliamentary Question session that contact tracing data has in fact been accessed by the Singapore Police Force in criminal investigations because it is believed they are empowered under the Criminal Procedure Code to do so.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjv4CreWleo_C6dAqDWO1xSg9sWX5QOvkorFHOViKG1RiXWqwkGzPNGBBBGdIhZCMTgE6nf56sm0cczPairhj8tZ0I7v2P3f4n6VcklSln12bkuEULFrc5JvuELnxXFISNVJ_2kBQ/s1164/lockdown+vs+app+takeup.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="644" data-original-width="1164" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjv4CreWleo_C6dAqDWO1xSg9sWX5QOvkorFHOViKG1RiXWqwkGzPNGBBBGdIhZCMTgE6nf56sm0cczPairhj8tZ0I7v2P3f4n6VcklSln12bkuEULFrc5JvuELnxXFISNVJ_2kBQ/w400-h221/lockdown+vs+app+takeup.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">How much uptake does a contact tracing app need to be effective, highly effective, and then experience diminishing marginal returns? Source: <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/05/1002775/covid-apps-effective-at-less-than-60-percent-download/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">MIT</a> modelling.<br />Would you trust Singapore's ministers when they say 70% or MIT when they say 56%?<br />Would you trust <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30184-9/fulltext" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The Lancet</a> when it looks at real world data and finds the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30184-9/fulltext" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">effectiveness of contact tracing apps sorely wanting</a>?</td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p>Singapore's mentally stultifying members of parliament have fielded no queries to establish the chain of events, procedures taken, considerations made for and against, requests made and approved, by which individuals, departments, ministries, or ministers, and when the Desmond Tan and eventually the cabinet knew and how they knew, and what legal advice the cabinet sought and from whom, and when the cabinet jointly and severally decided to sign off on this <b>imperial overreach</b>. Instead, the cabinet attempts to make good on the error by <a href="https://www.smartnation.gov.sg/whats-new/press-releases/upcoming-legislative-provisions-for-usage-of-data-from-digital-contact-tracing-solutions" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">establishing guidelines narrowing the type of police investigations that will be allowed to access contact tracing data</a>.</p><p>This "remedy" marks an intellectual incuriosity, a placid comfort in Singapore being the only country to allow its police to raid the data of private citizens that has been garnered only because of a grave international emergency, or that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/apr/23/government-rules-out-police-having-any-access-to-australian-coronavirus-contact-tracing-app" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">attempts by law enforcement to break into the henhouse were rightly rejected and rebuked by leaders elsewhere</a>. Given contact tracing apps are little more than proximity detection apps and no replacement for manual contact tracing, even a brain dead member of parliament or cabinet member should have asked how much such data would actually aid criminal investigations (as opposed to <a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/singapore-11th-most-surveilled-city-062420700.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Singapore's vast CCTV network</a> or <a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/police-gps-helped-solve-didnt-deter-killings-232940194.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">actual GPS tracking</a> and <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/man-to-be-charged-with-murder-of-teen-missing-for-over-13-years" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">phone records</a>). No one in the cabinet, backbenches, or the opposition benches did.</p><p><b>Can we delete TraceTogether?</b></p><p>Remedies by the public will be drastically limited especially when "<a href="https://support.safeentry.gov.sg/hc/en-us/articles/900003170126-What-is-TraceTogether-only-SafeEntry-" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">TraceTogether-only Safe Entry</a>" is fully implemented across the island. Either you carry the TraceTogether token around with you, use the TraceTogether app, or live with not going to your workplace building, the mall, restaurants, public places, and the cinema. On the bright side, you will be a real socially distancing hero even in Phase 3. Until this is actually implemented, you can and should just use normal SafeEntry whenever possible.</p><p>Modifying or rewriting the TraceTogether software on the phone, say to use the camera to take the venue QR code and produce an approved lookalike entry screen for eye-power safe distancing ambassadors door guards, is illegal and endangers the public at large at a time of a pandemic.</p><p>Even under a TraceTogether-only regime, we note that Singapore's TraceTogether app hasn't been vastly perverted from its BlueTrace origins, the major difference being that Singapore's contact tracing app has data in centrally stored servers while the NHS app was originally envisioned as such until privacy concerns led it to a decentralised model.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGIHqrO2EfDwyRwyPMmzXCManzHEdC8LdA_OHskuwpN0QhndraM4ScjI5AQRzYBttW3ZD4cS-58LJjEWMcz16ksttPF9QzeJ3UAMrktjFA-Xws7piBh5gdHRoHhw7_vkr9ajcxcA/s1600/tracetogether+homescreen.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="769" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGIHqrO2EfDwyRwyPMmzXCManzHEdC8LdA_OHskuwpN0QhndraM4ScjI5AQRzYBttW3ZD4cS-58LJjEWMcz16ksttPF9QzeJ3UAMrktjFA-Xws7piBh5gdHRoHhw7_vkr9ajcxcA/s320/tracetogether+homescreen.jpg" /></a></div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_1WDUp1nBrKHqOgnyr30KzxMPdEupLVMIsxHiZzkyjZguYKzKqYai-pBMVADPslL1fKJlMKCoP5U6Wwh68yZ0yqyaIi4zFmKSQXGOKgx7y8HU2H7pER04qPWSVPEGE_XxujKyZg/s696/NHS+screen.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="696" data-original-width="392" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_1WDUp1nBrKHqOgnyr30KzxMPdEupLVMIsxHiZzkyjZguYKzKqYai-pBMVADPslL1fKJlMKCoP5U6Wwh68yZ0yqyaIi4zFmKSQXGOKgx7y8HU2H7pER04qPWSVPEGE_XxujKyZg/s320/NHS+screen.png" /></a><br /></div><br /><p>Compared with NHS, Singapore's TraceTogether is a less comprehensive Swiss army knife app. What matters most is venue check-in, followed by Bluetooth proximity detection which can be turned off temporarily in both the NHS and Singapore apps. Singapore doesn't seem to think you should be able to report symptoms on your own, order a Covid-19 test, or to communicate important advice and updates to you. Of course, the paternalistic mindset in Singapore obliges that the app throw up full-screen and near permanent notification bar nags if you have the temerity to turn off Bluetooth even just for a while.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgW0cCnibG6Lf-aPxSCUdEwGGO65gL5VY8PY4rsjB181pINK4iBS2lmwazFn0JtF9LwawTARrlwJLGTMjK2NIQ9jesnOWm8dBf5JuVOGvMmt3NhOcqUOAZ9jgSHev9LvkLxAzbRbg/s2246/nagscreen%2527.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2246" data-original-width="1080" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgW0cCnibG6Lf-aPxSCUdEwGGO65gL5VY8PY4rsjB181pINK4iBS2lmwazFn0JtF9LwawTARrlwJLGTMjK2NIQ9jesnOWm8dBf5JuVOGvMmt3NhOcqUOAZ9jgSHev9LvkLxAzbRbg/s320/nagscreen%2527.png" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Climate of fear in Singapore is real and pervasive, amirite</td></tr></tbody></table><p>In terms of trust and/or privacy worries, the simplest remedy available to the public that causes the least harm in the face of the ongoing pandemic is this: minimise the amount of data TraceTogether generates while using the app and complying with check-in requirements at all venues. That means only turning on Bluetooth to use TraceTogether to check into venues, and then to turn off Bluetooth after you've shown the app check-in screen to the safety ambassador/door guard taking or reading your temperature.</p><p><b>How do I turn on and off Bluetooth on my phone?</b></p><p>Under iOS, <a href="https://support.apple.com/en-sg/guide/iphone/iph6d50ec543/ios" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">use the automation tool</a> in the shortcuts app to turn on bluetooth when TraceTogether is open and turn off Bluetooth when TraceTogether is closed.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihLoLXNrV2nAa7I5I_dtUgsgLgSAPNT6u0-Ytii_1O-3fRI_2xyiughv1-3G5hnotjUjo2dPcxu7E7dgyBeNTA2XlA0brsiMUfdW6vL5AmgotBsylDTQQTdTpSaAUuEFWcuP6AxQ/s2048/136719391_3817846791612324_4261715046919754654_n.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="947" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihLoLXNrV2nAa7I5I_dtUgsgLgSAPNT6u0-Ytii_1O-3fRI_2xyiughv1-3G5hnotjUjo2dPcxu7E7dgyBeNTA2XlA0brsiMUfdW6vL5AmgotBsylDTQQTdTpSaAUuEFWcuP6AxQ/s320/136719391_3817846791612324_4261715046919754654_n.jpg" /></a></div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPlHBi4wp-1OEN2B_nQVl7oJ5Ml561WSRr_jI2Q-vrM5RUa7dZvk2uwOTC5h3XGeMx7XlyniyfkrZ1h0kJKEFmFasflbfMh0sfMvJjwwdltJulH6PcNeRs4pCTok2ZQtIp6l7QNA/s2048/137093990_411039289979542_2242694633681974011_n.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="947" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPlHBi4wp-1OEN2B_nQVl7oJ5Ml561WSRr_jI2Q-vrM5RUa7dZvk2uwOTC5h3XGeMx7XlyniyfkrZ1h0kJKEFmFasflbfMh0sfMvJjwwdltJulH6PcNeRs4pCTok2ZQtIp6l7QNA/s320/137093990_411039289979542_2242694633681974011_n.jpg" /></a></div><p>Under Android, you have different hoops to jump through since there is no automation tool. You need to enter Settings, then Apps & Notifications, then look for the TraceTogether listing</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIbLsqpcYztAOYx8aorfanOjCGzM9PQikZeF2BvF2jBHsph4EXMVRcUzsK_lHcn_uTYsC5nt19LXoPwwU-7d3J2QT2wM9p4XPo4wLuKJkddWm6R2wQU0HBph57SIotVFwFbw5vbA/s2246/android+permissions+app+screen.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2246" data-original-width="1080" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIbLsqpcYztAOYx8aorfanOjCGzM9PQikZeF2BvF2jBHsph4EXMVRcUzsK_lHcn_uTYsC5nt19LXoPwwU-7d3J2QT2wM9p4XPo4wLuKJkddWm6R2wQU0HBph57SIotVFwFbw5vbA/s320/android+permissions+app+screen.png" /></a></div><p>Turn off notifications so the notifications submenu looks like this</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrdahuXSs5AqukI_DqSzJx2O_UNWBcLEOq-xPW6olbFGfCc4vRdBMOPIM0iJkQ9kBKieEnpuwDh_t1yezvcw8e9wONevRX13IZ2s4zLmKltel-ZhifP4luXOARNZM4CkxSXryfeg/s2246/Screenshot_20210509-131805.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2246" data-original-width="1080" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrdahuXSs5AqukI_DqSzJx2O_UNWBcLEOq-xPW6olbFGfCc4vRdBMOPIM0iJkQ9kBKieEnpuwDh_t1yezvcw8e9wONevRX13IZ2s4zLmKltel-ZhifP4luXOARNZM4CkxSXryfeg/s320/Screenshot_20210509-131805.png" /></a></div><p>And then turn on and off Bluetooth when you need it.</p><p><b>How about the data that's already in my phone from weeks and months of use?</b></p><p>From the app developers' description, the Bluetooth proximity data in your phone is only stored for 28 days and will be deleted automatically on a rolling basis. From the ministers' clarification in parliament, it can be surmised that data will be deleted automatically unless the Singapore Police Force open an investigation through one of your close contacts and somehow decide that ALL their close contacts are worth a cursory investigation, in which case your data will be stored permanently even if the case is closed, as per SPF standard operating procedure.</p><p>That said, no one knows what proximity TraceTogether data is in your phone until the Ministry of Health or the Singapore Police Force request for your cooperation. You can presumably <a href="https://mothership.sg/2021/01/tracetogether-how-to-delete-data/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">write in to delete your data in the TraceTogether server</a>, although it has never been explained how the data or what kind of data makes it to central servers pre-cooperation.</p><p>We at Illusio have a simpler solution for those who wish to start on a new slate of mistrust: deleting certain extraneous phone data especially when your phone is running out of storage.</p><p>In Android, from settings > app & notifications > TraceTogether, select Clear Storage.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjz1Vi9KphhfCuzTBJ2AFTYcdSFZigi9alAj1UoaQ1ujdciKRKedFhFJNCcQ7fnGA-H5BliIDVNIFQ2DEj3JVYecRgGpLZHe98ItGkrsDCWX_0EeUxNOqsBeBMuf_FttbcOdDDpIw/s2246/android+clear+storage.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2246" data-original-width="1080" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjz1Vi9KphhfCuzTBJ2AFTYcdSFZigi9alAj1UoaQ1ujdciKRKedFhFJNCcQ7fnGA-H5BliIDVNIFQ2DEj3JVYecRgGpLZHe98ItGkrsDCWX_0EeUxNOqsBeBMuf_FttbcOdDDpIw/s320/android+clear+storage.png" /></a></div><p>This wipes the Bluetooth data without waiting for the 28 day rollover. However you will need to reauthenticate and re-register the app with your NRIC and SMS OTP before you can use it again.</p><p><a href="https://www.wikihow.com/Delete-Application-Data-in-iOS" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">In iOS, you can only uninstall and reinstall the app</a>. There is no way to "clear storage" in iOS. You will also need to reauthenticate and re-register the app with your NRIC and SMS OTP before you can use it again.</p><p><b>How often should we clear our TraceTogether data?</b></p><p>We at Illusio suggest that users who have been using TraceTogether diligently and now want to use it only for checking into venues do so as soon as possible.</p><p>We also suggest that users wipe their TraceTogether app storage each time a new patch/update of TraceTogether is released and installed on your phone. And then to check that your preferred settings remain the same after the app is updated, as they can be reset by the app on update/patch.</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-38250829866116473562020-08-28T21:03:00.004+08:002023-08-28T22:10:00.070+08:00You chose Tan Kin Lian!<p style="text-align: center;"> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiHlx6y8_W0qt-3sVbcjwwn5l9rUiNBrOy7U85zpoDrWtrbUfaJ3EAi-Kko9rX82viutoeuKCJtqnBaSP0685Zq-hh8i1MsD6oq8SJi-3j0RI_ysw1mUUCoPP0any0AMBY61NEkHD-zO21o3_kcm5QzRwLvOpMDN7f203GLc6rCztmPNJfr7OAK9A" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="277" data-original-width="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiHlx6y8_W0qt-3sVbcjwwn5l9rUiNBrOy7U85zpoDrWtrbUfaJ3EAi-Kko9rX82viutoeuKCJtqnBaSP0685Zq-hh8i1MsD6oq8SJi-3j0RI_ysw1mUUCoPP0any0AMBY61NEkHD-zO21o3_kcm5QzRwLvOpMDN7f203GLc6rCztmPNJfr7OAK9A=s16000" /></a></p><p>In polling booths across Singapore, Tan Kin Lian is chosen by a slim margin as Singapore's 5th Elected President. Few suspect it, but hardcore opposition supporters do not form the largest portion of Tan's winning coalition. Tan wins the day not on his own merit. Instead, enough voters across Singapore's political spectrum have grown weary of the endless machinations of the PAP to redefine the elected presidency. After 30 years of PAP's tomfoolery, enough voters realised that the presidency has become a clown show and the appropriate way to reward the PAP is to elect the biggest clown they can find on the ballot sheet.<span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p>As it turns out, what you saw from Tan over the two weeks of campaigning is exactly what Singapore gets from his presidency. Gaffes every day from a leader who has a direct connection between his mouth and his brain. Every day, Tan posts a video or a paragraph on his personal social media account that draws sighs of exasperation and more audible protests from various groups of people. "Tan Kin Lian's daily cuckoo bird moment", some snarks will call these. In an interview with Sumiko Tan, he explains that as a people's president, he is obliged to eschew formal lines of communications especially with the people. After all, the government didn't stop Halimah from posting on Facebook, did they?</p><p>But that's not the worst. Tan posts on a daily basis, suggestions to improve the transparency of government, the management of Singapore's reserves, and the government's duty to the rights of the people. The prime minister refuses to meet with Tan at all, from fear that the president would just repeat everything they discuss on X, formerly known as Twitter. Undaunted, Tan invites himself to visit government offices, Temasek and GIC, and crashes cabinet meetings to give unsolicited advice, which he publishes on his blog instead of the official website of the President of Singapore.</p><p>Before the year is out, the council of presidential advisors is convened by the prime minister and his cabinet to initiate proceedings to remove Tan Kin Lian as president. They will choose between 2 explanations: either Tan has acted in contravention of the Constitution, or Tan has developed a serious and debilitating mental condition that was undisclosed at the time of his application to be president and disqualifies him from holding the office. Either way, the motion passes in parliament. However Tan will contest this in the Supreme Court, forcing the Chief Justice and his colleagues to judge on what the role of the president should and can be, within the Constitution. Tan will lose his appeal to the Supreme Court, but the judgement will contain a suggestion to revert the presidency to a ceremonial function in line with the practices of Commonwealth nations.</p><p>Regardless of the council's reasoning and the outcome, one segment of Singapore is outraged by PAP arrogance and bullying. Another segment of Singapore is outraged that the qualifications could let in someone so eminently unfit for office. It is only after Lawrence Wong becomes prime minister in 2025 that the PAP amends the Constitution once more, to reinstat a ceremonial president and popular figurehead. Tan Kin Lian is the last elected president of Singapore, and you and other voters heave a sigh of relief.</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-22577166699088982102020-08-28T21:00:00.001+08:002023-08-28T21:51:44.301+08:00You chose Ng Kok Song!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBdZUZO7mw9FDbU4n_FBKs0Ab6SCAJVBpaROdzcctQTamtR498RlRjlwQIvHwI3W3rCGX8vXe2szv3UB0XSuN8Qz4W57kgjwBoOaKs78qLmUHSGG68qCsLfdtl9-Tw3zYGBGsDuRRn65-MdGV6dK44lY4W4nrccV_TgesIiQaOqS3eEQnT6oxtXA/s238/image.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="238" data-original-width="170" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBdZUZO7mw9FDbU4n_FBKs0Ab6SCAJVBpaROdzcctQTamtR498RlRjlwQIvHwI3W3rCGX8vXe2szv3UB0XSuN8Qz4W57kgjwBoOaKs78qLmUHSGG68qCsLfdtl9-Tw3zYGBGsDuRRn65-MdGV6dK44lY4W4nrccV_TgesIiQaOqS3eEQnT6oxtXA/s1600/image.png" width="170" /></a></div><p>In polling booths across Singapore, Ng Kok Song is chosen by a slim majority of the votes as Singapore's 5th Elected President. Few suspected it, but he has a winning coalition that consists of pro-establishment types who nevertheless do not want an unpopular PAP to monopolise power over the presidency, and pro-opposition types who nevertheless cannot hold their noses to put the X next to Tan Kin Lian's name.</p><p>It is not being an "independent" that elevates him to presidency, but being a blank slate. Having expressed no political views and being a social non-entity with zero contributions to social and civic life ironically make him palatable enough to win the highest vote count.<span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p>In the months to come, Ng continues to be on-brand. He says nothing controversial or in fact nothing at all, meets very little people outside major engagements, and only shows up to community events where no MP or minister is already attending. You and other voters note the lack of connection despite Ng's attempts at being personable and relatable. Ng eventually tells Sumiko Tan in a Straits Times interview that he sees his most important roles as custodian of the reserves and official representative of the country, and reminds her readers that the modern office has moved on from the days when the president was a symbol of the people. "I will do my job, to my best. And I will not do any other job."</p><p>Despite the shock of defeating the establishment candidate and the temporary uproar his interview generates, Ng's presidency is uneventful and some would argue not that bad for the PAP. He is not unpopular, but possesses no charisma to be truly popular with the people. But as he keeps saying, that is not the job he is elected to do.</p><p>Yet because he has proven that an establishment-approved candidate can be defeated, Lawrence Wong in 2024 as one of his first acts as prime minister continues the PAP's long-held tradition to tinker with the elected presidency. This time, he makes 2 changes in 1 go. He tightens the requirements for the Fifth Schedule of key statutory boards and entities, to strictly only accept a candidate who is a chief executive officer, and removes the automatic qualification of current presidents. This prevents future candidates like Ng Kok Song from qualifying, and also bars him from re-election.</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-66369926523233524082020-08-28T20:59:00.002+08:002023-08-28T21:21:55.670+08:00You chose Tharman Shanmugaratnam!In polling booths across Singapore, Tharman Shanmugaratnam is chosen with more than 50% of the votes as Singapore's 5th Elected President. Few suspect it, but voters have noticed that his opponents are actively worse choices. Tan is an eccentric boomer who keeps stuffing his foot in his mouth while resting on his dusty 20-year-old laurels as NTUC Income chief. Ng has managed, outside his long professional career as a fund manager and entrepreneur, to be a social non-entity with next to zero contributions to Singapore's social or civic life. They reasoned that they would rather take a chance with Tharman.<p></p><p></p><p style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9VLUBWr9EaXdfmk8PWge40xFOVsh5ac8AD_kLMgwQiCk_wq60Z4uT4cnTxwTyXWVmQHq_iHkzKfA07BD7snyFCZvEwV0V9vxMrdi-ZQrh1f_2c7VURSPkRJdx4XeImNrH-jgaP1rzHqRUKK2QlfFXjpWZvJBG3hDQ54ekGb8Dy0rQ2wG1sVoJ-A/s838/image.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="838" data-original-width="600" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9VLUBWr9EaXdfmk8PWge40xFOVsh5ac8AD_kLMgwQiCk_wq60Z4uT4cnTxwTyXWVmQHq_iHkzKfA07BD7snyFCZvEwV0V9vxMrdi-ZQrh1f_2c7VURSPkRJdx4XeImNrH-jgaP1rzHqRUKK2QlfFXjpWZvJBG3hDQ54ekGb8Dy0rQ2wG1sVoJ-A/w286-h400/image.png" width="286" /></a></p>In the months to come, President Tharman attempts to heal the wounds of Singapore's troubled presidency, and then put his own spin on the office. <span><a name='more'></a></span><p></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p></p><p></p></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><p>Unlike his immediate predecessor, he moves straight into the Istana without any complaint because he knows that the president is also a symbol of the nation and should reside at the symbolic residence of the nation. He also refrains from speaking on any public policy issues, steering clear of any overlap with the government of the day. For all intents and purposes, he is the model of a president the PAP wants - a president who stays away from politics, and is silent on the exercise of his custodial functions except when the government wants it to be known (and it never does).</p><p>That is not to say that he's an inactive, rarely seen president. Tharman carries out his election promise to be a president interested in highlighting civil issues, problems and solutions, that do not require political or legal solutions. As president, Tharman has a packed social calendar. Though this initially comes across like a sinecure for easing himself out of politics, the people and the president grow to realise that there is far greater value beyond the secret custodial functions of the presidency.</p><p>Yet the greatest change comes when Lee Hsien Loong finally steps down as prime minister, fulfilling the longest, most revised, and most thwarted succession plan of the ruling party. As long time partners in the cabinet, new prime minister Lawrence Wong and the president renew their collegial relationship. While what their discuss during their weekly meetings are secret, Tharman and Wong agree that these meetings should be officially noted and published. Similarly, whenever the president and his council of advisors are convened for custodial decisions, these meetings are noted and published even though the exact details remain a secret. In time, observers will agree this was the minimum level of transparency the government needed to take to restore credibility and public confidence in the presidency.</p><p>Tharman goes on to serve as president for another term.</p>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-12148641415148868202020-07-05T15:30:00.001+08:002020-07-05T17:03:22.644+08:00Can the PAP run on its Covid-19 performance and plans in a Covid-19 election?<b>What should this year's elections be about?</b><div><br /></div><div>Singapore's general election campaign seasons tend to follow a general pattern: An initial period of free-for-all debates between the parties on all issues before the ruling People's Action Party leaders announce at the mid-point what issue or message the general election should hinge on. This is the main issue its challengers should engage them on, and the lens through which Singapore's responsible mainstream newspapers should refract and colour their daily election reporting and analysis. Strange as it sounds, this is how elections work in Singapore.</div><div><br /></div><div>This year, the PAP appears to have made Covid-19 the central issue for the rest of the campaign period, challenging opposition parties to unveil their plans for the Covid-19 recovery. Is this a blunder that could snatch a PAP defeat from the jaws of victory, as opposed to the <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2015/09/modelling-2015-singapore-general_16.html" target="_blank">brilliant message that snatched a PAP victory from the jaws of defeat in 2015</a>?</div><div><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYTtSqkc7QbRqQ-NOyj4wcBERgcbpZCIhOeHHXsuDc6a_Ox0kxiREFI6vQBJtx44t7yZkQtqMI2734g60E7dCJvn6eGbw-94uyonDY9oaSR12nokAAN5zcUP4vZ7iIAb0s4hKgSQ/s1600/rowlandson+english+dance+of+death.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="983" data-original-width="1600" height="308" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYTtSqkc7QbRqQ-NOyj4wcBERgcbpZCIhOeHHXsuDc6a_Ox0kxiREFI6vQBJtx44t7yZkQtqMI2734g60E7dCJvn6eGbw-94uyonDY9oaSR12nokAAN5zcUP4vZ7iIAb0s4hKgSQ/w500-h308/rowlandson+english+dance+of+death.jpg" width="500" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Not all the statesman's power or art<br />could turn aside Death's certain dart"<br />Illustration by Thomas Rowlandson, in The English Dance of Death, 1816<span><a name='more'></a></span></td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /></div><div><b>Why shouldn't the ruling party run on Covid-19 or demand the opposition trump its plans?</b></div><div><br /></div><div>We at Illusio have previously noted several missteps, blunders, and outright failures in Singapore's coronavirus response and strategy that tarnished the nation's sterling reputation during the pandemic.</div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/03/did-singapore-do-everything-right-in.html" target="_blank">Shutting off travel from Wuhan and China late</a></li><li><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html" target="_blank">Calling the lockdown late</a></li><li><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html" target="_blank">Allowing the PR agenda instead of medical and scientific expertise to set coronavirus policy</a></li><li><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/05/what-can-singapore-learn-from-other.html" target="_blank">Fighting the coronavirus as a set of firefighting responses, overreaction, and impatience</a></li><li><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/can-singapores-politicians-listen-to.html" target="_blank">Incompetent crisis communications</a></li><li><a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/05/what-can-singapore-learn-from-other.html" target="_blank">Failing to provide daily public coronavirus briefings</a></li><li><a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/coronavirus-mom-warns-employers-not-to-send-workers-who-are-well-to-hospitals-for" target="_blank">Negligence</a> <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/05/what-can-singapore-do-about-its.html" target="_blank">leading to an uncontrolled and ongoing outbreak in Singapore's guest worker camps and dormitories</a></li></ul></div><div><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZSL1Axk7EyTuNIJS_rUeo2YP4FMRXL92eU9VUIPNnjsEymY9kvzeAndkYzJwHvtrO-W9xDYCQEuPes3-ZiWjwL2sYng84rMdxQlYN2mwLajBqtTP2u8ZgH9-XHYITJGAStr6STg/s2048/fail-stamp-cover.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1536" data-original-width="2048" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZSL1Axk7EyTuNIJS_rUeo2YP4FMRXL92eU9VUIPNnjsEymY9kvzeAndkYzJwHvtrO-W9xDYCQEuPes3-ZiWjwL2sYng84rMdxQlYN2mwLajBqtTP2u8ZgH9-XHYITJGAStr6STg/w400-h300/fail-stamp-cover.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Very few people died from coronavirus in Singapore<br />but those headline infection numbers won't encourage people to visit or do business<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /></div><div>Sure, the opposition parties may dance to the PAP's tune and unveil plans on how to have a better Covid-19 recovery but the moves are very limited - this is all economic policy (how to shelter companies and workers from the economic fallout) and guesswork (how long will the New Abnormal last? Do we really need a vaccine? How can a V-shaped recovery be engineered?) and tweaking and the PAP's decent economic packages and handouts a few percentages here and there, and extending relief schemes a few months more. This is a fool's errand; the PAP has the full benefits of incumbency and is expected to counter opposition proposals with projections and models drawn up by Singapore's army of civil service bean counters when they designed the economic relief plans.</div><div><br /></div><div>The likelier outcome of this challenge is for a competent opposition to agree with the PAP that this is a Covid-19 election and point to the monumental disasters made by Singapore's inter-ministerial coronavirus task force.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>But why did the task force fail so badly?</b></div><div><br /></div><div>Singapore's initial response, however late it was initiated, was modelled on the SARS textbook it wrote in 2003. For some reason though, the PR agenda was allowed to trump medical and scientific expertise in setting out Singapore's pandemic response policy.</div><div><br /></div><div>What changed between 2003 and 2020? Was it down to the prime minister appointing the putative "4G leadership" to the inter-ministerial task force? How different is this task force compared to the one that handled SARS in 2003?</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXW0GgkPlvN4cwKNiQTSx1zwP_UT3Qgm7qh4NyCZm_uAmCjnqkECPhml_0IkszfjjIc5zkgZdKHBtFAOgoT_8dx_RG8YcGZMas2wh5xuXTgX58NlUxVq-cnFG_uwTSH-KNotJQ8A/s1850/vintage-magnifying-glass-3D-model_Z.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1850" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXW0GgkPlvN4cwKNiQTSx1zwP_UT3Qgm7qh4NyCZm_uAmCjnqkECPhml_0IkszfjjIc5zkgZdKHBtFAOgoT_8dx_RG8YcGZMas2wh5xuXTgX58NlUxVq-cnFG_uwTSH-KNotJQ8A/w500-h270/vintage-magnifying-glass-3D-model_Z.jpg" width="500" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>The <a href="http://www.annals.edu.sg/" target="_blank">Academy of Medicine Singapore</a> provides clues, if not the actual blueprints, on the 2003 task force. <a href="http://www.annals.edu.sg/pdf/35VolNo5200606/V35N5p301.pdf" target="_blank">A team from the Communicable Diseases Centre and various departments of the Ministry of Health</a> describe the task force's composition and structure:</div><blockquote>Prevention and control measures were initiated by the MOH SARS Task Force, which was formed on 15 March 2003 and chaired by the DMS [Director of Medical Services]. Its members included the chief executive officers of all hospitals, chairmen of medical boards, infectious disease physicians, epidemiologists and virologists.<br /></blockquote><blockquote>The Ministerial Committee on SARS (chaired by the Minister for Home Affairs) was established on 7 April to provide political guidance and quick strategic decisions to minimise the socioeconomic impact of SARS.<br /></blockquote><blockquote>The Executive Group, comprising permanent secretaries of the relevant ministries, was responsible for the overall coordination and implementation of multi-agency issues outside the healthcare setting, while an Inter-Ministry SARS Operations Committee ensured that cross-ministry operational issues on SARS were well coordinated.</blockquote><div><a href="http://www.annals.edu.sg/pdf/39VolNo4Apr2010/V39N4p313.pdf" target="_blank">A duo from the CDC and the manpower division of the Ministry of Health also notes</a>:</div><div></div><blockquote><div>The Homefront Crisis Management System (HCMS) in
Singapore is the framework for coordinating the whole-of-government (WOG) response in times of a crisis. Under
the HCMS, strategic and political guidance is provided by
the Homefront Crisis Ministerial Committee for Infl uenza
(HCMC-FLU), which is chaired by the Minister for Home
Affairs. HCMC-FLU is supported by the Homefront
Crisis Executive Committee (HCEG-FLU), chaired by the
Permanent Secretary (Home Affairs) (Fig. 3). Ministries and
agencies are functionally clustered into Crisis Management
Groups (CMGs). Each CMG is an inter-agency group led
by a Ministry that is the domain owner.</div><div></div></blockquote><div>Taken together, it can be understood that the competent 2003 task force was:</div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Led by scientific and medical experts</li><li>Headed by CEOs and chairs of Singapore's public hospital clusters</li><li>Chaired by the Chief medical officer</li><li>Under the purview of the Ministry of Home Affairs</li><li>Ministerial committee only existed to provide the political power necessary, and to combat the non-medical economic fallout</li><li>Actual executive group was comprised of permanent secretaries to provide coordination outside the health setting</li></ul><div>Looking at the roll-out and behaviour of Singapore's pandemic response, this is our best-guess blueprint of the inner workings of the 2020 task force:</div></div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Consulted by scientific and medical experts</li><li>Led and headed by 4G ministers</li><li>Not ultimately headed by the minister of home affairs, Mr K Shanmugam</li><li>Actual executive group comprised of 4G ministers?</li><li>Some medical decisions (like <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/coronavirus-mom-warns-employers-not-to-send-workers-who-are-well-to-hospitals-for">warning employers against sending workers for covid-19 testing</a>) made by 4G ministers? With no or little input or advice from scientific and medical experts?</li></ul><div>Had the ruling party not chosen this to be the issue of the general election, it would be on a comfortable saunter to complete electoral dominance. Now there is the tinniest of chances for an astute and competent party to enter its teams into parliament. If this is the 4G leadership that botched the national Covid-19 pandemic response, does it deserve an overwhelming mandate? Can you trust it to guide Singapore unchallenged? <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/07/modelling-2020-singapore-general.html" target="_blank">But don't hold your breath</a>.</div></div>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-53377630695000424432020-07-03T17:31:00.005+08:002020-07-03T18:17:12.225+08:00Modelling the 2020 Singapore General Election<br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody style="line-height: 1.5;"><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVX4m9cY7OGb7amJCR2J2VFrd-Ax4ZG7RA-fr8aOcu6Qmzlf8su6w9bTPV5qYwaTudW9X0mkrsMtB_44YIzL7MhCiuqc693SIBnq0_EzIC-VaFncmhYu8qXWqygKIBNaiyyN_wOQ/s1916/twister+2.png" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1032" data-original-width="1916" height="269" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVX4m9cY7OGb7amJCR2J2VFrd-Ax4ZG7RA-fr8aOcu6Qmzlf8su6w9bTPV5qYwaTudW9X0mkrsMtB_44YIzL7MhCiuqc693SIBnq0_EzIC-VaFncmhYu8qXWqygKIBNaiyyN_wOQ/w500-h269/twister+2.png" width="500" /></a></td></tr><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td class="tr-caption" style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;">Will this be a game of chess, or a game of twister?<br />Choose wisely when you play with Death!<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;">When <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/general-election-president-dissolves-parliament-nomination-day-12862490" style="line-height: 1.5;" target="_blank">its prime minister Lee Hsien Loong called for parliament to be dissolved on 23 June 2020 for snap polls</a>, Singapore joined an exclusive club of nations holding national elections during the global pandemic. South Korea's ruling Minjoo Party won its snap polls easily and even <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-52304781" style="line-height: 1.5;" target="_blank">extended its majority in parliament</a>. <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51077553" style="line-height: 1.5;" target="_blank">Taiwan's Tsai Ing-wen was handily reelected</a> in its presidential polls. Will Singapore's People's Action Party do the same? Is it checkmate and a total wipeout for Singapore's opposition, which held just 6 seats out of 89 after the 2015 election?<span style="line-height: 1.5;"><a name='more'></a></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><b style="line-height: 1.5;">How do voters decide in Singapore?</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;">In 2015, we at Illusio modelled the Singapore general election. This year, we continue to believe that <a href="http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/28132/1/Dunleavy_Rethinking_dominant_party_systems_2010.pdf" style="line-height: 1.5;" target="_blank">Dunleavy's multinational analysis of dominant party systems</a> is the right model to forecast Singapore elections. The Dunleavy model has not broken down for elections post-2014, and Singapore continues to be a dominant party state.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody style="line-height: 1.5;"><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSc5J-isIvDgbiW-rjb9kSawLPU5N7Rk2U4LPOe8aQ479ZYnV979scyjrxc4bcCq-7vKxkiOy8iLiInyIqcj1gbUcKNvLeByucZKUkNHosiZGoasjHRIgjluFmdEXzHFuEJ1COIQ/s551/effectivecurve.png" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="501" data-original-width="551" height="455" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSc5J-isIvDgbiW-rjb9kSawLPU5N7Rk2U4LPOe8aQ479ZYnV979scyjrxc4bcCq-7vKxkiOy8iLiInyIqcj1gbUcKNvLeByucZKUkNHosiZGoasjHRIgjluFmdEXzHFuEJ1COIQ/w500-h455/effectivecurve.png" width="500" /></a></td></tr><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td class="tr-caption" style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;">Remember this graph?<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;">As a refresher to <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2015/08/modelling-2015-singapore-general.html" style="line-height: 1.5;" target="_blank">our 2015 post on Dunleavy's model</a>, the ruling party in a dominant party state enjoys a "halo of effectiveness". For a wide range of rational voters, the dominant party is a preferable choice to any other party that is closer to the voter's ideological position. Qualitative surveys such as those conducted in Japan show <a href="https://rubenson.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Smith-tpbw18.pdf" style="line-height: 1.5;" target="_blank">voters tend to choose the incumbent party because they see it as an effective deliverer of competent policy, even when those policies deviate with voter policy preferences</a>.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcClXtuD_gwo6mLVDh0XG6CeRn8gL7DYfKcmnhL5EssOztO8iv3ll92xoCxdxnmLhIlanCLZdAM79s33XFNeO3wyvWF81R41OSsHjL-1_KPtYkK0DfkOUtBQacrEsrX2JV_3tJfw/s1000/pork+barrel.jpeg" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="726" data-original-width="1000" height="363" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcClXtuD_gwo6mLVDh0XG6CeRn8gL7DYfKcmnhL5EssOztO8iv3ll92xoCxdxnmLhIlanCLZdAM79s33XFNeO3wyvWF81R41OSsHjL-1_KPtYkK0DfkOUtBQacrEsrX2JV_3tJfw/w500-h363/pork+barrel.jpeg" width="500" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;">In more practical terms, constituents in Japan and other dominant party states around the world see dominant political parties as a source of local spending projects and area improvements. This may also explain why the PAP has, in the light of policy failures since 2011, focused on unveiling URA's "town council masterplans" and taking credit for them.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;"><b style="line-height: 1.5;">How should the political contest be fought?</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;">Under the Dunleavy model, elections in a dominant party state are essentially <b style="line-height: 1.5;">plebiscites</b> on the ruling party. Has the ruling party delivered in its previous term? Is its vision for the nation in the next term what the people actually want? Has life improved for people in the past 4 years? Do they think the next 5 years will be better?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody style="line-height: 1.5;"><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZUfoIPlU36E3c9Cqieq_NS8UpCVSyNnpwgHnssFFzzuPNqKuvwc53RQUALt1-MmvtMCX_dqBNvrQx9yO9w4Rn_d-9Uj2PyAAlJHipqhjZ_2eUHJKdDDo3JuFyQaR1hZBQPy2Zlw/s750/report+card.jpg" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="748" data-original-width="750" height="499" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZUfoIPlU36E3c9Cqieq_NS8UpCVSyNnpwgHnssFFzzuPNqKuvwc53RQUALt1-MmvtMCX_dqBNvrQx9yO9w4Rn_d-9Uj2PyAAlJHipqhjZ_2eUHJKdDDo3JuFyQaR1hZBQPy2Zlw/w500-h499/report+card.jpg" width="500" /></a></td></tr><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td class="tr-caption" style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;">What would the Singapore/PAP report card for 2015/2020 look like?</td></tr></tbody></table><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5;">Applying first principles to the development of the past 5 years, it's clear that any serious and competent party that is not the PAP would run a campaign attacking</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">1. the PAP's competence, focusing on highly publicised policy and governance failures (say national privacy failures, the failure to provide a sustainable 99-year HDB lease solution, international corruption of Singapore-branded companies like Keppel, the powerless job bank, the botched coronavirus strategy of the multiministerial task force and the massive covid19 dormitory outbreaks, amongst other failures)<br />2. the PAP's vision for Singapore. How many voters want a Singapore with 6.9 million people (or <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/10/singapore-must-plan-for-10m-population-ex-hdb-chief.html" style="line-height: 1.5;">according to Liu Thai Ker, 10 or 20 million</a>!), easy visas and immigration for foreign job-seekers, a depressed wage and low productivity economy, and more ineffective rounds of economic restructuring that do not address Singapore's addition to low productivity?</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">and downplaying 3. the importance of the sole thing the PAP did right: turn on the stimulus to keep businesses running and workers employed during the corona crisis.</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><b style="line-height: 1.5;">What is the fly in the ointment?</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0TSy1E1dun75DOaKEwmHIiwSxtade79_NU7V1ZhlXFHQqJ9IdfkwqVH9ICv3kZjbQBZds8o6IeCy3neLoBtaKPd_5jtwPe-vE0uUFz7rc9d7FZns1iqwybEkSD6aE0-l1QCkWQw/s592/effectivecurve2.png" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="416" data-original-width="592" height="351" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0TSy1E1dun75DOaKEwmHIiwSxtade79_NU7V1ZhlXFHQqJ9IdfkwqVH9ICv3kZjbQBZds8o6IeCy3neLoBtaKPd_5jtwPe-vE0uUFz7rc9d7FZns1iqwybEkSD6aE0-l1QCkWQw/w500-h351/effectivecurve2.png" width="500" /></a></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwk7cub6uvtwARs_eC3f1Kp3HOTF8ybNcSp-2VGDmyA75WO2SLZBI92g1JI7HB6T-twmJEfIAZIc0eO4T6DqLHnLP-XxTlTW946mCSUlA6OcyCZqi-C_RCzQR1Odn20O9Q_gHutg/s619/effectivecurve3.png" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="419" data-original-width="619" height="339" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwk7cub6uvtwARs_eC3f1Kp3HOTF8ybNcSp-2VGDmyA75WO2SLZBI92g1JI7HB6T-twmJEfIAZIc0eO4T6DqLHnLP-XxTlTW946mCSUlA6OcyCZqi-C_RCzQR1Odn20O9Q_gHutg/w500-h339/effectivecurve3.png" width="500" /></a></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">Dunleavy notes a pure consequence of the dominant party model:</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><blockquote style="line-height: 1.5;">Only when some opposition parties adopt ‘convergent’ or ‘deeply convergent’ positioning strategies will support for dominant parties tend to be seriously eroded. Greater crowding of the ideological space is a key stimulus to some opposition parties adopting convergent or deeply convergent strategies.</blockquote></div>But are there enough viable opposition parties this year to seriously erode the PAP's dominance, and its dominant share of the vote?<div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">We note that the 2020 general election is the second time in Singapore's modern history where all seats in parliament are contested. Does this mean the field is "crowded" with sufficient parties adopting convergent or deeply convergent strategies? Unfortunately not since none of the opposition parties are entering contests in the same seats as each other. Dunleavy's Figure 3 describes contests where the dominant party is competing with an overcrowded field. This is not the same as in Singapore, where the dominant party is competing one-on-one with different challengers across the map, which is essentially Figure 2.<br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">To put it in concrete terms: The Workers Party is contesting in East Coast Group Representative Constituency. The East Coast voter only has a choice between WP and PAP. The PAP is able to keep its 'halo' in the ward because not enough parties are contesting and overcrowding its position in the East Coast ward. Where the presidential election of the 4 Tans was overcrowded with multiple challengers, it resulted in a narrow victory by Tony Tan, the PAP's preferred candidate.</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody style="line-height: 1.5;"><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnDhcdD6obEUTwoAh4h2Nx1bCqWAVrFN6_eP8LZVpye-q4I0ShKdUw2F6-y0hhMhnX45DYLHU5J4lUxNiTUh2sOdgVU50gUMaL41UKRsQvhOBiKQ4Jy9cvL-nT1UVVB0pcUUk5YA/s530/everyschool.jpg" style="line-height: 1.5; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="189" data-original-width="530" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnDhcdD6obEUTwoAh4h2Nx1bCqWAVrFN6_eP8LZVpye-q4I0ShKdUw2F6-y0hhMhnX45DYLHU5J4lUxNiTUh2sOdgVU50gUMaL41UKRsQvhOBiKQ4Jy9cvL-nT1UVVB0pcUUk5YA/w500-h179/everyschool.jpg" width="500" /></a></td></tr><tr style="line-height: 1.5;"><td class="tr-caption" style="line-height: 1.5; text-align: center;">Schools and political parties are the same<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">And we are assuming that every opposition party is a viable party. According to the voter preferences of 2015: none of them are viable, but one was only fit to have a token voice in parliament. More research and surveys need to understand why, but Dr Tan Cheng Bock's Progress Singapore Party had, during its online party launch, hinted at an attempt to build a party capable of contesting every ward, i.e. a national party.</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">This is apparently a heretical idea in Singapore, that an opposition party should want to contest all the seats. But Dr Tan is a maverick. And also a realist. How do you ensure that your party doesn't get stymied or caught unprepared when constituency lines are redrawn every election? Just have a party huge enough, with volunteers and grassroots wide enough that you don't need to sweat to find assenters, polling agents and campaigners in any ward. That is a viable party, which Dr Tan has not succeeded in delivering, even though the PSP is the biggest challenger for seats in parliament this year (a total of just 24, out of 82).</div><div style="line-height: 1.5;"><br /></div><div style="line-height: 1.5;">In other words, we at Illusio see this as a difficult and uphill battle for the opposition and an easy victory for the People's Action Party, barring an upswell of dissatisfaction and unhappiness from Singapore's electorate or a newfound ability to puncture the PAP's aura of competence by the opposition during the campaign.</div>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-33381983458293831612020-06-08T17:04:00.000+08:002020-06-08T18:49:32.879+08:00Where was Singapore's Prime Minister during the Covid-19 crisis?On 7 June 2020, Singapore prime minister Lee Hsien Loong made a national broadcast. <a href="https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/National-Broadcast-PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-COVID-19" target="_blank">In his half hour address to the nation</a>, the prime minister set out Singapore's position in its fight against the coronavirus pandemic, outlined the potential long-term problems in a post-coronavirus world and hinted at the wide-ranging reforms his cabinet team would propose and unveil in further broadcasts.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In his typical Deus Absconditus style, Lee set up and delegated the coronavirus response to a "Multi-Ministry Covid-19 Taskforce", vanished from the public eye almost completely, and let them run the show entirely. This team has since shown itself to be marred by <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/can-singapores-politicians-listen-to.html" target="_blank">poor communication skills and crisis management</a> and a <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html" target="_blank">tendency to allow PR agendas to trump medical-scientific expertise and set policy</a>. By refusing to have <b>daily coronavirus briefings</b>, this team failed to reassure, educate, guide, and rally the public and to shore up the government credibility and authority during the pandemic.<br />
<br />
Credibility and authority need to be replenished because when dealing with a novel virus, governments and health agencies around the world are more than likely to stumble, reverse course, and refine their approaches as more is learned about the virus. It is also likely that institutional blind spots lead to <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html" target="_blank">massive outbreaks such as the one that is still continuing in Singapore's guest worker dormitories</a>.<br />
<br />
Does the prime minister's address to the nation now make up for these missteps and failures?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkBVDhQkMvpeIb25FHir-BavIztUdK_OvHhwkNdejnCm7_Cd0DwE_LCS9VX-N58bcZRJj8cGbhc6u34HzMRR7Sz_mCV9ZnJNILWRtu-lgyek-No25JIS4EGOi-O_ilL5RJNoviSA/s1600/FDR+fireside2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="617" data-original-width="1100" height="224" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkBVDhQkMvpeIb25FHir-BavIztUdK_OvHhwkNdejnCm7_Cd0DwE_LCS9VX-N58bcZRJj8cGbhc6u34HzMRR7Sz_mCV9ZnJNILWRtu-lgyek-No25JIS4EGOi-O_ilL5RJNoviSA/s400/FDR+fireside2.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Can Minilee pull an FDR?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a name='more'></a><b>Was the national address too little, too late? Or too visionary to connect?</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The prime minister's delivery was sincere but awkward when it should have been warm, reassuring, or dynamic. Had Lee elected to head daily public coronavirus briefings with a rotating team like a certain Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, he and his team would've found sufficient practice by now to hone their crisis communications and more importantly generic communication skills <i>just in time for the looming elections</i>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This deficiency is also evident in the construction of the speech.</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Lee trumpets the success of Singapore's coronavirus response</li>
<li>Lee then moves on to diagnosing possible strategic problems for Singapore in a post-coronavirus world: the world backpeddling on globalisation and trade and its impact on Singapore jobs and companies.</li>
<li>Lee then hints his forward-looking team will prepare Singapore for wide-ranging economic reforms. And only then does he acknowledge demographics he is "particularly concerned" with.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
As a PR consideration, it is self-defeating to trumpet Singapore's coronavirus response in such unbalanced terms without acknowledging the obvious teething problems, breakdowns and failures, and the firefighting culture apparent in the task force. The prime minister need not commit <i>seppuku</i> on national television for the faults of his task force but he could afford to be far more candid instead of sweeping issues under the carpet.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLB4IcBg6K4FjsLRN4BErGAiyKpVbDkeseZ_wI_9YxaG-J4qkjlFfljyaSVk2LbwMW40TX3sON4Xg_nS8t4TFFcs4kENclH6DLnSHDCVCy6bAHTk3nMLqI921Tb1fjpbZQYtyRGA/s1600/obamamedal.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="478" data-original-width="680" height="280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLB4IcBg6K4FjsLRN4BErGAiyKpVbDkeseZ_wI_9YxaG-J4qkjlFfljyaSVk2LbwMW40TX3sON4Xg_nS8t4TFFcs4kENclH6DLnSHDCVCy6bAHTk3nMLqI921Tb1fjpbZQYtyRGA/s400/obamamedal.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
For example, Lee makes the astonishingly unbalanced claim that "Singapore has responded to COVID-19 – openly and transparently, neither avoiding
reality, nor acting arbitrarily at the first sign of trouble". This observation is difficult to square with the task force's <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html" target="_blank">tendency to allow PR agendas to trump medical-scientific expertise and set policy</a> or its <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/05/what-can-singapore-learn-from-other.html" target="_blank">penchant for firefighting responses, overreaction and impatience</a>. If Singapore's pandemic response were transparent, figures like ICU capacity and occupancy, and test capacity would be available on a daily basis.<br />
<br />
It may be reassuring that Lee has a visionary team in charge, looking out and looking ahead for the interests of Singapore but this is putting the cart ahead of the horse. Lee needed to start by acknowledging the pain, sacrifices, and losses that were borne by the people to combat the pandemic, and to salute them before he went into projections and predictions.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Why is Singapore's PM predicting doom and gloom, then forcing bitter medicine down throats?</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjg_6ROJDryaw_lwuHbGfnSXqNznfobFXXgRv-pNdSf4x6DaZuLpSK0KXHXk8cHpOW2V6AQGTfJ3S1AgSO0Gx5HAzoOf8eQbjZ4v-cPGQ55gCUJge2ge-_DUfnOfj5nyeoDsoD9gQ/s1600/ludovico.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="287" data-original-width="479" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjg_6ROJDryaw_lwuHbGfnSXqNznfobFXXgRv-pNdSf4x6DaZuLpSK0KXHXk8cHpOW2V6AQGTfJ3S1AgSO0Gx5HAzoOf8eQbjZ4v-cPGQ55gCUJge2ge-_DUfnOfj5nyeoDsoD9gQ/s1600/ludovico.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Thanks for sharing your vision of the future but no thanks?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
While most global economists and stock markets are now predicting and projecting a V-shaped recovery, Singapore's leaders seem to be hedging their bets on a long and painful global recession based on how the world will operate on lockdown, shelter in place, work from home rules with largely reduced international trade and travel for the foreseeable future as the "New Normal".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
For a government that has burnt through its store of credibility, authority and public goodwill, it is folly to then champion and package a "New Normal" and put itself at odds with the people, <i>whose sacrifices and pains have not been recognised anywhere in Lee's speech</i>. People do not accept the "New Normal" because they see it as a largely abnormal, temporary, and repugnant set of measures they must reluctantly live with until Covid-19 is eradicated or brought under effective control. Flogging this "New Normal" will breed resentment in the people.<br />
<br />
Singapore's well-informed and connected population must be asking themselves today:<br />
<div>
<ul>
<li>Why is Singapore's prime minister far more pessimistic on the recovery than warranted?</li>
<li>Will his team's proposed and soon-to-be unveiled economic reforms cause far more pain to the economy, put enterprises and jobs in peril —just like most economic reforms in Singapore's modern history?</li>
<li>Will the pain and mayhem caused by Singapore's upcoming economic reforms or restructuring be conveniently blamed on Covid-19 instead?</li>
</ul>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgg4003IB7g0Y9OJGZRXfqJVUFv2IfKtjmZOoEdFwmEZ-XLdAlmKPzD_l4AyoblUT-qmcwvUM-bVLHndaE-WI0pYAYx_BSibtY0j-y1Fuu-_O8p_YjOaD-7KOpgtB4DM043xOg-xA/s1600/bitter+medicine.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="462" data-original-width="613" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgg4003IB7g0Y9OJGZRXfqJVUFv2IfKtjmZOoEdFwmEZ-XLdAlmKPzD_l4AyoblUT-qmcwvUM-bVLHndaE-WI0pYAYx_BSibtY0j-y1Fuu-_O8p_YjOaD-7KOpgtB4DM043xOg-xA/s400/bitter+medicine.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
And this is what's wrong with the prime minister's address to the nation; if we and the world are not out of the woods in this pandemic, Lee should not be counting the eggs in his basket and making speculative long-term forecasts that economists did not make. He should be providing real leadership to galvanise the people instead.</div>
akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-17198316361612450492020-05-19T20:30:00.000+08:002020-05-21T10:31:57.151+08:00What can Singapore learn from other countries on Covid-19?<b>Does Singapore still have an advantage in the lockdown era?</b><br />
<br />
On 3 April 2020, Singapore became one of the last major economies of the world to enter a lockdown. <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">Singapore's lockdown came 2 weeks to a month too late, after the pattern of case doubling had already been observed in early March</a>. The international media has used the massive outbreak in Singapore's guest worker dormitories to write off Singapore as a role model for the pandemic.<br />
<br />
To be fair, Singapore's SARS textbook response is a <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">mitigation model aimed at containing the spread of a virus and eradicating it over time</a>. Once community spread and outbreaks occur, Singapore as much as the rest of the world is in uncharted territory. Singapore's mitigation model will become relevant to the world again after nations emerge from their suppression model lockdowns. As for being 2 weeks to a month late to the global lockdown party, Singapore's leaders can fashion its own lockdown policy and implementation from mistakes and successes from the rest of the world.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6WEGjRauGOM_v2ulO0qK1-Z6nMAc4P-NxtZnix11dyl0TR0BGq7CqZU-uR-uggCDEOJCpr53JyXdghNr-Vo454_d9SylvF8Y7X87G9CiBz15CsdCv9CcVFlBmexcxhNlJI5C_9g/s1600/mrbeanexam.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="298" data-original-width="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6WEGjRauGOM_v2ulO0qK1-Z6nMAc4P-NxtZnix11dyl0TR0BGq7CqZU-uR-uggCDEOJCpr53JyXdghNr-Vo454_d9SylvF8Y7X87G9CiBz15CsdCv9CcVFlBmexcxhNlJI5C_9g/s1600/mrbeanexam.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<a name='more'></a><b>What did Singapore do right in the lockdown?</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
National lockdowns have never been part of modern pandemic responses. Yet this measure, essentially stopping most social interaction and "flattening the curve", was proposed by very serious scientists. The virus was simply so contagious that modern social distancing measures and contact tracing are insufficient to curb it, and deadly enough that it was necessary.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Stopping almost all social interactions means a stop to economic activity and commerce. By definition, lockdowns are an extremely blunt tool that have a devastating impact on the economy. The impact is as huge as a natural disaster or a war. What happens when people are told to work from home or else cease their business unless it's an essential service? Contracts are reneged due to <a href="https://www.hfw.com/Coronavirus-Can-it-be-a-Force-Majeure-event-Feb-2020">force majeur</a>. Rents cannot be paid. Businesses go bust. Livelihoods are lost. Being broke and homeless is only slightly better than being sick or dying during an epidemic.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_qEs0G7kJK8sdwz3LRhJiI3NEinUKIc8bmAds_pEFSNtk8P49h8VItJU4Y8wk4mQSwRov4Hv4zPxoFW7R2Rxfyjtg6WazmfIXAEI6HzZP9GcEX1gQPSGgfKFpUEsdtH0cgTkETA/s1600/clinton+economic+stupid.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="320" data-original-width="311" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_qEs0G7kJK8sdwz3LRhJiI3NEinUKIc8bmAds_pEFSNtk8P49h8VItJU4Y8wk4mQSwRov4Hv4zPxoFW7R2Rxfyjtg6WazmfIXAEI6HzZP9GcEX1gQPSGgfKFpUEsdtH0cgTkETA/s1600/clinton+economic+stupid.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
Was Singapore's lockdown restrictions over the top? Singapore's initial <a href="https://covid.gobusiness.gov.sg/essentialservices/">essential services exemptions</a> appear to be <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/further-businesses-and-premises-to-close/further-businesses-and-premises-to-close-guidance">very similar to the UK list</a>.<br />
<br />
Did Singapore protect businesses and people's livelihoods sufficiently? The Chancellor of the Exchequer devised a 330 billion pound plan to <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52318355">extend government loans for all businesses</a> and <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51969708">pay up to 80% of wages to protect jobs</a>. Singapore's finance minister devised a total of 60 billion SGD in stimulus packages. Singapore's bailout is business centred with "wage subsidies" (of between 25 to 75%) for companies and just a one-time payout of 600 SGD for workers and 300 SGD for self-employed people. <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/more-businesses-mull-wage-cuts-no-pay-leave-covid-19-12691308">Indications suggest that Singapore's bailout may not be sufficient</a> as companies went ahead with wage cuts and no-pay leave in the following month. Of course this doesn't preclude Singapore's leaders from releasing more relief, but <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/157631/unemployment-insurance-coronavirus-cares-act">they should be mindful not to overdo the relief</a> and create perverse incentives.<br />
<br />
<b>What lessons should Singapore be learning?</b><br />
<br />
Two weaknesses in Singapore's pandemic response and crisis management have emerged even before its lockdown phase: <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/can-singapores-politicians-listen-to.html">poor communication skills and crisis management</a> and a tendency to allow <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">PR agendas to trump medical-scientific priorities and expertise</a>.<br />
<br />
In a months-long national lockdown where people are starved for information and tend to fall prey to either paranoia or apathy, effective crisis communications and management and fashioning guidelines from science and evidence are just the sort of skills that are needed. Both skills are combined in the best tool for managing a lockdown: the <b>daily coronavirus briefing</b>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5dcbBWSPWq3PQ8KFabKXNwM7dIA41oTA04V0NZMgAZHofvmJ4B9R_euZthGn7S8cYro8gRQr7yKwR4jWYg9Uue-rMmOUDfVKCY5f-lEjl3p4Y01ooIgjL4bjw0lDO2kSaUIxkog/s1600/FDR+fireside.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="612" data-original-width="1200" height="203" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5dcbBWSPWq3PQ8KFabKXNwM7dIA41oTA04V0NZMgAZHofvmJ4B9R_euZthGn7S8cYro8gRQr7yKwR4jWYg9Uue-rMmOUDfVKCY5f-lEjl3p4Y01ooIgjL4bjw0lDO2kSaUIxkog/s400/FDR+fireside.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Just as Franklin D Roosevelt used his series of fireside chats to calm a nation in crisis, the leaders of America and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/26/world/europe/uk-us-coronavirus-briefings-trump-johnson.html">UK have employed prime-time broadcasts and live streaming on a daily basis to shore up government credibility and authority during the pandemic</a>, while also giving official guidance and updates on their pandemic response.<br />
<br />
The UK daily coronavirus briefing is a model for communications, feedback mechanism, behavioural modification, and public education. These briefings are for the public, available readily every day at 5pm on all broadcast channels and online media. Ministers and secretaries of state address the public, speak to the public, and have the public in mind in the entire duration of their briefing. Each briefing begins a minister delivering the daily numbers and tallies, but it is the chief expert of the day who ties these numbers directly to indicators of how well the public is social distancing and travelling. This is known as an active feedback mechanism: people are more open to modifying their behaviour when it can be measured and linked to visible results. <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/slides-and-datasets-to-accompany-coronavirus-press-conferences">These slides for the daily briefings are of course publicly available online</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVACkFW5kBFRo6gxp5ijipRH7seERPQnn-pCMyR4Q7KkSdbXtD7H6xfKnG-QaYH62urgLosgOuKJyFcParXtOcFpfUNjnltGeN5zldJKuMuwP3gs26c_Q6CdwdyFXDeYUIIa130A/s1600/feedbackmechanism.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="530" data-original-width="943" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVACkFW5kBFRo6gxp5ijipRH7seERPQnn-pCMyR4Q7KkSdbXtD7H6xfKnG-QaYH62urgLosgOuKJyFcParXtOcFpfUNjnltGeN5zldJKuMuwP3gs26c_Q6CdwdyFXDeYUIIa130A/s400/feedbackmechanism.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
UK ministers are a picture of reassuring calm, remembering every so often (and especially when faced with hostile questions) to praise health workers, educators, and the public at large in their pandemic response, praise the journalists for the questions, and to end every question with a timely repetition of their current pandemic motto, whether it is "Stay home, protect the NHS, save lives" or "Stay alert, control the virus, save lives".<br />
<br />
Each day a single minister takes a lectern in a room in 10 Downing Street, is flanked on either side by the government's chief medical officer, the government's chief scientific officer, the medical director of the NHS or their deputies. In their briefings, ministers readily and often defer to these experts to explain the rationale for lockdown guidelines and account for the government's progress in its pandemic response. Ministers stress that the government response is always guided by science and under advice from specially convened pandemic scientific committees, and the experts explain the science in an accessible manner, sometimes taking as much as 40% of the broadcast time. Of course, the minutes, discussions, and decisions made by the UK's <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/scientific-advisory-group-for-emergencies-sage-coronavirus-covid-19-response">SAGE</a> and <a href="https://app.box.com/s/3lkcbxepqixkg4mv640dpvvg978ixjtf/folder/103551854721">NERVTAG</a> committees are regularly updated and accessible to the public, even internationally, in a spirit of transparency and accountability.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirMbppD1UOsseN1OnVbga9bmQrAWsMd-HiZDc8KJ3hSTUwf7amHLE8qNDFm1vn1p7mWqyIpp30c4jEbEQkt_SlPwTugJ7JdlEDS6DlPM1g-a-DZ27RW3vafjIbQsE8sD1EoiQ1gQ/s1600/hancock+briefing.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="579" data-original-width="965" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirMbppD1UOsseN1OnVbga9bmQrAWsMd-HiZDc8KJ3hSTUwf7amHLE8qNDFm1vn1p7mWqyIpp30c4jEbEQkt_SlPwTugJ7JdlEDS6DlPM1g-a-DZ27RW3vafjIbQsE8sD1EoiQ1gQ/s400/hancock+briefing.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">L-R: Deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam, Health secretary Matt Hancock, Director of health improvement, Public Health England Prof John Newton on 21 April 2020</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
These ministerial communication skills and cordial demeanor, combined with deference to experts and openness about their scientific advice, has been the UK's government's best defense against a press that at times may be out for blood for missteps and an initially poor pandemic response. At the same time, an unfettered press is the reason why the public knows the current test capacity, ICU capacity and occupancy for any day, and just how much the government aims to improve these.<br />
<br />
Why hasn't the UK government made masks mandatory? Why are there PPE shortages? Why were so little tests done in the beginning? Why is it taking so long to ramp up testing? Why were elderly patients discharged from hospitals before the pandemic began? Why didn't the UK health authorities include anosmia in the list of symptoms till 18 May 2020? Why isn't the government listening to nursing and teachers unions who say they're not confident to go back to work? Angry, accusatory, blaming questions are deflected with scientific advice and reasoning not by a beleaguered minister but by a very serious, knowledgeable scientific or medical expert. Attempts at affecting anger and pushing false issues can only last so long before there's a public backlash against the reporter or their publication. Everyone wins in the end; reporters get answers, ministers deflect, the public are educated.<br />
<br />
<b>What has Singapore gotten wrong in its lockdown phase?</b><br />
<br />
Two existing weaknesses in Singapore's pandemic response and crisis management have carried into its lockdown phase: <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/can-singapores-politicians-listen-to.html">poor communication skills and crisis management</a> and a tendency to allow <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">PR agendas to trump medical-scientific priorities and expertise</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_7XeDK7ZN5sNTPhUqj5-8bVk9VdI-9zuIuJxTBUykvdvA-kFNqSYPNjovdQe-XK6XfFYkEnzKTT6TF37Meu90h8EGCIE9I9J2mVAcdzku5nmet-KXFFFFmRadIVHyv6xToSP5TA/s1600/cool+hand+luke.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="405" data-original-width="500" height="259" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_7XeDK7ZN5sNTPhUqj5-8bVk9VdI-9zuIuJxTBUykvdvA-kFNqSYPNjovdQe-XK6XfFYkEnzKTT6TF37Meu90h8EGCIE9I9J2mVAcdzku5nmet-KXFFFFmRadIVHyv6xToSP5TA/s320/cool+hand+luke.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span id="goog_184481728"></span>
To the best of our knowledge, Singapore has coronavirus briefings but these are not held daily. They are meant more for the press; not much for public consumption. Press members are allowed to field questions but not follow-ups. Briefings are broadcast but not on a live basis. There are no live streams on social media. A conga line of 5 ministers is accompanied by 1 director of medical services in the Ministry of Health. From the last publicly available briefing, these ministers spoke for about 80% of the time. Testing capacity and ICU capacity were unknowns for more than a month till the inter-ministerial task force announced their plans for ramping up capacity. All this while their counterparts in the UK were improving the public communications skills so helpful in winning future elections.<br />
<br />
Is Singapore's inter-ministerial team advised by scientific groups like the UK's NERVTAG or SAGE? No one knows. However, it is Singapore's handling of lockdown guidelines truly expose its tendency to discard medical-scientific fundamentals, and suggest that Singapore may not even have an equivalent of NERVTAG or SAGE.<br />
<br />
Singapore's lockdown was announced on 3 April, yet additional and increasingly radical measures were added starting 10 April. The "circuit breaker" began with the prime minister announcing that the public would now not be advised against against wearing face masks of any material. Beginning 10 April, a slew of announcements were made. First, masks would be advised for visiting hawker centres. Then masks would be compulsory for food stall operators at hawker centres. Then masks would be compulsory for visitors to hawker centres, supermarkets (because there was a NTUC cluster). Then they would be compulsory if you had to go outdoors. and for all public transport.<br />
<br />
These and other changes do not have the backing of science, medicine, or evidence. Note the following:<br />
<ul>
<li>The incubation period of the virus is as much as 14 days. Any set of guideline changes are really attempts to modify or correct behaviour from 2 weeks ago. Given the lockdown had barely existed for a week, the initial advisories on wearing masks to hawker centres are either indefensible or show a monumental error had been made in the initial modelling.</li>
<li>There have been zero cases of Covid-19 infections at hawker centres. Any diseases previously contracted at hawker centres came from improperly prepared or handled food, neither of which are remedied by mask wearing.</li>
<li>Food in Singapore's hawker centres are usually prepared over hot stoves and frying. Mandating often elderly hawkers wear masks while cooking is dubious on health grounds.</li>
<li>According to the World Health Organisation and even the UK SAGE/NERVTAG advisory groups, there is no strong evidence to suggest universal masking prevents asymptomatic transmissions</li>
<li>Current science suggests very low asymptomatic transmission</li>
<li>Contact tracing has been able to link a vast majority, in fact almost all of the cases so far</li>
<li>In a rare instance when questioned by journalists<a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/masks-shouldnt-be-seen-as-only-form-of-protection">, Singapore's health experts ended up saying there is no strong evidence for masking and they believe this may be a psychological policy</a>, not medical. Were any psychologists or behavioural scientists consulted? UK's SAGE has a behavioural science section advising coronavirus guidelines</li>
<li>In 2018, devices were used in a trial on Singapore's trains to detect airborne viruses in public transports. Were any SARS-CoV-2 viruses detected on Singapore's trains this year?</li>
<li>Populations across the world and even in Singapore typical treat masks as a substitute for social distance and not a complement.</li>
<li>There are no "bubble tea clusters", yet bubble tea shops were ordered to close because Singaporeans were allegedly not staying at home enough. That's despite the fact that public transport usage has fallen by 80%, about the same as the successful lockdown in the UK.</li>
<li>A beer ban in Robertson Quay was imposed after a group of residents did not comply with social distancing measures.</li>
</ul>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfSueuwoBpuW0POCYeVdoHxME7A2KEp5-KmQN2B1Zkt5yOZkSO7DvA1VW30sgWYYa8N6l3GD-sjd0UBDGkEoYFAMzahVVcfudSOQ9MxubG88MfGfJ6BLl3PY_kwMyO0PwPNdGaMg/s1600/Fire-extinguisher.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="799" data-original-width="600" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfSueuwoBpuW0POCYeVdoHxME7A2KEp5-KmQN2B1Zkt5yOZkSO7DvA1VW30sgWYYa8N6l3GD-sjd0UBDGkEoYFAMzahVVcfudSOQ9MxubG88MfGfJ6BLl3PY_kwMyO0PwPNdGaMg/s320/Fire-extinguisher.jpg" width="240" /></a></div>
<br />
Taken as a whole, Singapore's lockdown guideline changes are indicative of the firefighting culture in government. Instead of real solutions to real issues, Singapore's leaders employ security theatre to assuage public fears instead of using proper crisis communications and management. The inter-ministerial task force is prone to overreaction and impatience instead of employing daily briefings over time to persuade behavioural modifications by the public and to mitigate risky behaviour. In addition, the task force is unable to distinguish between new developments and game changers. In a novel pandemic situation, it is critical that epidemiological science remains at the fundamentals of a nation's response even while information is dynamic.<br />
<br />
<b>Situation update: What has Singapore done for its guest workers?</b><br />
<br />
The massive Covid-19 outbreak in Singapore's guest worker community may be the black mark that has blemished international regard for the nation's competence in the fight against the coronavirus, but Singapore's leaders have begun to make up for their institutional blind spot by moving guest workers out into more spacious temporary accommodations in <a href="https://www.thestar.com.my/news/regional/2020/04/10/covid-19-singapore-moves-1300-foreign-workers-into-army-camps">military camps</a>, <a href="https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/covid-19-singapore-shifting-foreign-workers-to-ships/1825413">cabins in ships</a>, and <a href="https://mothership.sg/2020/04/covid-19-hdb-migrant-workers/">unused residential flats</a> and <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/all-foreign-workers-in-dorms-to-be-tested-for-covid-19">ramping up testing for the entire guest worker population</a>.<br />
<br />
In its daily statistics, Singapore's leaders continue to refer to this outbreak as taking place outside "the community", with guest workers counting outside "community cases". <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/9-in-10-coronavirus-patients-housed-in-isolation-facilities">Yet the non-political and practical response on the ground has been to house these "non-community cases" in "community facilities" if they test positive but do not require hospitalisation</a>.<br />
<br />
It is heartening to know that while Singapore's political instinct is determined to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic, the medical response on the ground is firmly rooted in science. It is disheartening to know that members of Singapore's homegrown press have unquestioningly bought into the unjustifiable segregation of guest workers. One "Tessa from Today" actually asked in a Interministerial Covid-19 Task Force briefing if <a href="https://youtu.be/raeOjrKOBE8?list=PLbnMTcZEga8QMfa3bjIddBE29SRMX3zKP&t=1404">the curve has been flattened because the "community cases" for that day was just one</a>. Of course she ignored the 600+ new cases from that day because guest workers are not part of the community, according to political meddling in Singapore's daily coronavirus reporting.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif66UGJG7EVIrHnLzePyRYb1SkzJssBnCFIIN2no4O38ipTqhrNBtp5L0AGx5qJdWqvJp3XP14GtmklAgPsUaqkLqwpT1WROzawlPxMqurroBHMM_YJz5S4luBtJOdwORG4Cm0Qg/s1600/shame+unella.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="368" data-original-width="700" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif66UGJG7EVIrHnLzePyRYb1SkzJssBnCFIIN2no4O38ipTqhrNBtp5L0AGx5qJdWqvJp3XP14GtmklAgPsUaqkLqwpT1WROzawlPxMqurroBHMM_YJz5S4luBtJOdwORG4Cm0Qg/s400/shame+unella.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
See what happens when journalists take the government's segregation narrative to heart?akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-88626926913889712592020-05-05T18:59:00.002+08:002020-05-11T20:39:02.961+08:00What can Singapore do about its dormitory population?<b>Are guest workers a hidden and permanent underclass in Singapore?</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgO8aCFON3c0vuAf7x-E4rmepQDagEM9EWqL1NUNIQtPZVt-cWX14wMebZSKC-crcELeTxUOr0ChhNSOYNNHHjUwdxb5Z23eP0cJr7Otmiuvc4PZMHtMa1nai3mIgSJCYlSLmkYCw/s1600/s11+dorm.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgO8aCFON3c0vuAf7x-E4rmepQDagEM9EWqL1NUNIQtPZVt-cWX14wMebZSKC-crcELeTxUOr0ChhNSOYNNHHjUwdxb5Z23eP0cJr7Otmiuvc4PZMHtMa1nai3mIgSJCYlSLmkYCw/s400/s11+dorm.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"S11", a dormitory or worker camp in Singapore<br />
Photographer: Suhaimi Abdullah/Getty Images</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The segregation of COVID-19 numbers in Singapore's daily reporting is a mi<a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">sguided attempt to boost domestic morale through window dressing and impression management</a>. Don't panic at these high numbers; guest workers living in dormitories are not part of the community, they're not local, they're not permanent residents! This intrusion of politics into technocratic competency in Singapore's effort to manage the coronavirus pandemic is now affecting key policy. The minister heading the coronavirus task force announced yesterday in parliament that <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/tightened-circuit-breaker-measures-to-stay-for-another-week">our goal is to end the lockdown when new daily community cases</a> <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/covid19-circuit-breaker-community-cases-gan-kim-yong-parliament-12699946">are at low single digits</a>. <b>One can only infer this will be achieved by simultaneously discounting new daily numbers in the ongoing outbreak in the dormitories.</b><br />
<br />
This attempt to handwave away more than 90% of SARS-COv-2 infections in Singapore is not supported by medical science. From an epidemiology standpoint, what's happening in Singapore's guest worker dormitories is a classic community outbreak. Contact tracing has established early on that <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/covid-19-record-287-new-cases-spore-219-infections-linked-dorms-foreign-workers-who-had-visited">guest workers living in dormitories were infected through</a> <a href="http://tinysg.com/2-imported-covid-19-cases-from-msia-india-among-11-cases-linked-to-new-mustafa-cluster-news-from-singapore-asia-and-around-the-world/">a cluster at Mustafa Centre</a>, a megamall popular with Singaporeans, permanent residents, guest workers, as well as <a href="https://www.qantas.com/travelinsider/en/explore/asia/singapore/singapore/mustafa-centre.html">tourists from all over the world</a>.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Instead of following the science, the data presentation reveals the social hierarchy of Singapore as seen through the eyes of its leaders: The community consists of citizens and permanent residents who are on skilled visas and their dependents. Outside the community, there are unskilled work pass visa holders and then still further out, the 300,000 <a href="http://twc2.org.sg/2020/05/01/the-dorms-are-not-the-problem/">transient guest workers</a> in the property development industry who live in crowded purpose‑built dormitories, converted factories, and shophouses. Singapore's daily Covid-19 reports illustrate the <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3341588?seq=1">governmentality</a> behind these non-medical, non-scientific categorisations: which populations count and which don't count, which populations matter and which can be discounted.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0OfF0o4ISoxOiLFAsC0eSSjfXjdb9YZPmYtbfPNEZ3lpXfD7logMPqFPN6jFFUQBr-FrlWmWgM_rdGAFUNtFsy-mWeJeoEfJf8VzuJkCVT2k6pNnNmM2qn0KWjrkcRL9l3VcLwQ/s1600/MOH+segregation.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="797" data-original-width="920" height="277" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0OfF0o4ISoxOiLFAsC0eSSjfXjdb9YZPmYtbfPNEZ3lpXfD7logMPqFPN6jFFUQBr-FrlWmWgM_rdGAFUNtFsy-mWeJeoEfJf8VzuJkCVT2k6pNnNmM2qn0KWjrkcRL9l3VcLwQ/s320/MOH+segregation.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Table from Ministry of Health Covid-19 report for 4 May 2020</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b>Did Singapore forget the link between overcrowding and outbreaks?</b><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/emergencies/qa/emergencies_qa9/en/">Overcrowding is associated with a propensity for outbreaks of certain infectious diseases</a>. <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/003591572501801603">It is a fact known since modern medicine was in its infancy</a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Punish-Michel-Foucault/dp/0679752552">Certain institutions of the modern state exemplify the trend of increasing governmentality and rational control of bodies and populations</a>. We at Illusio further posit that they are further characterised by sanctioned and legalised overcrowding and subsequent medical-scientific measures, protocols, and rituals to circumvent disease outbreaks. Schools, prisons, and the military make up the classic trio of institutions but to this, we add hospitals and nursing homes in welfare states and dormitories (or worker camps) in labour input dependent economies.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRQNOSW8rw_K2xyMRGLlRxp6IVcYxJbQkkOzG-SpuZaAo4Y1BMcyDLuJjSEsYv1YGwKdcB0I6Ip_oKGkIDkyg2KQhyg-mo9fZjgP0TLyBPfgz8B1Y_CllLDeeSbCReOMLpKe6XcQ/s1600/dormitory+room+sg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="960" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRQNOSW8rw_K2xyMRGLlRxp6IVcYxJbQkkOzG-SpuZaAo4Y1BMcyDLuJjSEsYv1YGwKdcB0I6Ip_oKGkIDkyg2KQhyg-mo9fZjgP0TLyBPfgz8B1Y_CllLDeeSbCReOMLpKe6XcQ/s400/dormitory+room+sg.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A typical overcrowded dormitory room in Singapore, after new standards were imposed in 2016</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
During the early phase of the global coronavirus pandemic, nations across the globe focused their attention to all these institutions. We note that Singapore took somewhat proactive measures in these institutions except its worker dormitories, and the outbreak only happened because <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/was-singapore-just-unlucky-in-its.html">its decision to impose a lockdown was 2 weeks to a month late</a>. In order of what was done first starting in March, <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/singapores-prisons-remain-covid-free-due-to-precautionary-measures">prisons took immediate protective measures</a>, <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/coronavirus-no-visitors-at-all-nursing-homes-for-rest-of-april-split-zones-for-homes-with">nursing homes banned visitors</a>, <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/most-workplaces-to-close-schools-will-move-to-full-home-based-learning-from-next">schools were closed</a>, and <a href="https://www.mindef.gov.sg/web/portal/mindef/news-and-events/latest-releases/article-detail/2020/April/06apr20_nr">basic army training for conscripts suspended for the duration of the lockdown</a>.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjeSUBCy2b27YobHxgneSzAGGkxiTiaXoxoL5aTO_6yV54g_jEZ6w3_q4DhyphenhyphenIkkRPexHdveJ01YpJM6WXf2MMt4V7e1BPlwljtrxsKzJzBFErflyI6CfDGbkEDug630QmsfeIU2g/s1600/dormitory+room+gulf.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="394" data-original-width="700" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjeSUBCy2b27YobHxgneSzAGGkxiTiaXoxoL5aTO_6yV54g_jEZ6w3_q4DhyphenhyphenIkkRPexHdveJ01YpJM6WXf2MMt4V7e1BPlwljtrxsKzJzBFErflyI6CfDGbkEDug630QmsfeIU2g/s400/dormitory+room+gulf.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A typical overcrowded worker camp room in the Gulf</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Despite clear indications that the outbreak had broken out in the general guest worker population, Singapore's coronavirus task force decided to impose quarantines dormitory by dormitory, and <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/covid-19-singapore-new-cases-moh-may-3-12697698">only recently started to roll out mass testing its guest worker population</a>. Dormitory operators and employers in the construction industry seem to be aware of the dangers if not the signs of an outbreak, requesting guest workers to don masks in public in February and encouraging them to be tested at Singapore's hospitals before the <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/mom-send-workers-to-hospitals-only-if-its-a-medical-emergency">Ministry of Manpower issued a circular against this</a>.<br />
<br />
To be sure, in February tests were in development and low supply and meant to be used in hospitals on patients who had fallen ill from Covid-19. But for Singapore's Ministry of Manpower to openly scoff at genuine, legitimate, and well-placed health concerns by parties who were well acquainted with <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/measles-on-the-rise-with-17-cases-last-week-says-health-ministry">the dangers of disease outbreaks in Singapore's dormitories</a> and to call them irresponsible and threaten them with license cancellations is simply a policy failure, again indicative of a mentality that discounts guest workers in policy formulation, even crisis response formulation.<br />
<br />
<b>Why did Singapore take late action on dormitories?</b><br />
<br />
Singapore's liberal activists nurtured close contacts in the international media who are invariably activist journalists. It is no surprise that international coverage of the Covid-19 outbreak in dormitories adopt the same crusading tone as our activists, blame the same set of villains as our activists, and diagnose the same societal problem as our activists.<br />
<br />
Caution is needed before the full blame can be laid at the doors of Singapore's political leadership, its Ministry of Manpower, and its coronavirus task force. While the Ministry of Manpower appears to be overbearing in this instance, we note that in normal times (even after the <a href="https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/FEDA2015">Foreign Worker Dormitories Act</a> was passed in 2015) the whip hand has been with the construction industry and its dormitory operators.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOtoF8Gn-r5gSl60aR8CcM7IqANxGptloi7RhvddD_Wpwov5FA8htoHkj7iq0JvpQiZTiFzHloJFl_qtNYT0kKlY7Pkl2b5zpmbkJHSMNBwlZxejd7ehIV774MsoS8fJiZZH4-TA/s1600/monopoly+board+singapore.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1038" data-original-width="1080" height="384" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOtoF8Gn-r5gSl60aR8CcM7IqANxGptloi7RhvddD_Wpwov5FA8htoHkj7iq0JvpQiZTiFzHloJFl_qtNYT0kKlY7Pkl2b5zpmbkJHSMNBwlZxejd7ehIV774MsoS8fJiZZH4-TA/s400/monopoly+board+singapore.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Monopoly, Singapore edition.<br />
Or at any rate, one of the many official "Singapore editions"over the years.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Real estate is big money in Singapore. <a href="https://www.cbre.com/singapore/about/media-centre/singapore-remains-the-2nd-most-expensive-housing-market-in-the-world-after-hong-kong">Its property is among the most expensive in the world</a>. <a href="https://blog.moneysmart.sg/invest/singapore-reits-investing/">REITS are seen as sure-win bets in a normal economy and a standard investment vehicle</a>. Real estate is so big, the Singapore government's investment vehicle <a href="https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/temaseks-sgx-listed-trusts-averaged-422-return-in-3-years-dbs-is-portfolios-top">Temasek Holdings has significant positions in every major REIT</a>. Where do the fat profits go? Not to the guest workers who build flats, condos, malls, and the office blocks in Singapore's financial district, but to <a href="https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/will-golden-age-for-construction-firms-return">property developers</a> and their shareholders, then local dormitory operators and visa agents on both sides of the border. All the government can do is impose a levy on foreign workers, yet not too high a levy.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://marketbusinessnews.com/financial-glossary/regulatory-capture-definition-meaning/">Economic theorists suggest that industries that are too profitable and big cannot be effectively regulated</a>. A regulatory agency or commission may be appointed to oversee such an industry, but the end result is the industry players and lobbyists hold the whip hand. It is they who consent to the industry regulations they are willing to follow, and not the regulator who imposes guidelines for industry players to follow. What regulations industry players do not wish follow will are usually framed as an additional cost that must be passed down to everyone instead of being absorbed in any part by themselves. It is of course an attempt to privatise profits and socialise costs, which only works because of the power imbalance between them and the regulator.<br />
<br />
Josephine Teo's ministry is nominally in charge of drafting the dormitory regulations for Singapore's property industry. One of her responses to the dormitory outbreak illustrates the textbook definition of regulatory capture: <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/dorm-standards-should-be-raised-says-josephine-teo">"Each time we attempt to raise standards, employers yelp - these are added costs which they must eventually pass on. They ask MOM, 'Are people prepared to pay more?'"</a><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8WuM07G-jOb9wOmqbOtj6NnyGw1zIWtVF3of2W3gCKV-I2FsN96MsSm_vkgF3t3RGvXAvFOpOCcQgN-PTsvpStUzrs-drcPxWivkUBS0eJfX0efu2x-DusJyCjGISKqJEQ7aZcQ/s1600/fantasticmrfox+quentin+blake.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="493" data-original-width="764" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8WuM07G-jOb9wOmqbOtj6NnyGw1zIWtVF3of2W3gCKV-I2FsN96MsSm_vkgF3t3RGvXAvFOpOCcQgN-PTsvpStUzrs-drcPxWivkUBS0eJfX0efu2x-DusJyCjGISKqJEQ7aZcQ/s400/fantasticmrfox+quentin+blake.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Fox guarding a henhouse is a popular explanation for regulatory capture;<br />
illustration by Quentin Blake in The Fantastic Mr Fox</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/dorms-in-singapore-surpass-global-standards">That is not to say that Singapore's dormitories are the worst in the world</a>. Even ruthless capitalists have standards! As the dormitory owner explains, Singapore's dormitories exceed World Bank's minimum standards for worker housing in terms of amenities! At a regulated minimum of <a href="https://www.ura.gov.sg/-/media/User%20Defined/URA%20Online/circulars/2016/Sep/dc16-14/dc16-14-Appendix-D.pdf?la=en">3.5 square metres per person</a>, Singapore's dormitories come within striking distance of the <a href="https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/---emp_ent/---multi/documents/publication/wcms_116344.pdf">International Labour Organisation's recommended 3.6 sq m per person</a> for worker housing!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If you scroll up to the earlier photos of dormitory rooms in Singapore and work camp rooms in the Gulf, that's how 3.5 square metres per person looks like. Regulatory capture or no, these minimum standards endorsed by international bodies still make worker housing susceptible to the occasional outbreak like <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/measles-on-the-rise-with-17-cases-last-week-says-health-ministry">measles</a> or <a href="https://www.arabianbusiness.com/labour-camps-most-at-risk-from-swine-flu-top-official-19023.html">swine flu</a>, even with subsequent medical-scientific measures, protocols, and rituals to circumvent them.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>What can Singapore do about its guest workers and their housing?</b></div>
<br />
Moving quarantined guest workers to army barracks, offshore ships, and surplus housing flats is a temporary measure. As the minister Josephine Teo said, there will have to be changes to worker dormitories when all this is over.<br />
<br />
NMP Walter Theseira has suggested a Commission of Inquiry into the outbreak. Such an investigation would be superfluous and move too slow; the Ministry of Health's epidemiologists and contact tracing team are likely to be fully aware of the exact mechanism of disease transmission due to the extensive investigations as part of their work.<br />
<br />
Liberal activists have proposed the Commissioner of Foreign Worker Dormitories actually appoint his assistant commissioners. The commission was created by the 2015 FEDA to accompany new dormitory standards in Singapore. Regulatory capture rendered the commission powerless to discharge its duty of oversight and it was pointless for a powerless commissioner to appoint assistants. The failure to fill these posts did not cause the outbreak.<br />
<br />
We at Illusio believe that the conditions are ripe for the Ministry of Manpower to take back control of dormitory regulation and for the government to regain credibility in the eyes of the domestic and international public and come out on top.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPETX1_4EnmnqGcLo1qlCIbSG_4VesK6Khahrw3cRG5M9dTln5PiecFtbuHDbXf_dFWHpGj4ka-_ELpyXZYoe5fjMjBE2voCKhwVK3SrwHxWwdMZ2lpDPr9aKXHSPTWVOzfoz4GQ/s1600/uno+reverse.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="380" data-original-width="992" height="153" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPETX1_4EnmnqGcLo1qlCIbSG_4VesK6Khahrw3cRG5M9dTln5PiecFtbuHDbXf_dFWHpGj4ka-_ELpyXZYoe5fjMjBE2voCKhwVK3SrwHxWwdMZ2lpDPr9aKXHSPTWVOzfoz4GQ/s400/uno+reverse.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Some political scientists say that administrative governance is marked by a <a href="https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1084&context=faculty">punctuated equilibrium model of lawmaking</a>. "Some dramatic events, commonly observed and productive of the right kind of public narrative, serve to alter, if only briefly, the static dynamics that allow for private interest 'capture' of legislative and regulatory entities... Dramatic events can intensify public focus on particular policy questions, however, and enhance the possibility that the inherent advantages enjoyed by private regulated entities in the process of policy-generation can be reduced."<br />
<br />
This describes Singapore's dormitory outbreak situation to a T. Singapore's leaders must strike when the iron is hot or the chance to take back control will never come again for a long time. Such action can take the form of mandating new, higher dormitory standards, a higher levy rate, or as is our preference, a special tax that will be seen by the public as a righteous and moral penalty on the industry and its owners for failing to mitigate overcrowding in dormitories.<br />
<br />
As a parting shot, we leave Singapore's policymakers with a recommended set of talking points to sell their playing of the Uno Reverse card on the property development industry.<br />
<br />
1. Lessons are learned every day in our fight against the coronavirus<br />
2. We trusted the industry to do the right thing and to set their own standards<br />
3. Until it showed it was not up to the task<br />
4. It's not our fault there was an outbreak<br />
5. Ultimately it's the dorm operators, property companies fault<br />
6. We will build better dorms and make them pay for it<br />
7. For one time, construction companies cannot privatise profits and socialise costs<br />
8. This is an unprecedented situation and international bodies have not made new recommendations<br />
9. We will follow the science and best practices as they develop worldwide<br />
10. <a href="https://saudigazette.com.sa/article/591861/SAUDI-ARABIA/Up-to-SR10000-fine-for-violatinghealth-regulations-at-labor-camps">This is currently a minimum space of 12 square meters for the accommodation of each worker as the ideal physical distance between workers that would help avoiding transmission of any infection</a>akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-18320038662548976532020-04-26T08:00:00.000+08:002020-05-04T16:11:17.512+08:00Was Singapore just unlucky in its coronavirus fight?<b>For want of a nail?</b><br />
<br />
Singapore's coronavirus response has been lauded as a <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_asia/article/epgqda/singapore-containtment-coronavirus-lessons">golden standard for the international community</a>, an oasis of <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/singapore-was-ready-for-covid-19-other-countries-take-note/">technocratic competence</a>. In as little as 3 months since the virus arrived in Singapore, a <a href="https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/2020/04/23/singapore-coronavirus-second-wave/">massive outbreak</a> has hit its guest worker community and its sterling reputation.<br />
<br />
The media narrative paints a compelling story: Singapore is a poster child that merely got unlucky. Its technocrats had the situation in hand by following the protocols it developed from its encounter with SARS 2 decades ago. They had just an unfortunate, single blind spot in an area no one could predict. To use Benjamin Franklin's retelling of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Want_of_a_Nail">proverb of the nail</a>, "a little neglect" of Singapore's overcrowded and unsanitary dormitories led to the failure of Singapore's battle against coronavirus.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx8fKwsvyO7bq3u1NWzk4FtCIOoBrNbVClvQz5Y3tANaPkN6__p9FXtoSGvSyL6aHN5Bc5XzGSlUFajSN-raO2iE1GESCvAO0c41f68E8DMly2iXttweIf8-hoKCDK7dmZ_C4ACw/s1600/wallace+trip+For+Want+of+a+Nail.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1078" data-original-width="1600" height="269" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx8fKwsvyO7bq3u1NWzk4FtCIOoBrNbVClvQz5Y3tANaPkN6__p9FXtoSGvSyL6aHN5Bc5XzGSlUFajSN-raO2iE1GESCvAO0c41f68E8DMly2iXttweIf8-hoKCDK7dmZ_C4ACw/s400/wallace+trip+For+Want+of+a+Nail.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.wallytripp.com/">Wallace Tripp</a>, 1973 illustration from<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><u>A Great Big Ugly Man Came up and Tied his Horse to Me: A Book of Nonsense Verse</u></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a name='more'></a>Like claims that Chan Chun Sing did nothing wrong, this narrative works only in a vacuum of context. Singapore's response in the short period before Dorscon Orange was announced and proper measures kicked in was <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/03/did-singapore-do-everything-right-in.html">inconsistent, contradictory, faltering</a><cite class="left-aligned"><span style="font-style: normal;">—</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin" title="Benjamin Franklin"></a></cite>and even <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2020/04/can-singapores-politicians-listen-to.html">outright sneering and insulting</a>. Paying close attention to Singapore's handling of the coronavirus from Dorscon Orange on 9 February to the lockdown on 3 April will reveal that this is a far cry from the "golden standard" accolade heaped upon it by the mainstream media.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<b>But what did Singapore do right?</b><br />
<br />
Singapore's coronavirus response is based on the influenza pandemic protocols it developed from its painful and costly experience with SARS in 2002. Sufficient similarities between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 and strict adherence to this protocol enabled Singapore to keep the rate of transmission to single digits in February and early March.<br />
<br />
The SARS protocol consists of measures by both the general public and in hospital settings:<br />
<b>Frequent hand washing</b> is a hygiene measure which directly decreases infection in the public via touch and fomites;<br />
<b>Temperature screening at public areas</b> detects early symptoms and limits access by sick individuals (but aren't useful for a virus with a long incubation period);<br />
<b>Registration to enter public areas</b> facilitates contact tracing;<br />
<b>Twice-daily temperature checks</b>;<br />
<b>Rigorous contact tracing</b>;<br />
<b>Isolation protocols</b> protect hospital staff from infection by aerosol generating procedures critically ill patients and special ventilated rooms for confirmed and suspected patients;<br />
<b>PPE protocols</b> protect medical staff and patients from hospital acquired infections of the virus; and<br />
<b>Independent development of multiple tests by different organisations </b>reduce false positives and false negative rates and misdiagnosis.<br />
<br />
<b>What went wrong when Singapore did everything right?</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipyB2XTJE_EyrhC0mQq1wLY0FzD3Wlo7jORPsY4j7nZ5PBtLhQHp90T0BsbFWBt7t8OaU4tvkdb6jBcoCM0wv3uEIi3v2RZHOYE2_Ts3fLkcpSft3NvO1RBQOM0acSNXGEX0gcpA/s1600/things-on-the-exam-things-i-studied-37098199.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" data-original-height="392" data-original-width="500" height="313" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipyB2XTJE_EyrhC0mQq1wLY0FzD3Wlo7jORPsY4j7nZ5PBtLhQHp90T0BsbFWBt7t8OaU4tvkdb6jBcoCM0wv3uEIi3v2RZHOYE2_Ts3fLkcpSft3NvO1RBQOM0acSNXGEX0gcpA/s400/things-on-the-exam-things-i-studied-37098199.png" width="400" /></a></div>
Luckily for Singapore, SARS and Covid-19 are similar enough. Unluckily, it didn't realise there were key minor differences and <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/memorising-exam-answers-wont-score-you-the-as">continued to respond by sticking to its model answer</a>. Evidence from the global phase of the pandemic indicates the coronavirus is more infectious than the SARS virus and has a longer incubation period. Politicians sanctioned expert recommendations insofar as SARS era protocols were concerned but there appears to be resistance to adapting the existing SARS protocols to the novel coronavirus.<br />
<br />
<b>Social distancing</b> was seen as part of the quarantine measures an incompetent or unlucky West had to resort to. Yet Singapore's social distancing measures would not have been put in place if a "private group" of karaoke enthusiasts from the ruling People's Action Party's patronage network (the "People's Association" and "Residents' Corners") had not contracted the coronavirus in a <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/safra-jurong-covid-19-cluster-feb-15-event-was-cny-celebration-by-members-of-hokkien">lavish Chinese New Year celebration featuring </a><a href="https://www.sammyboy.com/threads/lo-hei-is-unhygienic.108689/">raucous communal food tossing</a>.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When the news broke out of their infection, Singaporeans took umbrage that these beneficiaries of Singapore's patronage system had organised a mass gathering in the face of global social distancing, and a defensive government had no good defense aside from <a href="https://www.gov.sg/article/factually-clarifications-on-falsehoods-on-safra-jurong-dinner">quibbling over minor details</a> and screaming "fake news".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Singapore's elected legislators continued to organise walkabouts and community visits, apparently in preparation for an imminent general election. Even after some weak social distancing measures were announced, politicians (<a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/coronavirus-opposition-party-leaders-call-for-calm-and-solidarity-with-frontliners">both ruling party and opposition MPs and candidates alike</a>) and their entourages visited multiple locations in a day, with the prime minister of Singapore even <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2020/03/23/pm-lee-goes-on-walkabout-in-ang-mo-kio-distributes-bottles-of-hand-sanitiser-to-patrons-at-teck-ghee-court-food-centre/">dispensing free sanitizers</a> and face masks to crowds.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcrE-lngxKp15q_LR14hjX7YeR_U59YJOc791hbKqL_O_XMLf_9M0830XRLnJX9r1t3fw32KjKWM3fSsALm9wVEO5Lnzfdz6htg59mdv413VvnK34L_xbqbvtVrEul0HUZcAnBDw/s1600/pm_lee_social-750x375.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="375" data-original-width="750" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcrE-lngxKp15q_LR14hjX7YeR_U59YJOc791hbKqL_O_XMLf_9M0830XRLnJX9r1t3fw32KjKWM3fSsALm9wVEO5Lnzfdz6htg59mdv413VvnK34L_xbqbvtVrEul0HUZcAnBDw/s320/pm_lee_social-750x375.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Composite photo courtesy of <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2020/03/23/pm-lee-goes-on-walkabout-in-ang-mo-kio-distributes-bottles-of-hand-sanitiser-to-patrons-at-teck-ghee-court-food-centre/">The Online Citizen</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And right in the middle of the lockdown, MP Dr Chia Shi-lu, a <a href="https://www.duke-nus.edu.sg/directory//detail/chia-shi-lu">practising surgeon who should know better than any layman</a>, <a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/covid-19-pap-suspends-all-ground-engagements-during-circuit-breaker-period-013803630.html">went on a spree distributing masks at hawker centres</a> and apparently took <a href="https://www.facebook.com/drchiashilu/posts/3112798135417863">selfies with just about every food vendor he met</a>. He claimed he observed social distancing laws set out by the government. He claimed he wasn't even campaigning, just educating the masses. <a href="https://mothership.sg/2020/04/pap-suspend-walkabout/">This not-walkabout has nothing to do with the ruling party's decision a day later to suspend walkabouts</a>. <i>The good doctor should know that social distancing also includes reducing social contacts and socialising, and lockdowns are designed to reduce these to a minimum</i>.<br />
<br />
For Singapore's political class, honoring the spirit was clearly far less important than fulfilling the letter of social distancing measures.<br />
<br />
Singapore missed or ignored signs that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is far more contagious and infectious. It missed out on early social distancing and did not pay sufficient importance to it. This may explain why nearly a month into Singapore's lockdown, a significant proportion of ordinary Singaporeans still do not take social distancing or even lockdown measures seriously.<br />
<br />
<b>But how did Singapore get blindsided by the outbreak?</b><br />
<br />
Singapore's adherence to SARS protocols enabled it to track the growth of the virus in a timely and accurate manner. New infections, critical cases, death counts and contact tracing details were provided daily by the <a href="https://www.moh.gov.sg/covid-19/">Ministry of Health</a>. Test counts started appearing on 7 April but have not been consistently updated.<br />
<br />
However, the presentation of daily data by the Ministry of Health suggests a tension between medical-scientific priorities and PR agendas. In the early months, the daily count was segregated into "imported" vs "local". When numbers started to experience a bump due to repatriated Singaporeans, the media pushed a narrative of a "second wave" of infections from returnees. When guest workers began getting infected, case numbers were then segregated into "foreign workers" vs "local", then "dormitory and long term work permit holders" vs "community", and then at publication time of this article, "community" vs "dorm residents" and "work permit holders not residing in dorms".<br />
<br />
The shifting granularity of this data presentation is based on a foundation of sand, not science. This is not the standard presentation of data by the <a href="https://covid19.who.int/">WHO</a> or even the <a href="https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/">Worldometer</a>. To put it bluntly, this is window dressing and impression management. Impression management is evident from the mode of Singapore's daily coronavirus briefings. Unlike the UK, US, or even Malaysian daily briefings, Singapore's is generally not televised or streamed for the public. They are chaired by a panel of a gaggle of ministers and just 1 solitary expert, with the ministers doing most of the talking - the opposite from say the sterling UK daily briefings. In Singapore, journalists listen to talking points and craft the message of the day for a public that isn't trusted to know better or to be invested in the developing crisis. This mode of communication is not merely elitist or patronising; it has the effect of divorcing the public from the coronavirus fight to the extent that they become apathetic and eventually resistant to adhering to protocols that may need to be implemented in an instant, such as a lockdown.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjRtgjbHeUnk0KxPh-zJn3UDi0FKXi7SJx1_PGwr4wB0Z95bKqzHHgFkWD-L666VimlEf8e2qhEY28UdMsnEQ0M800dS-vDNIpLLbT2xHI4-SolTshV4an8PaAo6HtSI-qDBKWlA/s1600/clusone+top.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjRtgjbHeUnk0KxPh-zJn3UDi0FKXi7SJx1_PGwr4wB0Z95bKqzHHgFkWD-L666VimlEf8e2qhEY28UdMsnEQ0M800dS-vDNIpLLbT2xHI4-SolTshV4an8PaAo6HtSI-qDBKWlA/s320/clusone+top.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Everyone participates in the danse macabre, highborn or low, spiritual or earthly their domain</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This attempt at impression management by segregating numbers is not justified by science. Whether an infected person is "imported" is irrelevant. They are or were physically in Singapore, interacting with its physical environs and interacting with the public in public settings like international conferences and social gatherings and commercial exchanges. Whether a person has returned from a different country where they were infected is irrelevant. They are now in Singapore, sometimes breaking quarantine orders to eat bak kut teh. Whether a person is a foreign worker residing in a dormitory or otherwise is irrelevant. Guest workers are physically in Singapore. They may return to their dormitories at the end of the day but they work here, are supervised by local or permanent resident foremen, take public transport, take naps at void decks, pray at local places of worship, shop at local malls, occasionally eat at local coffeeshops. What part of "community" do they not belong to? This segregation is just plain wrong given the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/careerpaths/k12teacherroadmap/epidemiology.html">epidemiological understanding of community</a>.<br />
<br />
Yes, guest workers are part of the community both in a social and epidemiological sense. They constitute a distinct sub-community but one that, to anyone familiar with epidemiology and network science, is intermeshed with "locals".<br />
<br />
This impression management is not just unnecessary and wrong, but harmful. Presenting a count of less than a handful of new "local" cases a day takes away the urgency and seriousness of the pandemic fight. People may not be in a state of constant panic, but they were certainly lulled into an apathy instead of being alerted into proper levels of concern. This again may explain why nearly a month into Singapore's lockdown, a significant proportion of ordinary Singaporeans still do not take social distancing or even lockdown measures seriously.<br />
<br />
This misplaced obsession with impression management and dressing up of case numbers blinded Singapore's coronavirus task force to the true second phase of a pandemic—the phase known as community seeding. Early global trends indicate a pattern of 8 to 10 days of case numbers doubling and the start of an outbreak. This tipping point was reached in the middle of March, where numbers had <i>doubled twice</i> in the space of a fortnight.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgI6dTJLsUj5F5SaWSzVmzXZ2-tfoMXde2u4WNX0p0G9EjsKFkwm8cVq1ydTubVOuCgUmLMt6CWkiKqdGFIzYzh3xzjF2sKiEi1eUOUFEN-_tEBXPB0fNU3EBA5Y4faqKd87FFlaA/s1600/doubling+graph.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="901" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgI6dTJLsUj5F5SaWSzVmzXZ2-tfoMXde2u4WNX0p0G9EjsKFkwm8cVq1ydTubVOuCgUmLMt6CWkiKqdGFIzYzh3xzjF2sKiEi1eUOUFEN-_tEBXPB0fNU3EBA5Y4faqKd87FFlaA/s640/doubling+graph.jpg" width="360" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Doubling pattern as depicted by ChannelNewsAsia</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But remember, the lockdown in Singapore only began on 3 April. From the numbers, Singapore's lockdown came 2 or 3 weeks too late. The dormitory outbreak began on 9 April. As incubation of the virus can take up to 14 days, it can be posited that delaying the lockdown directly led to the infection and massive outbreak in the dormitories of guest workers.<br />
<br />
While the politicians played games with the real numbers produced by the medical experts in the coronavirus task force, community seeding and a massive outbreak occurred right under their noses.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWPwVjwqiQAOqkKH8F0XI2TqSlEDZ_XXazVLRIVEjWjh87zJZqjmPjjqhPkVw_s_kjkLl8gLpHWuONnrWjEBAc0RvTaP5F6Uvv-wHez8chAh_-TELpCADYw50o5l1Fv-YA05NT2A/s1600/nero+burning+rome.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="462" data-original-width="950" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWPwVjwqiQAOqkKH8F0XI2TqSlEDZ_XXazVLRIVEjWjh87zJZqjmPjjqhPkVw_s_kjkLl8gLpHWuONnrWjEBAc0RvTaP5F6Uvv-wHez8chAh_-TELpCADYw50o5l1Fv-YA05NT2A/s400/nero+burning+rome.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nero and a burning Rome</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-27775783088753707502020-04-08T21:20:00.000+08:002020-05-05T20:58:34.545+08:00Can Singapore's politicians listen to the experts?<div>
We established in our previous post that panic buying is a human response to crisis. Panic is fed by the trio of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. In Singapore itself, the government dithered and delayed before the politicians put the technocrats in charge to deal with the global pandemic. Before that, various departments issued directives that were at cross-purposes with each other. These public failures of judgement and coordination fed the fear, uncertainty, and doubt in Singapore, which exploded into an wave of panic buying across the island when the authorities raised the national disease outbreak alert to Orange on 9 February 2020.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Trade minister Chan Chun Sing, a ministerial member of the multi-named task force, reacted with a furious, dismissive, and insulting <a href="https://mothership.sg/2020/02/chan-chun-sing-leaked-transcript/">rant some time later</a>, to a group of businessmen at the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He ridiculed the panic buyers, insulted them, and accused them of undermining Singapore's national standing and survival.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sure, minister Chan might not be a psychologist, sociologist, or a communications expert but was what he said that wrong? Didn't he say what everyone else was thinking? Wasn't this what we'd expect from a straight-talking former career general? Wasn't this highly strategic and forward thinking befitting a former Chief of the Army and a former front-runner for Singapore's next prime minister?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0srAlUstvwoo1QsmmtjrM-4KjFVx6y0Rtrn4j94Pf5iFeAtSsrWxTPCnOuXWz1HJCCOLd6LdTiDh-ufXGDeMbtVkvQnIWTOMOnH9-Yh3VU1w8tFuYDTP2HEkHOUg26KCx6UqjHQ/s1600/seventh+seal.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="664" data-original-width="1180" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0srAlUstvwoo1QsmmtjrM-4KjFVx6y0Rtrn4j94Pf5iFeAtSsrWxTPCnOuXWz1HJCCOLd6LdTiDh-ufXGDeMbtVkvQnIWTOMOnH9-Yh3VU1w8tFuYDTP2HEkHOUg26KCx6UqjHQ/s400/seventh+seal.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Playing chess with Death during the plague</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a name='more'></a></div>
<div>
<b>Can Singaporean leaders communicate?</b><br />
<br />
We note that despite being initially <a href="https://berthahenson.wordpress.com/2020/02/19/virally-speaking/">clearly unapologetic</a>, despite <a href="https://www.youth.sg/Peek-Show/2020/2/What-Singaporean-youths-think-of-the-leaked-audio-clip-saga">polling companies popping out of the woodwork to produce unsolicited surveys apparently conducted at their own expense</a> that sanction his spiel, the minister has nevertheless toned down his rough-hewn, salt of the earth, talk first shoot later, Trump-lite persona since this incident. But let us stick to the incident proper.<br />
<br />
In an absence of clear standards for what to say what a crisis strikes, it would be reasonable to give the minister the benefit of the doubt and chalk it up to his personal preferences and communication style. After all, the electorate is diverse and different messaging is needed to reach out to everyone. <br />
<br />
But as it turns out, there are clear standards for these things. There is such a thing as crisis communication. And as it turns out, there are experts who are paid very good money by government bodies all over the world to teach civil servants and leaders on how best to communicate with a fearful, panicking public in a pandemic. Some of them are altruistic enough to make public their <a href="http://www.psandman.com/col/panflu4-1.htm">teaching material</a>, <a href="http://www.psandman.com/handouts/AIHA-DVD.htm">course notes</a>, <a href="https://vimeo.com/35508141">videos</a>, and <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-commemoration/1918-webinar.htm">case studies </a>on the internet.<br />
<br />
There's even a training seminar commissioned by a health industry association that's available online, for visual learners.<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="autoplay; fullscreen" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/35506171" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
And as it turns out, the minister broke every major rule of crisis communication that is taught anywhere in his rant.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Peter Sandman's risk communication course materials set out the following observations of pandemics: Every new disease brings about uncertainty. This uncertainty may decrease over time as scientists learn more about the virus. Crisis communications require governments to retain credibility and command during the entire period. It's about communicating in a manner that <b>maximises and preserves trust, credibility, and the ability to command</b> even when the government and its experts are learning and unsure, and may even have to change their minds and public recommendations when they learn new facts.<br />
<br />
Sandman further recommends that governments be more open, to inform the public to give them choices for useful action, to share dilemmas, acknowledge uncertainty and unpredictability and their effects on policy, and to respect opinion diversity. He helpfully warns any overeager or panicking civil servant against <b>setting unrealistic goals</b>. In particular, he advises public health officials and coordinators:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<li>Don’t aim for zero fear.</li>
<li>Don’t forget emotions other than fear.</li>
<li>Don’t ridicule the public’s emotions.</li>
<li>Legitimize people’s fears.</li>
<li>Tolerate early over-reactions.</li>
<li>Establish your own humanity</li>
<br />
<br />
What's amazing is the minister managed to break all these rules with one rant. To add insult to injury, the minister exaggerate the panic buying into a national extinction level event. And to rub salt into the wound, he boasts that he made a gamble and released the national stockpile of surgical masks to placate the panic buyers!<br />
<br />
Similar courses on <a href="https://courses.laimoon.com/course/crisis-preparation-management/singapore">crisis management and crisis communications have been taught at the Civil Service College</a>. Granted that Chan Chun Sing is a minister but he was first a career civil servant and would've had access to the module, especially when it was taught by the excellent <a href="https://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/gia/article/diminished-leadership-in-crisis-communications">Viswa Sadasivan</a>. Perhaps as a general and Chief of the Army, this module or elective may have seemed a frivolity; experience proves otherwise.<br />
<br />
<b>Did the minister make a simple mistake or was this a major strategic disaster?</b><br />
<br />
There is evidence that minister did not make a rookie mistake; his rant was carefully planned, rehearsed, and polished. Such folly smacks of genius; a lesser mind would be incapable of it.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDl3s74esCuO23ZBAfhNy3q4DiHhbWRRb5rpotE2JRM5FPxIfD0ox45ZsSd2QCOLDy-MILc4ZKY5nrfKz5m08q5J47-HC0vPQ1HYruRbVcbwUgtwrOyTX1OwvKEXAsypC5nCkpyw/s1600/chan-chun-sing-v2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="747" data-original-width="804" height="185" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDl3s74esCuO23ZBAfhNy3q4DiHhbWRRb5rpotE2JRM5FPxIfD0ox45ZsSd2QCOLDy-MILc4ZKY5nrfKz5m08q5J47-HC0vPQ1HYruRbVcbwUgtwrOyTX1OwvKEXAsypC5nCkpyw/s200/chan-chun-sing-v2.jpg" width="200" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEga9CuzYQXNWkIDFWhmm-OOsVqhp7eupyxEEmECBB11xUzsxzZWxcMU5bbDAyVzDdcS-2CpktdIGAtH4sbWdthJ1dNz57F7f0v5qpc1JogGr4i46O1fJMFj5ixTthnWLxZkztuDaQ/s1600/alfred+e+neuman.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="494" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEga9CuzYQXNWkIDFWhmm-OOsVqhp7eupyxEEmECBB11xUzsxzZWxcMU5bbDAyVzDdcS-2CpktdIGAtH4sbWdthJ1dNz57F7f0v5qpc1JogGr4i46O1fJMFj5ixTthnWLxZkztuDaQ/s200/alfred+e+neuman.jpg" width="154" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
We at Illusio refer our readers to the <a href="https://mothership.sg/2020/02/chan-chun-sing-leaked-transcript/">transcript of the minister's rant</a>, which occurred some time before 17 February. It is an academic exercise to compare this rant to the gist of <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2020/02/10/panic-buying-undermines-international-confidence-in-singapore-says-minister-chan-chun-sing/">his public statement</a> made a week earlier on 9 February, or even to the whatsapp message the minister apparently forwarded to his grassroots leaders as deputy chairman of the People's Association on either 8 February or the mornign of 9 February.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dear GRL,<br />
below is a message from PA Deputy Chairman, Minister Chan Chun Sing (CCS) that he would like to share with all GRLs.<br />
———<br />
“Recent news of panic buying at local supermarkets has been circulating widely, both locally and internationally.<br />
When we panic and behave badly, it adds to the global negative impression of Singapore. People lose confidence in our cohesion and rationality. This has longer term consequences for us.<br />
When people run on essential items, it weakens our ability to negotiate and secure more supplies. That means we end up paying much more during such extraordinary times.<br />
If Singaporeans continue to behave like this, we will be finished before the virus kills us.<br />
Nobody will do business with us or believe in us anymore.<br />
These are serious implications that Singaporeans must understand. It is not just about being kiasu. It affects our national standing and survival.<br />
We are not just defending against the virus. We are defending our social cohesion and international standing.”<br />
- CCS</blockquote>
<div dir="auto">
The texts of the minister's rant, his public statement, and his message to grassroots leaders indicate a coherent message that has been carefully crafted and continuously worked on over the course of a week. Not only that; his rant, statement, and message appear crafted for the same audience: the public at large.</div>
<div dir="auto">
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
Yes, even the rant at the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The SCCCI is a business lobby group. Under what circumstances, in response to what type of questions by a business lobby group, would the minister engage full-tilt on his rant? Communications theory suggests: none. We at Illusio posit that the minister was so intent on repeating and promulgating the ideas in his painstakingly-crafted message that he forced it out at the SCCCI, regardless of the relevance to any question they might have asked him. The fact that the questions can all be taken out and the rant reads and sounds more or less coherent further proves the point.</div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
This wasn't just a momentary lapse on the level of <a href="http://siewkumhong.blogspot.com/2007/03/how-many-portions-of-help-sir.html">Vivian Balakrishnan's callous quip in parliament</a>. This is an error, repeated thrice, that shows to those still looking for signs of Chan's chances of still becoming the next prime minister, that he lacks good judgement even when, or <b>especially </b>when he tries his best to <b>strategerize</b>.</div>
<div dir="auto">
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
<b>Are there any lasting consequences from Chan Chun Sing's disaster communications?</b></div>
<div dir="auto">
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
For insulting the public, overreacting to the public's overreaction to a crisis, showing one's ignorance of history (this isn't the first time Singapore's seen panic buying, or any country for the matter) or even psychology (this is perfectly rational behaviour)... it is surprising and perhaps comforting that the minister has retained his membership in the Singapore government's multi-ministry Covid-19 task force.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVLkG7mB9ESYt8WyG4ul2SOyptO7EDjUMVjs-wiJKC4lCQzkDRiBom6c9Sw9eps6w-nW09RQKiGM3NynBv2RZ5CzElwrN7aqDNPJKs4w3s1NeYLmhx_mthifpUo0tHy96NjCx6XA/s1600/Bogus-Journey-Death.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="374" data-original-width="704" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVLkG7mB9ESYt8WyG4ul2SOyptO7EDjUMVjs-wiJKC4lCQzkDRiBom6c9Sw9eps6w-nW09RQKiGM3NynBv2RZ5CzElwrN7aqDNPJKs4w3s1NeYLmhx_mthifpUo0tHy96NjCx6XA/s400/Bogus-Journey-Death.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Chan Chun Sing's totally bogus game with Death</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
However, there are real consequences. Having a minister break faith with the public so decisively and visibly and without consequence, and a conspicuous lack of remedial messaging from his colleagues from the task force (such as acknowledgements of public fear and worry, reminders of <a href="https://www.scdf.gov.sg/docs/default-source/scdf-library/publications/publications/scdf-emergency-handbook_(eng_130917)_0.pdf">proper stockpiling protocol</a> which recommend ideally two weeks of supplies), panic buying will become a normal occurrence in this pandemic year, and has indeed become a regular feature in Singapore's Covid-19 pandemic experience. Public resistance has been baked in, at least in terms of panic buying. By writing off the public in his rants, the public in their minds have also written the minister off.</div>
<div dir="auto">
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
Perhaps the best remedial messaging would be this, as suggested by Dr Sandman: "Even if you say nothing about potential shortages, enough people will anticipate the worst to produce an immediate pre-pandemic run on supermarkets, hardware stores, drugstores, gas stations, banks, etc. You don’t have any good choices – only a dilemma you cannot escape. If you warn of shortages, you’ll be accused of contributing to panic buying. If you don’t warn of shortages, people will rush to the stores anyway, and you will be seen as an unreliable source. Warn of shortages. And <a href="http://www.psandman.com/col/enough.htm">share that communication dilemma</a> with the public.</div>
<div dir="auto">
<br /></div>
<div dir="auto">
In recent days, the minister has been insisting that <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/covid-19-coronavirus-no-reason-stockpile-food-essential-supplies-12574576">there is no need for the public to stockpile</a>. This is not only in contradiction to the <a href="https://www.scdf.gov.sg/docs/default-source/scdf-library/publications/publications/scdf-emergency-handbook_(eng_130917)_0.pdf">Total Defense handbook given to all Singaporean households</a> but other <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/foodwater/prepare.html">emergency advisories</a> to maintain a stockpile of 2 weeks' food, water, and medical supplies in an imminent emergency as well. In light of this, the minister's public statements continue to be not just wrong but outright irresponsible.</div>
<div dir="auto">
<br /></div>
We hope that when this is over, given how the minister has nevertheless toned down his rough-hewn, salt of the earth, talk first shoot later, Trump-lite persona since his rant, that he will be ceremoniously be put to pasture and posted to a position of irrelevance where he can do no further harm.<br />
<br />
And for the rest of us? A lesson that fighting an epidemic isn't just about doctors curing patients, experts recommending social distancing and lockdowns, but also how to communicate and manage public fear and uncertainty.</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="_3x-2" data-ft="{"tn":"H"}" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">
<div data-ft="{"tn":"H"}" style="font-family: inherit;">
<div class="mtm" style="font-family: inherit; margin-top: 10px;">
<div class="_6m2 _1zpr clearfix _dcs _4_w4 _41u- _59ap _2bf7 _64lx _3eqz _20pq _3eqw _2rk1 _359m _3n1j" data-ft="{"tn":"H"}" id="u_fetchstream_42_1w" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; border-radius: 0px; border: none; box-shadow: none; font-family: inherit; margin-left: -12px; margin-right: -12px; max-width: none; overflow: hidden; position: relative; z-index: 0; zoom: 1;">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-73775714807751952152020-03-19T21:14:00.004+08:002020-04-08T15:18:01.595+08:00Did Singapore do everything right in the coronavirus epidemic?<div class="separator tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Even in the developing global Covid-19 pandemic of 2020, the nation state of Singapore punches above its weight when the main action takes place in China, South Korea, Japan, then Iran and mainland Europe. Singapore—or some facsimile of it—is summoned, bound and fashioned by the intersection of medicine and politics.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Depending on the narrative, <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/s/615353/singapore-is-the-model-for-how-to-handle-the-coronavirus/">Singapore is a nigh impossible to imitate</a> <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/coronavirus-who-reports-92-cases-of-human-to-human-spread-outside-china">exemplar of epidemic containment</a>, a <a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/What-Singapore-s-coronavirus-tactics-can-and-can-t-teach-world">non-dysfunctional authoritarian-technocratic polity poised to seduce the democratic West and its allies in its hour of crisis</a>, an embarrassing failure because <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/leak-of-closed-door-chan-chun-sing-meeting-deeply-disappointing-and-a-betrayal-says">panic buying did break out</a> in its otherwise well-behaved, obedient, and acquiescent population, or an embarrassing failure because it was for several weeks, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-singapore-map-shows-spread-worst-hit-outside-china-2020-2?IR=T">the country with the highest incidents of coronavirus infections outside China</a>. Then there is the <a href="https://www.nti.org/about/projects/global-health-security-index/coming-soon-global-health-security-index/">Global Health Security Index</a>, whose inaugural October 2019 edition considered Singapore's pandemic preparedness far behind the developed West and even its neighbours in Southeast Asia.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Did Singapore really do everything right? How could it have done everything right if it wasn't expected to do everything right? Can Singapore's pandemic response be considered a success despite its populace succumbing to multiple bouts of panic buying?</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiye1RjW4tJEvA04g23T-eCjS_8Z0l_nd4bNd61UwvPZIlX8p9Mb0JJrITn1G_IUAxe_Z-ilf43GDjJkUD-7lNMBcWnHv2gUJezaWzl4gGLyo6Mh-WMBP4Mxq8xXT_8TxaiHpE6Wg/s1600/Plague_in_London%252C_1625.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="552" data-original-width="800" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiye1RjW4tJEvA04g23T-eCjS_8Z0l_nd4bNd61UwvPZIlX8p9Mb0JJrITn1G_IUAxe_Z-ilf43GDjJkUD-7lNMBcWnHv2gUJezaWzl4gGLyo6Mh-WMBP4Mxq8xXT_8TxaiHpE6Wg/s400/Plague_in_London%252C_1625.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Plague in London, 1625<br />
Title artwork from Thomas Dekker's pamphlet "A Rod for Run-awayes"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<a name='more'></a><b>Is panic buying as a sign of social breakdown, a national shame?</b><br />
<blockquote style="text-align: left;">
"But it was impossible to make any impression upon the middling people and the working labouring poor. Their fears were predominant over all their passions, and they threw away their money in a most distracted manner upon those whimsies."</blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: right;">
Daniel Defoe, A Journal of a Plague Year (1722)</blockquote>
Ignoring <a href="https://mothership.sg/2020/02/chan-chun-sing-leaked-transcript/">Chan Chun Sing's nationalist-moralistic rant</a> for the moment, a <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-10/why-rational-people-are-panic-buying-as-coronavirus-spreads">dispassionate analysis of the coronavirus panic buying phenomenon can and does exist</a>. Rational people can and do panic and then panic buy in response to imminent epidemics, war, and natural disasters because these events are so far outside their ordinary experience to process psychologically and to solve individually. They panic buy and hoard up to feel they are back in control instead of feeling not in control of the situation. Others see many people panic buying and think they ought to do something too, because frantic action is preferable to passive acquiescence to an impending doom.<br />
<br />
(This is why <a href="http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2020/02/14/2003730944">there was panic buying even in Taiwan</a>, which implemented immigration checkpoint temperature testing, strict border controls, mandatory quarantines weeks earlier than the rest of the world and has held on to the world's lowest Covid-19 infection rate crown despite its proximity to China.)<br />
<br />
With this explanation, it is possible to reduce panic buying behaviour to the 3 classic elements of mass hysterias (and also predict that bank runs, another classic mass hysteria, are likely to take place in the near future of this pandemic), <b>fear, uncertainty, and doubt</b>: Fear of how many people the coronavirus could infect and kill, uncertainty about the nature of the coronavirus, and doubt in the ability of the state to handle the epidemic.<br />
<br />
The first two are in the realm of epidemic medicine and for medical experts to solve, but the third is a an issue of crisis management and communication, solely in the hands of politicians. They are the ones who make the decision that the situation is serious enough to bring in the experts and implement their plans, and also to manage the fear, uncertainly, and doubt of the populace.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXHt3YimelznXGC5ThKQNGly0GszhNb-UAznriXoumqqBS8_ifAiOIHH45S3NE_FSHeAYBAtjv2mmNVrdRjeRU2ikeMiOgvrCGufrUURuV4G6jlHx8mCgx0dikf5EhuThNr52a9A/s1600/plague+doctor.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1148" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXHt3YimelznXGC5ThKQNGly0GszhNb-UAznriXoumqqBS8_ifAiOIHH45S3NE_FSHeAYBAtjv2mmNVrdRjeRU2ikeMiOgvrCGufrUURuV4G6jlHx8mCgx0dikf5EhuThNr52a9A/s400/plague+doctor.jpg" width="286" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Summon the epidemic experts!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Barring spectacular incompetence in a healthcare system or an incorrect epidemic response plan, the ball is the politician's to drop. European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen illustrates the point neatly with her <a href="https://news.am/eng/news/566826.html">recent admission of failure</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"I think that all of us who are not experts initially underestimated the coronavirus. We understand that measures that seemed drastic two or three weeks ago, need to be taken now"</blockquote>
It's not about who has the best pandemic plans. Almost everyone has some kind of foolproof plan to enact since the H1N1 and swine flu outbreaks. It's about when politicians decide they need to activate these plans, and it is their inaction during this epidemic that has created panic.<br />
<br />
<b>What did Singapore do wrong from the Wuhan outbreak to Dorscon Orange?</b><br />
<br />
If the president of the European Commission can admit to failure to take timely action despite knowing the correct measures to take, Singapore's leaders hopefully can concede that while its choice of epidemic control strategy and implementation has been correct so far, it too suffered a similar failure of timely action.<br />
<br />
A simultaneous reconstruction and deconstruction of the early Covid-19 timeline is sufficient to prove two worrying tendencies in the Singapore government to dither and delay what needed to be done, and put out messaging that is hardly reassuring to its populace, entirely tone deaf to the developing sense of crisis.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQSpLh18YqTzWsYql52NUQoaQ0yXdkPyMbglJFRYQgIpqJVkpi0BS_CUMKDfGBt9YCrtow-yqNNc0Z6bxW8HqkVervFD3N39a_NZrpn5I2B_CPE5fy8stMTisj1RGoiGuI-g61Lg/s1600/nero+burning+rome.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="462" data-original-width="950" height="194" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQSpLh18YqTzWsYql52NUQoaQ0yXdkPyMbglJFRYQgIpqJVkpi0BS_CUMKDfGBt9YCrtow-yqNNc0Z6bxW8HqkVervFD3N39a_NZrpn5I2B_CPE5fy8stMTisj1RGoiGuI-g61Lg/s400/nero+burning+rome.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nero Fiddling while Rome burns.<br />
That's what people remember, not Nero putting out the fire the right way afterwards.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>31 December: </strong>China alerts the WHO about a spate of pneumonia-like cases in Wuhan<br /><i>This is a few days after whistleblowers utilise social media break the news about the outbreak. In epidemic terms, the news can no longer be quarantined by the CCP.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>31 December: </strong><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/what-taiwan-can-teach-world-fighting-coronavirus-n1153826">Taiwan begins to monitor people travelling from Wuhan</a></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item">
<strong>1 January:</strong> The seafood/animal market believed to be at the centre of the outbreak is closed<br /><i>You'll never read a news article saying the virus was positively identified in any samples taken from the market because no samples were taken for inspection during the great clean-up. If this were a murder mystery, the CCP in Wuhan just destroyed a crime scene and all evidence in it.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>6 January: </strong>US CDC issues travel notice for Wuhan, China</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>9 January</strong>: WHO says the infection is caused by a new type of coronavirus</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item">
<strong>11 January:</strong> First death confirmed</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>12 January:</b> <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/what-taiwan-can-teach-world-fighting-coronavirus-n1153826">Taiwan sends experts to China, and shortly after begins requires hospitals to test for and report cases</a><br /><i>Taiwan sent its experts on a fact-finding mission and they do the right thing in the face of Chinese lies a few days later.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>14 January: </b><a href="https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/18/flashback-who-china-coronavirus-contagious/">WHO repeats Chinese claim that the virus is not contagious</a><br /><i>Caught suppressing evidence, the CCP now lies. The pattern of self-serving obfuscation that emerges from China feeds the fear that the virus is far more lethal and contagious than admitted and that China has already failed to contain the outbreak</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>17 January: </strong>US CDC implements health screening at US airports receiving travellers from Wuhan</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item">
<strong>18 January:</strong> <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51148303">Experts work out that the Chinese numbers have been suppressed</a> based on infections picked up outside China</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item">
<strong>20 January: </strong>Number of cases triples to more than 200,
and outbreak spreads to Beijing, Shenzhen and Shanghai; third death
confirmed; Chinese officials confirm human-to-human transmission</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>23 January: </b>China locks down Wuhan from other Chinese provinces<br /><i><a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Editor-s-Picks/China-up-close/China-s-inaction-for-3-days-in-January-at-root-of-pandemic">But as many as 5 million of its 11 million citizens had already left the city!</a></i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>23 January: </b>First confirmed case in Singapore, Wuhan tourist arrived 20 January</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>24 January:</b> 2 more cases in Singapore, more Wuhan tourists arrived 21 and 23 January</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>24 January:</b> <a href="https://www.ica.gov.sg/news-and-publications/media-releases/media-release/temperature-screening-to-be-implemented-at-the-land-checkpoints-from-24-january-2020">Singapore initiates temperature testing at land checkpoints</a><br /><i>Either Chinese tourists don't fly to Singapore at Changi Airport, or this is a clown show</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>25 January: </strong>Chinese New Year</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><i>Nothing to do with the dithering and delay? Nothing to do with the hundreds of thousands of Chinese tourists that vacation in Singapore every Chinese New Year?</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>25 January: </strong><a href="https://www.ica.gov.sg/news-and-publications/media-releases/media-release/clarification-that-travellers-from-wuhan-were-denied-entry-into-singapore">Singapore denies turning away travellers from Wuhan</a><br /><i>Fake news circulated on social media. Instead of assuaging fears and hopes by the fearful about Wuhan tourists importing the epidemic to Singapore, a circular is released on a government website.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><strong>25 January: </strong>(evening) 1 more case in Singapore, Wuhan tourist arrived 22 January</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item">
<strong>26 January:</strong> Taiwan bans flights from Wuhan</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>27 January: </b>China suspends group gravel to foreign countries<br /><i><a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Editor-s-Picks/China-up-close/China-s-inaction-for-3-days-in-January-at-root-of-pandemic">For 3 days after the Wuhan lockdown, China has allowed a massive exodus of Chinese holidayers out of the country despite the developing epidemic!</a> And individual travel is not suspended either!</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>27 January</b>: <a href="https://www.ica.gov.sg/news-and-publications/media-releases/media-release/referral-of-chinese-nationals-with-passports-issued-in-hubei-province-to-health-screening-stations-at-airports">Singapore starts screening arrivals from Hubei province</a><br /><i>Finally screening at the airport. Compare the dithering and delay to Taiwan. Also note this takes place after the suspension of group travel anyway by China.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>27 January: </b>US CDC advises against non-essential travel to China</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>27 January: </b>1 more case in Singapore, Wuhan tourist who arrived 18 January<br /><i>Are we getting the pattern here?</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>28 January:</b> <a href="https://www.moh.gov.sg/docs/librariesprovider5/default-document-library/additionary-precautionary-measures-to-minimise-risk-of-community-spread-in-singapore---28-jan-2020.pdf">Singapore starts quarantine measures on some visitors and PRs from Wuhan</a><br /><i>The measures are only for those the authorities deem "high risk", and not a blanket quarantine. This is days after Chinese researchers suggest asymptomatic spread.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>30 January:</b> WHO declares novel coronavirus a public health emergency</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>30 January: </b>China imposes lockdown on Hubei province, travel ban on rest of nation<br /><i>By this point, it is obvious that the Chinese lockdown is pure theatre; the virus has already escaped Wuhan to other provinces in China, and quite possibly abroad. This surely adds on to the global reservoir of fear.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>31 January:</b> <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2020/02/04/low-turnout-at-chingay-parade-amid-coronavirus-concerns/">Chingay Parade goes ahead with substantially reduced attendance.</a><br /><i>No, it's not a Chinese gay pride but a Singaporean Rose Parade held during the final days of the Chinese New year. And yes, sensible people were staying away from this potentially crowded event. Despite authorities insisting at first there was no cause for concern, then taking "<a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/enhanced-safety-measures-for-chingay-parade-2020-amid-wuhan-virus-concerns">enhanced security measures</a>" the day before.</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>31 January:</b> Singapore's "Multi-Ministry Taskforce on the Wuhan Coronavirus" finally imposes a travel ban on visitors with recent history to mainland China<br /><i>Took them long enough? It's time to impose the restrictions only after the last big event that attracts the big Chinese tourist numbers and dollars? Or is it time to impose the restrictions only after China belatedly locks down Wuhan, Hubei and every province?</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>1 February: </b>Singapore begins distribution of masks to households</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>3 February: </b>Singapore advises against non-essential travel to China</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>4 February: </b>Redditors notice China's official coronavirus numbers follow a neat quadratic curve that's way too neat.<br /><a href="https://www.barrons.com/articles/chinas-economic-data-have-always-raised-questions-its-coronavirus-numbers-do-too-51581622840"><i>This is eventually fact checked by experts and confirmed to be statistical massaging by mainstream outlets</i></a></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>4 February: </b>Malaysia reports its first native case; Malaysian attended international conference in Singapore 18-23 January</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>4 February:</b> First local cases in Singapore, picked up the virus from Chinese tourists who bought "Traditional Chinese Medicine" herbs from their shop<br /><i>Could it be some perverse form of medical tourism? Singapore is a medical tourism hub or has aspirations to be one!</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>5 February: </b>South Korea's CDC reports a case of a South Korean who attended the same conference 18-23 January</li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>7 February: </b>Singapore's Ministry of Manpower allows re-entry for China workpass holders but imposes a quarantine on them<br /><i>A loophole around 31 January travel restrictions?</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>9 February:</b> <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/wuhan-coronavirus-dorscon-orange-singapore-risk-assessment-12405180">Dorscon Orange alert in Singapore</a><br /><i>This is followed immediately by panic buying on toilet paper, rice, and surgical masks</i></li>
<li class="story-body__list-item"><b>16 February:</b> Singapore Airshow (aka military hardware market exhibition) not cancelled, even features <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/singapore-airshow-2020-sees-smaller-crowd-because-covid-19-visitors-unfazed-virus-threat">People's Liberation Army pilots performing</a><br /><i>I know it's way after the timeline but this is mindboggling from an alleged control freak authoritarian government that takes no risks.</i></li>
<br />
<br />
We at Illusio argue that the evident delay and dithering by the Singapore government and the contradictions between various departments working at cross-purposes are publicly visible failures of judgement exacerbated the growing fear, uncertainty, and doubt in its capabilities so that when <a href="https://www.ica.gov.sg/covid-19">epidemic measures were finally announced</a> in the Dorscon Orange level alert by the Singapore government, the hysteria that had built up led to panic buying.akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-68818174237776279732019-08-20T17:12:00.001+08:002019-09-16T12:49:53.774+08:00What is the rational solution to the Hong Kong protests?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGyNL8n8aIbBGN9MPfMWQdY73rrrGO2t8w3OkEEp_rJZrMDsWQaufr1urKb70Z1FEnyEm8zKGwGFmMzWR2TIdOZy5OIGauyK05X-SvkcIwnclE3QE81kd61bD8B6Q_3SbMqW-7Tw/s1600/HKtanks.gif" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1600" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGyNL8n8aIbBGN9MPfMWQdY73rrrGO2t8w3OkEEp_rJZrMDsWQaufr1urKb70Z1FEnyEm8zKGwGFmMzWR2TIdOZy5OIGauyK05X-SvkcIwnclE3QE81kd61bD8B6Q_3SbMqW-7Tw/s400/HKtanks.gif" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Thanks to Singapore's authoritarian and paternalistic leadership, its activists have never had a chance to commandeer a successful negotiation with the government. Deprived of such experience and pushed towards the "oppose, protest, and railblock" model of activism, these civil society actors fail to recognise that skilful negotiation is part and parcel of everyday social processes within a polity to moderate policy given disparate and competing preferences on the ground.<br />
<br />
From the point of view of Singapore's activists, the Hong Kong protests can only end in a "Springtime for Xi Jinping" (aka the coup from above) or a "Hong Kong Spring" (aka the revolution from below), both of which fit into their experience of activism as futile but dramatic political theatre but are in fact the least likely outcomes in even semi-democratic, moderately liberal, wealthy polities like Hong Kong. Little is expected from Singapore's activists aside from virtuous signalling that they "stand in solidarity" with Hong Kong and will shed the requisite amount of tears of appropriate joy or sorrow when the time comes. But what happens when we approach the protests rationally?<br />
<a name='more'></a><b>So what if we look at the the Hong Kong protests as a form of political negotiation?</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4zQhVDs-v2qi3W9OFtCK3zF4tnW0zL1SS4h6Q5c2LgO4PYTeqDd1Q9MNpqk-vu-d7Jup5uKVT5qubgLdidwpLPosLSA_2m_aMkcx7hfzsE_ZOEniIQD1qB_-M8L6d7Hq9IohlhQ/s1600/negotiations.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="339" data-original-width="400" height="271" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4zQhVDs-v2qi3W9OFtCK3zF4tnW0zL1SS4h6Q5c2LgO4PYTeqDd1Q9MNpqk-vu-d7Jup5uKVT5qubgLdidwpLPosLSA_2m_aMkcx7hfzsE_ZOEniIQD1qB_-M8L6d7Hq9IohlhQ/s320/negotiations.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
What happens when a protracted series of mass protests and demonstrations occur? How can we predict if these social movements will be co-opted or rejected, suppressed or boil over into revolution? The fields of political science, economics, and mathematics (in the form of rational choice theory, game theory, and democratic transition models) have been applied to case studies from the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to transitions to democracy in Eastern Europe, Taiwan, and South Korea, to populist revolutions and elite coups in Latin America. Their answer lies in how negotiations pan out, and in what circumstances they pan out.<br />
<br />
Despite their differences, the 3 existing varieties of theories agree that a protracted and predictable series of mass demonstrations tend to result in a period of behind the scenes negotiations between rulers and demonstrators. Preferences or preferred outcomes of each faction are communicated during the period of protests. But during the negotiation process, an additional sub-faction game plays itself out: hardliners, reformers, opposition radicals, and moderates on either side make rational decisions based on their preferred and tolerated payoffs, factional strengths, and to reach across the aisle while throwing a sub-faction of compatriots under the bus.<br />
<br />
Let's now look at the Hong Kong situation of One Country, Two Systems - the alleged root of Hong Kong's political, policy, and governance dysfunction and a target demand for reform by the current protest movement.<br />
<br />
<b>The Zero person game</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9mFmbJjawGwgO2sf9dDZrtzIUiKWDKDMFVOOdzpxFKDNZzaKRE8zWoKtkEpgM6JK-98iz4XHP8qxgiUzNV_xLD0yE6jbtQB8iTadd3POvBRFu8YLnayKj38pQlJCGZc_H6naYJQ/s1600/invisible+hand.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="397" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9mFmbJjawGwgO2sf9dDZrtzIUiKWDKDMFVOOdzpxFKDNZzaKRE8zWoKtkEpgM6JK-98iz4XHP8qxgiUzNV_xLD0yE6jbtQB8iTadd3POvBRFu8YLnayKj38pQlJCGZc_H6naYJQ/s320/invisible+hand.jpg" width="317" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wealth created by an invisible hand is more real than wealth created by central planning</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Assuming China had no specific agenda for Hong Kong, no plans for premature Sinification, the fate of Hong Kong after its 50 years of autonomy would be <b>more years of autonomy and Hong Kongers have no rational reason to revolt or protest</b>. The original intentions of the drafters of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law in 1985 and 1990 appear to be this: Hong Kong as an already-existing financial hub contains the capitalist and democratic institutions necessary for its continued success. It can make China as prosperous if adopted as a model. Even if China were to make itself an economic powerhouse through state-directed means, Hong Kong as a continually and independently prosperous financial hub would still serve as the Chinese insurance policy against the unexpected flaws and crises of state-directed economic development, and a gateway from which dodgy Chinese state-created wealth can be turned into internationally accepted coin.<br />
<br />
It's like the old Russian joke: Even if the Communist revolution succeeds, the Soviet Union will demand that Switzerland be preserved as the only capitalist state in the world - because communists need to know the market price for goods from somewhere!<br />
<br />
<b>The Peking game and the prisoners' dilemma</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRfBQXBt1VbROkENaansE9jk8n11dYvhh5f40q7SYkI-Hssnmt2O8891zB8rAU9_zUVyRaUF4X2D-9mkVvFfUL2N8AAPZWVPv-xOJFXjHMHgzrGJ6riDPUr2YkFpR3J1DFx-ljXA/s1600/prisoners+dilemma.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="723" data-original-width="1322" height="218" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRfBQXBt1VbROkENaansE9jk8n11dYvhh5f40q7SYkI-Hssnmt2O8891zB8rAU9_zUVyRaUF4X2D-9mkVvFfUL2N8AAPZWVPv-xOJFXjHMHgzrGJ6riDPUr2YkFpR3J1DFx-ljXA/s400/prisoners+dilemma.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Regime apologists typically ask: Why protest and resist when Hong Kong is going to be Chinese sooner rather than later? Why insist on a lose-lose outcome, aka the immediate destruction of Hong Kong (presumably by a Springtime for Xi Jinping scenario)?<br />
<br />
The drafters of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law that didn't count on China developing a version of capitalism with Chinese characteristics, where it would promote and enrich loyal oligarchs and subsidise key industries in their bid to be global behemoths. Not only that, but its policy over the past 2 decades are obvious: Peking intends to sideline Hong Kong into a second-tier Chinese city, tolerate the local tycoon cartel who are responsible for its policy failures and legislative gridlock, and erase the city's autonomy way ahead of schedule.<br />
<br />
Game theory responds: Where is the benefit Hong Kongers for going along with Peking's attempt to Sinify the city? Absent of any positive payoff, the rational choice for Hong Kongers is to play the Chicken Game with Peking. How eager is Peking to destroy Hong Kong immediately and deprive itself in the remaining decades of having an insurance policy, gateway, and financial hub to launder its dodgy wealth into internationally acceptable coin?<br />
<br />
<b>Wrinkles in the negotiation game</b><br />
<br />
The Hong Kong protests are famously "uncoordinated" even if not quite spontaneous. This is no doubt a practical response to the Hong Kong government cracking down on leading Umbrella protest activists, but has the downside of removing negotiators from the equation.<br />
<br />
Who can represent the protest movement? How can the pro-reform legislators in Hong Kong's dysfunctional government initiate and sponsor negotiations with "Chief Executive" Carrie Lam, the pro-Peking factions, or the tycoon cartel's representatives in Hong Kong government? How will a negotiation process and a negotiated compromise look without representatives from the protest movement?<br />
<br />
But it's not the entire fault of the protesters. Who can and should negotiate for Hong Kong? Its chief executive? Xi Jinping and his party apparatus in Peking? Peking's supporters in Hong Kong legislator? The tycoon cartel? <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbHXwjCLnBc">Lam may not have the autonomy to negotiate any reform, if she has any real autonomy and decision-making powers at all</a>. Peking stepping in and solving the problem (even with a non-violent, less authoritarian but vaguely reformist compromise) exacerbates the problem of a Legislative Council that is not fit for purpose.<br />
<br />
<b>The endgame</b><br />
<br />
The upside is that <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49149477">Peking has already publicly hinted who it is willing to throw under the bus</a>. In its immediate response to the initial outbreak of violence in the protests on 28 July, the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office chief offered his empathy for Hong Kong youth and their struggle for "affordable housing and employment" - social goods that the Hong Kong government has failed to deliver, with the connivance of the self-enriching tycoon cartel.<br />
<br />
Based on the following criteria:<br />
Protests do not peter out in numbers and frequency when school term resumes in September (or, if the protests are temporarily suspended for school term, they resume later without petering in numbers and frequency);<br />
Protests do not spiral out into more violence;<br />
Protests maintain wide support across Hong Kong society while not tipping the danger point;<br />
Pro-Peking demonstrations continue unhindered in their current numbers,<br />
<br />
we make the following set of predictions:<br />
Peking unilaterally throws either Lam or a few members of the tycoon cartel under the bus. Who gets thrown depends on the LamBot having another embarrassing public malfunction or a tycoon or two becoming the focus of future demonstrations, whichever happens first;<br />
The reform deal will deliver a "liberalised functional representation" rather than a universal suffrage system; and<br />
Peking to remain at the border with its armoured personnel carriers conducting "exercises" for public consumption.<br />
<br />
We propose that "Springtime for Xi Jinping" is an implausible scenario. A violent crackdown is out of the question based on the widespread support for the protests. In other words, it's not just university students unlike Tiananmen. It's a wide swathe of civil society, and Hong Kong society. A violent crackdown will thus alienate Peking from Hong Kong society instead of repressing the protest movement. Demographically, the attendance at the protests put China at a severe disadvantage. <a href="https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3022345/young-educated-and-middle-class-first-field-study-hong-kong">The protesters and their supporters are far younger and better educated than the average age of China</a>. It is they who can wait the issue out to the expiry date of Hong Kong's autonomy while <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2017/02/21/chinas-aging-population-becoming-more-of-a-problem/">China's population ages way before it becomes a rich nation, much less consolidate its wealth</a>.<br />
<br />
Still, politics is a game of skilful negotiated outcomes, and there is no guarantee that Peking, the Hong Kong protesters, Carrie Lam, or the tycoon cartel, having made countless missteps along the way, will not make any blunders in the near future.<br />
<br />
<b>Recommended reading</b><br />
<span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "arial" , "verdana" , "trebuchet ms"; font-size: 15px;">Josep Colomer. 2000. Strategic Transitions: Game theory and Democratization.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "arial" , "verdana" , "trebuchet ms"; font-size: 15px;">Karl Dieter-Opp, Peter and Petra Hartmann. 2018. T</span><i style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Arial, Verdana, "Trebuchet MS"; font-size: 15px;">he Rationality of Political Protest. A Comparative Analysis of Rational Choice Theory</i><br />
<span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "arial" , "verdana" , "trebuchet ms"; font-size: 15px;">Karl Dieter-Opp, Peter Voss and Christiane Gern. 2008. </span><i style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: Arial, Verdana, "Trebuchet MS"; font-size: 15px;">Origins of a Spontaneous Revolution.</i><br />
Yi Feng and Paul J Zak. 1999. The Determinants of Democratic Transitions, <i>Journal of Conflict Resolution </i>43(2):162-177<br />
Adam Przeworski. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America.<br />
Barry Weingast. 1997. The Political Foundations of Demoracy and Rule of Law, <i>American Political Science Review</i> 91(2):245-63.<br />
Jakub Zielinski. 1999. Transitions from Authoritarian Rule and the Problem of Violence, <i>Journal of Conflict Resolution</i> 43(2):213-228.akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-42324959503082410082019-08-14T21:12:00.001+08:002019-08-18T19:54:53.552+08:00Are the Hong Kong protests unjustified, pointless, and futile?<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgel_J112LgPhUTlKIi9N6rTdc3HP8NvgYwTVtZTEBHdBr7JHkSyukvb41MAAba8LnEOEcZnHpYVMPTxktIUFcL35704tfWdDc2ikAYtam58c2QT0_Bl__K_-LVnez-jPwvJE5y9A/s1600/HKtanks.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1600" height="205" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgel_J112LgPhUTlKIi9N6rTdc3HP8NvgYwTVtZTEBHdBr7JHkSyukvb41MAAba8LnEOEcZnHpYVMPTxktIUFcL35704tfWdDc2ikAYtam58c2QT0_Bl__K_-LVnez-jPwvJE5y9A/s320/HKtanks.gif" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Does this fate await Hong Kong?<br />
Why would its people protest knowing this will happen?<br />
(cartoon copyright of <a href="https://latuffcartoons.files.wordpress.com/">https://latuffcartoons.wordpress.com</a>)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a>Two months following the outbreak of apparently spontaneous, popular, and uncoordinated protests against Hong Kong's government, Hong Kong's people and its allegedly autonomous government are nowhere near a settlement. Instead, things have intensified. The protests have breached decades of civil society norms and sporadically turned violent (both physically and <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-48829298">symbolically</a>), while the government has employed <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/30/world/asia/did-hong-kong-police-abuse-protesters-what-videos-show.html">force</a><br />
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/30/world/asia/did-hong-kong-police-abuse-protesters-what-videos-show.html">that even crowd control experts elsewhere in the world find</a> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/18/world/asia/hong-kong-tear-gas.html">unjustified and excessive</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/12/hong-kong-protests-brutal-undercover-police-tactics-spark-outcry">fielded undercover cops</a> as <a href="https://youtu.be/1mIMUOOGkyw">agents provocateur</a>, and allegedly rented<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/these-are-thetriad-gangs-linked-to-hong-kong-protester-attacks/2019/07/24/91b6e2f2-adf8-11e9-9411-a608f9d0c2d3_story.html"> gangsters to beat up protesters in public</a>.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
There is a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/world/asia/hong-kong-protests-china.html">disinformation war</a> waged by the Chinese Communist Party which will meet its match in a <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/hong-kong-protesters-raise-1-5m-in-a-day-to-fund-global-ad-campaign-11784689">crowdfunded international advertising campaign from the protesters</a>, while mere kilometers away, Chinese tanks have amassed at the border between China and its "Special Autonomous Region" of Hong Kong.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Have no doubt that this protest has already internationalised; without knowing, we are already consuming Chinese influence operations either from Peking or via its collaborators and useful idiots in your local area. We at Illusio urge you not to ignore the narratives from Peking, Hong Kong, or any faction, but to cast a critical eye on them.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b>An unruly mob that needs to be stamped out?</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXnIMWQoBC_DySXxfyjat6BUpNmGPLNBytZdHw7qA6Ih5UV6W1uJpJ5vzOK97HhP5DzBCSi5rB_WHqfZnHIinYqsJurlVxlzLS06jHrNpynMbAPKN5XjDsIRndbLtbObUExlMN1w/s1600/1984+boot+on+face.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="326" data-original-width="490" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXnIMWQoBC_DySXxfyjat6BUpNmGPLNBytZdHw7qA6Ih5UV6W1uJpJ5vzOK97HhP5DzBCSi5rB_WHqfZnHIinYqsJurlVxlzLS06jHrNpynMbAPKN5XjDsIRndbLtbObUExlMN1w/s1600/1984+boot+on+face.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hong Kong's future, either way: a boot stamping on a human face, forever?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The authorities in Peking have begun to characterise the protestors as <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/13/asia/china-hong-kong-terrorism-intl-hnk/index.html">terrorists</a> and agents of foreign interference. There is naught to do but to laugh heartily at their delusion that this would sound convincing to anyone outside its totalitarian state. It is also par for the course for a regime that <a href="https://quillette.com/2019/08/05/china-and-the-difficulties-of-dissent">harasses, imprisons, disappears, or murders those who demand the right to vote, much less engage in protests</a>. For a regime whose fear of the rise of a liberal young, educated, middle class made it choose to massacre an entire generation of youths in 1989, <a href="https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3022345/young-educated-and-middle-class-first-field-study-hong-kong">the demographics of this year's Hong Kong protest</a> will no doubt set off Xi Jinping's Pavlovian reflex.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
While there is certainly no credibility to Peking's rhetoric so far, it does signal the Communist Party's consistency to its mainland audience, that there will be no embarrassing climbdown on its part. Within the domestic CCP power structure, strongman Xi Jinping is in such an unparalleled power of authority that he is effectively trapped in a position of no retreat, no surrender - even when negotiations and compromises are necessary to resolve the situation.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<b>Is it the economy, stupid?</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3SxHbXa4BsqsFZ6YVj2_69lMJ9HiSLVcje5qJFded7xeeDdUVmpawG5OIWVf_PYgMsHD2BzAGvEzzLmvxLhGIPUGmvEIrRGB5IOCUQNAp9oY4qBHZ4GGYGVlZaFjZFjhULHKjvg/s1600/clinton+economic+stupid.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="320" data-original-width="311" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3SxHbXa4BsqsFZ6YVj2_69lMJ9HiSLVcje5qJFded7xeeDdUVmpawG5OIWVf_PYgMsHD2BzAGvEzzLmvxLhGIPUGmvEIrRGB5IOCUQNAp9oY4qBHZ4GGYGVlZaFjZFjhULHKjvg/s1600/clinton+economic+stupid.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Leslie Fong was once <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/sph-veteran-leslie-fong-retires">Singapore's former state newspaper chief</a> and now special correspondent at the South China Morning Post. Fong is remembered by top journalists and editor PN Balji as a newsman who protected his staff against temper tantrums from thin skinned ministers. The average reader of The Straits Times would be more familiar with Fong's full throated op-ed defenses of the PAP government and its ideology. Imagine if you will, Fong working at a Chinese Pravda, since the Hong Kong paper was bought over by a Chinese oligarch. Then imagine Fong repeating his professional regime apologist schtick there. Speaking for himself only but hiding under the guise of unnamed "thoughtful Singaporeans", Fong opines that <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2019/07/05/film-producer-lynn-lee-slams-former-editor-of-st-for-his-article-that-condemns-hong-kong-protesters-in-1-july-protest">the protests have deep socioeconomic roots (aka "bread and butter causes")</a> and the current kerfuffle can be resolved by the rioters allowing the Hong Kong government to apply itself to that set of problems (chief amongst which appear to be the public housing crisis - both increasingly unaffordable and 99 year leases all set to expire soon!)</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Similarly, Singapore's minister for law K Shanmugam, who appears to be not just a Marxistfinder General but also a historian and economist, has gone on record stating his belief that <a href="https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2019/08/14/law-and-home-affairs-minister-k-shanmugam-worried-for-hong-kong-over-ongoing-protests-criticises-international-media-for-muddied-narrative-of-events/">socioeconomic problems in Hong Kong are the base of the protests</a>.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
There is naught to do but laugh with Singapore's establishment, for they are burying Hong Kong with the faintest of praise.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Governments exist to deliver social goods for all, and a public policy that satisfies a plurality of the popular vote. Socioeconomic problems and policy disagreements are routinely solved as a matter of government business by functioning representative democracies, even those with SAR Hong Kong's <a href="https://thediplomat.com/2016/09/what-exactly-is-hong-kongs-legislative-council/">limited representation system</a>. Policy and socioeconomic problems do not cause popular protests in functioning representative democracies, precisely because the popular ballot is a mechanism par excellence that ensures public policy aligns with public interests in the long run, tempering hardline policy to avoid revolutions from the masses or coups by the elites.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
In fact, Hong Kong's colonial history has shown that its legislative council can and did moderate its policies upon popular protests, no matter how the protests were dealt with.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
The statements by Singapore's establishment figures, while positioning as either a "pro regime pundit" or "credible governance theorist" faction, can only imply that <b>Hong Kong's government and political system is not fit for purpose</b>, that it has failed to deliver social goods for a long time, and that it is not just tone deaf or arrogant, but incapable of aligning public policy to popular demands and needs.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<b>One country two systems to blame? Functional representation to blame?</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
We now examine the claims of the officially uncoordinated, spontaneous, leaderless protest movement in Hong Kong -- insofar as any claim can credibly, reasonably, and realistically be made by an allegedly spontaneous, uncoordinated, leaderless protest movement which continues to refuse to appoint representatives to negotiate with the Hong Kong government.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/13/what-do-the-hong-kong-protesters-want">The five demands</a>, apparently also formed out of the void in a similarly spontaneous, uncoordinated, leaderless manner as the protest movement, are:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioBmWlAFNJMrcgAHBo-TlBcqsF7QfzbCmB67ZpovSiQrD7-fn7Et9DwDXFYxlCXcbFpP0Ol7WVrdU8ww1Dk8-Y50k5402ew6WNPxRKgShtr9PK6oxaoaPuaKWS_BP6L05tUQgbqg/s1600/HK+demands.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1200" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioBmWlAFNJMrcgAHBo-TlBcqsF7QfzbCmB67ZpovSiQrD7-fn7Et9DwDXFYxlCXcbFpP0Ol7WVrdU8ww1Dk8-Y50k5402ew6WNPxRKgShtr9PK6oxaoaPuaKWS_BP6L05tUQgbqg/s400/HK+demands.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
We note that none of these demands mention any of the socioeconomic problems that Leslie Fong and minister K Shanmugam, presumably reasonable, responsible and respectable men, have pinpointed as the root cause of the protests. It cannot be that we are wrong about Fong and Shanmugam being reasonable, responsible and respectable men; rather, their analysis must be, while correct, not entirely correct and somewhat off the mark.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
The extradition bill may have sparked the initial protests but they only grew in popularity because of the Hong Kong government's response: initially tone deaf, then increasingly entrenched and unresponsive to feedback, dismissive of the popular consensus, then outright hostility in its blatant use of excessive force, the local triad, undercover cops, and suspected deployment of undercover Public Security Bureau or <span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">公安局</span> operatives/hoodlums from across the Chinese border.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<i>Governments exist to deliver social goods for all, and a public policy that satisfies a plurality of the popular vote</i>. The extradition bill is not seen as a social good, nor is it accepted by a plurality of Hong Kong citizens.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<i>Policy problems and disagreements are routinely solved as a matter of government business by functioning representative democracies. The popular ballot is a mechanism par excellence that ensures public policy aligns with public interests in the long run.</i> By signalling consistently over the years that it is far more interested in demolishing Hong Kong's autonomy (way ahead of schedule under the Basic Law) than delivering public goods and a coherent public policy, it is no wonder that it has steadily lost public trust. The fact that the same coalition of legislators keep getting elected under the system despite the lost of trust and inability to deliver is a sign that the system is unable to self-correct via the ballot box - leaving protests and demonstrations as the electorate's only option of political negotiation.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Hong Kong's functional representation system is incapable of electing legislators who can form a workable government that is accountable to its people. It is even incapable of electing legislators who are even willing and able to work for the interests of the people they represent, while being far more pliant to the interests of the autocrats in Peking and the tycoon cartel in Hong Kong. This problem is inherent to the system and has been highlighted by political scientists since <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22hong+kong%22+%22functional+representation%22&btnG=">shortly after the handover</a>.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Fong and Shanmugam have fatally misdiagnosed the problem: it is not socioeconomic but political. Hong Kong's housing issue, public policy failures, and even the extradition bill problem cannot be solved without political reform of its broken functional representation system. The question, as with all protests, is whether a negotiated settlement featuring best compromises by interest coalitions can be possible under the so-called One Country, Two Systems arrangement between Hong Kong SAR and Peking. But that is the topic for our next discussion!</div>
akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-55374050866974077822019-05-15T22:52:00.001+08:002019-05-16T08:57:23.265+08:00How will Singapore's leaders use its new Fake News law?<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48196985">On 8 May 2019</a>, the Singapore parliament passed the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulations bill into law. As of the time of the publication of this blog post, either the president has not given her assent or the minister has not made the decision to commence the law in the <a href="http://www.egazette.com.sg/gazetteViewDetail.aspx">Gazette</a>.<br />
<br />
We noted earlier that even though the ruling People's Action Party has a supermajority which ensures the passage of any bill proposed by the cabinet, the key issues have always been whether the cabinet can gain the confidence of stakeholders and industry interests in the bill, whether there will be corrections or clarifications of the more unsettling portions of the bill, and whether the bill passed would satisfy that audience.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLtFnQyasgJF2SLFx_T3O6PxxcVLn9uSdfA09Ocn00cjhi9khJH-tl4sYsLuMU8V1jDQpVZJ9Y2weKwRjDuFrLg7TsLOUzkBlJI4irUHY6AN9lHeVyoU_ZZfKGq6zMCMYBKUJQpg/s1600/Power-resides-where-men-believe-it-resides-1170x550.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="550" data-original-width="1170" height="188" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLtFnQyasgJF2SLFx_T3O6PxxcVLn9uSdfA09Ocn00cjhi9khJH-tl4sYsLuMU8V1jDQpVZJ9Y2weKwRjDuFrLg7TsLOUzkBlJI4irUHY6AN9lHeVyoU_ZZfKGq6zMCMYBKUJQpg/s400/Power-resides-where-men-believe-it-resides-1170x550.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Power is power, or is it? The power to pass laws is absolute power, or is it?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
A snapshot of attitudes, comments, and actions from stakeholders and members of the industry in the run-up to the debate suggest that clarifications at the very least had to be made and made convincingly, especially if no corrections or U-turns could be afforded by the cabinet on the bill.<br />
<br />
So did the parliamentary debate provide suitable clarification to gain the confidence of industry interests and stakeholders?<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
(Note that appropriate links and quotes from Singapore's online "Hansard" or <a href="https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/home">Parliamentary Report</a> from the 7 and 8 May debate will be made available on this blog when they are published on the parliamentary website)<br />
<br />
<b>Two clarifications that were made</b><br />
<br />
We at Illusio welcome two major clarifications made by the cabinet during the debate, which establish legislative intent of the bill.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvLLS8jD3UMmweMg7LJ8eybJfHFFT_sC6HVT9U3c6A94C8YokJ9ewjkDu1_4KmoybKKE9J4oBNMzNNuaY4SoTdFOa5XwlFoQljbX766pnVolGl8G_H8DQDrOaVLGfszEvebcLzsw/s1600/shan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="462" data-original-width="696" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvLLS8jD3UMmweMg7LJ8eybJfHFFT_sC6HVT9U3c6A94C8YokJ9ewjkDu1_4KmoybKKE9J4oBNMzNNuaY4SoTdFOa5XwlFoQljbX766pnVolGl8G_H8DQDrOaVLGfszEvebcLzsw/s400/shan.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
We thank the law minister K Shanmugam for stating in parliament that the bill will not be used against statements of opinion, commentary, analysis, parody, satire, etc. He also reiterated his belief that a statement of fact is something that is clear-cut: it is or it isn't, and that a false statement of fact is equally clear-cut.<br />
<br />
Whatever misgivings Singapore's civil rights activists have against Mr Shanmugam or the intention behind the bill, any challenge in court will rest exactly on what the minister himself has said in parliament.<br />
<br />
We consider this sufficient clarification at worst, and a solemn promise at best, that <b>the law will not be used by a minister against published speech that does not fall strictly under false statements of fact</b>.<br />
<br />
This is notwithstanding the legislative opinion by the authors of the UK's White Paper on Online Harms that <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper">disinformation has a less clear definition than a far longer list of harms which includes incitement of violence, sexting of indecent images, harassment, and hate crime</a>. (see p.31). It is foreseeable that the very first legal challenge in the future to an application of this law will trigger when a minister decides to order a correction or removal of a statement that most early objectors to this bill have pointed out would be hard to demarcate as fact, opinion, satire, analysis, etc. The mere fact that this challenge is heard instead of summarily dismissed would indeed prove the superiority of the stand taken by the Rt Hons Savid Javid and Jeremy Wright, at which point the law ought to be sent back to parliament for required rectification and rethinking, or the law be acknowledged to have a far narrower application than currently imagined by both activists as well as the minister.<br />
<br />
This is also notwithstanding NMP Prof Walter Theseira's speech in the debate where he unveiled his study of the Singapore government's <a href="https://www.gov.sg/factually">Factually</a> website. His conclusions after studying all the posts on Factually are damning. Prof Theseira claims the website exists mostly to dispute opinions and conclusions that run contrary to the government's narrative, and not false or wrong statements of fact. Whoever runs Factually on behalf of the government has the tendency to characterise fair but contrary conclusions and opinions as untruths. That the findings from his study were not denied or rebutted by the minister suggest that they are true.<br />
<br />
Like Prof Theseira, we hope the cabinet will be more circumspect and intellectually honest when it comes to the application of this law. It is hoped that its seemingly cynical at best or incompetent at worst approach to distinguishing facts, opinions, and untruths in Factually is not an indicator and will not inform its application of this law.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzqOWopoOFIJqb06VV2f_mrlNtSUhlejTkXdjWZcoYtOetVVYJwoluDhgdkDX67YtReDkXHvHdVCyPNo0bfNB3uZfk8-G190iLXiU_hIHnzHoTSykO5QqJ6v719lCuxECjJsMRvw/s1600/iswaran.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="683" data-original-width="1024" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzqOWopoOFIJqb06VV2f_mrlNtSUhlejTkXdjWZcoYtOetVVYJwoluDhgdkDX67YtReDkXHvHdVCyPNo0bfNB3uZfk8-G190iLXiU_hIHnzHoTSykO5QqJ6v719lCuxECjJsMRvw/s320/iswaran.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
We also thank the communications and information minister Iswaran for clarifying that his ministry is currently working with technology companies on the industry code of practice. We consider this sufficient clarification that the ongoing legislative process (which includes drafting the code of practice and getting the industry stakeholders to bind themselves to it) is for the most part, a <b>consultative exercise</b> and true dialogue between the executive, stakeholders and industry interests.<br />
<br />
This clarification is essential in ameliorating the hard line and overcombative stance taken by junior minister Edwin Tong on the eve of the parliamentary debates, where he <a href="http://theindependent.sg/edwin-tong-claims-the-overwhelming-majority-of-singaporeans-want-strong-fake-news-laws/">castigated an industry group voicing its concerns as only "a small group" "crying wolf"</a> and conveniently left out any real world research proving his outlandish claims that most citizens want strong fake news laws. The junior minister may forget that campaigning for the bill's passage should have ended by the time the bill was first read in parliament. That "small group" was essentially the major stakeholders and industry interests voicing their concerns and misgivings. There is no conceivable reason to antagonise or demonise an entire industry that are participating in the consultation process and providing their honest feedback and concerns.<br />
<br />
<b>Where there has been a lack of clarifications</b><br />
<br />
The major issue with the bill is how it turned from an instrument for protecting public order during the Select Committee process into an instrument for protecting public interest - which as defined by the bill, is a dubious and "not exhaustive" laundry list of things that do not look like public order issues at all, and cannot be reviewed by a judge during an appeal or review.<br />
<br />
This bait and switch leaves a bitter taste in the mouth of moderates who lent their most reluctant support during the Select Committee stage to deal with hopefully rare, extreme threats by hostile state actors that posed clear danger to public order.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMofF79VUYO0Frx4e7eyE72ax-h81c4zJDIFUQjSn1gRr14EWBuPltC-jCatr94Q7WRSUXiXnsui4qBZKXUfz1i5JSRItclgB8LtjDhL7lcw0hDmVGA6pq4O58NVXA06nQsyh3Pw/s1600/charlie+brown+lucy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="683" data-original-width="1024" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMofF79VUYO0Frx4e7eyE72ax-h81c4zJDIFUQjSn1gRr14EWBuPltC-jCatr94Q7WRSUXiXnsui4qBZKXUfz1i5JSRItclgB8LtjDhL7lcw0hDmVGA6pq4O58NVXA06nQsyh3Pw/s400/charlie+brown+lucy.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The classic bait and switch, AAUGH!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
We at Illusio are disappointed with the lack of clarification by the ministers, and the lack of effort in seeking clarification and pushback by the parliamentary opposition and the very special, very expert NMPs on why very narrowly defined public order instances discussed in the Select Committee process has now bloated into far wider and more nebulous public interest.<br />
<br />
The parliamentary opposition appears to have missed this issue entirely and focused on getting the minister to define a threshold for which "public interest" is met. The minister understandably did not offer one, even though the Select Committee report makes reference to a "<a href="https://draft.blogger.com/"><span id="goog_1564145598"></span>careful calibration to prevent public interest from being harmed<span id="goog_1564145599"></span></a>" (para 50). To be fair to the minister, the threshold for "public interest" does not need to be explicitly defined; it is deduced from previous words and actions of this government, from every time the government brings up "public interest" to deny or offer information to the public.<br />
<br />
From the government's recent actions, <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/public-interest-criminal-history-driver-pm-lee-son-11401696">the public interest threshold is met when someone talks badly to the son of the prime minister and posts the video on social media</a>, for example. It is met when the minister says he believes it would be better if the government has the power to use the law to "immediately clarify that this is false, and require the person and the online platform to push a notice to everybody" in the precise event that <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/proposed-law-on-falsehoods-has-clear-oversight-mechanism-to-11438132">a rumour is spread about a roof of a HDB flat collapsing</a>, even though no one actually took that rumour seriously, let alone created a panic about it. That is to say, the threshold of public interest never approaches the widespread panic, public order, riots, subversion of democracy or similar dire circumstances that the cabinet is more than happy to trot out when selling this bill to the public and in parliament. That is to say, there is a very low bar for 'public interest' that is at odds with how the bill has been rationalised and used to seek the previous consensus of the public. It is thus amazing how this bait and switch has not been challenged by the parliamentary opposition or by the NMPs.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy6HNOEx87YP2P76IiNIIB6EOXM034f2j7yaPzeKAmKbG-T14kH15CXrkM_Vy-If8ot7ITp56ILjxmR6yhqmnZIg_Z1IHylWr9cn0Jk9FKpogoPPYKLJRH1F1bQLW5LqlDQ8r7ZA/s1600/powercersei.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="270" data-original-width="480" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy6HNOEx87YP2P76IiNIIB6EOXM034f2j7yaPzeKAmKbG-T14kH15CXrkM_Vy-If8ot7ITp56ILjxmR6yhqmnZIg_Z1IHylWr9cn0Jk9FKpogoPPYKLJRH1F1bQLW5LqlDQ8r7ZA/s400/powercersei.gif" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Let us suppose the minister decides to make a correction or removal order on a statement that he argues is in the public interest but patently will not lead to riots, undermining of the democratic process, pose a threat to harmony, etc. A likely legal challenge could be that in the process of its passage, the law started off with public public order in its inception, public understanding, consensus, and then somehow changed to public interest in a bait and switch that had no explanation in the form of a white paper. No legislative intent has been stated for the change. The court in all likelihood will be unable to make a ruling and refer the law back to parliament for further clarifications, i.e. rewriting and more comprehensive debate on issues that have been ignored or denied in the recent debate. Will that happen? Why should Singapore wait for this humiliation to happen?<br />
<br />
The option is still open for future ministers to exercise the new law only in strict public order situations, "public interest" clause notwithstanding. As with the much ballyhooed section 377A of the criminal code, it is possible for a contested law to be redeemed via far more judicious application by the executive.akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-63374513367169601502019-04-24T16:21:00.000+08:002019-04-25T08:36:51.640+08:00Can Singapore's leaders be trusted to enact a Fake News law?Barely half a year after <a href="https://www.parliament.gov.sg/sconlinefalsehoods">public hearings conducted by the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods</a> and its report presented to parliament, the Singapore parliament last week tabled the <a href="https://www.parliament.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/protection-from-online-falsehoods-and-manipulation-bill10-2019.pdf">Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulations Bill</a>.<br />
<br />
But is there trouble in paradise?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinOMAFAZbBsAcHHm7HAT-C5jlCu-2K2mdh20ubCmPB8U5GqG88cPZqS_95WlCeOUVLC_rANej9ePhuZvwnbD7mTUcEe4zORHzE-V6Q8lGMHT1-UTPrFSTuCrp3l3sDs4iGgOJFvw/s1600/lady+liberty+leading+the+people.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="1276" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinOMAFAZbBsAcHHm7HAT-C5jlCu-2K2mdh20ubCmPB8U5GqG88cPZqS_95WlCeOUVLC_rANej9ePhuZvwnbD7mTUcEe4zORHzE-V6Q8lGMHT1-UTPrFSTuCrp3l3sDs4iGgOJFvw/s400/lady+liberty+leading+the+people.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">How some activists see themselves</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a name='more'></a>Respected elder statesmen of Singapore journalism, <a href="http://blog.freedomfromthepress.info/2019/04/06/falsehoods-2/">Cherian George</a> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/bertha.henson.54/posts/1246825338789580">Bertha Henson</a>, continue to employ their decades of expertise in journalism to point out major and niggling issues with Singapore's fake news law. The Law Society of Singapore, accused of inaction or acquiescence by civil society slacktivists, issued a statement that it has indeed been <a href="https://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/Headlines/fake-news-bill-law-society-refutes-online-flak-over-alleged-silence">engaging the cabinet and giving its legal opinions on the bill in closed door consultations</a> (a necessary mode of operations given how the Law Society appears to be <a href="https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/LPA1966">proscribed</a> from public legal commentary). <a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/fake-news-bill-media-professionals-favour-fact-checking-body-divided-role-045339001.html">Singapore's mainstream press participated in a roundtable organised by the opposition Workers' Party</a>. Presumably the mainstream press has also been engaging with the cabinet in closed-door consultations, but it is clear their preferred remedies to the "Fake News problem" do not align with the bill. <a href="https://isocsg.org/index.php/2019/04/20/seminar-on-protection-from-online-falsehoods-and-manipulation-bill/">The Internet Society of Singapore will organise a seminar on the bill</a>, presented by a lawyer, a former member of parliament, and a veteran journalist. K Shanmugam, widely seen as the moving force behind the fake news law, <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/appeals-process-should-be-simple-and-relatively-inexpensive-shanmugam-online-falsehoods">appeared in public to discuss popular criticisms made against the bill</a>. Singapore's ministers have never been this consultative in recent memory.<br />
<br />
The reality of governance is that a ruling party with a supermajority still needs to consult with stakeholders and industry. Losing the confidence of stakeholders and industry interests kills a bill faster and more quietly than protests and petitions from activist academics, rights activists, and their coalition of willing overseas petition signers. Will the law kill off the viability of social media and small independent online publishing in Singapore? Will it bring back the primacy of a tightly controlled and narrow print media industry, a la Lee Kuan Yew? Why would any stakeholder or industry concern want that?<br />
<br />
<b>Is Singapore's fake news law the new normal or an outlier in a post-truth world?</b><br />
<br />
There is sufficient evidence that Singapore's bill is not unusual. The <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1555559351002&uri=CELEX:52018PC0640">European Union</a>, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper">UK</a>, <a href="https://germanlawarchive.iuscomp.org/?p=1245">Germany</a>, <a href="http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/15/ta/tap0190.pdf">France</a>, and <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=s1201">Australia</a> have either passed or are in the process of drafting legislation to protect their citizens from hate speech, "manifestly unlawful content", "abhorrent violent content", "incitement to terrorism", "disinformation", and other "online harms".<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMos481wIPftBhCjV_J5uN06U3P5jRo1ThTx3bBEzwEs0uTIUQXUgvpLMeUEbmVfhwTVIIhR8Cg9MaSI-liRnsPEMSXGcXrWBddN6ubtpD0C-xXuMaFjkWMcaetKI5VKp3MNBQ_w/s1600/fake+news+law.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="468" data-original-width="690" height="271" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMos481wIPftBhCjV_J5uN06U3P5jRo1ThTx3bBEzwEs0uTIUQXUgvpLMeUEbmVfhwTVIIhR8Cg9MaSI-liRnsPEMSXGcXrWBddN6ubtpD0C-xXuMaFjkWMcaetKI5VKp3MNBQ_w/s400/fake+news+law.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Legislation against fake news and violent online content is fast becoming the international norm</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
These legislation couch incitement of hatred, violence, and disinformation campaigns as a public order and public health issue, similar to how Singapore's Select Committee couched the fake news threat. There are removal orders (the EU draft for example suggests a one-day window for compliance upon receipt of orders from a competent authority while Singapore's bill has yet to specify a reasonable time frame for expedient removal), an appeals and oversight process, and fines for failure to comply. In contrast, the UK white paper leaves it to an independent commission to set a reasonable timeline for compliance with removal orders instead of baking it into the law, and strikingly, to ensure that the law does not itself become a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barriers_to_entry">barrier to entry</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We expect the regulator to work with the industry to encourage the development of technologies that aid compliance, and to facilitate cross-sector collaboration and sharing of expertise. These technologies could be made available to start-up or small companies."</blockquote>
<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper">UK online harms white paper</a>, section 5.9<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The Regulation introduces a removal order which can be issued as an
administrative or judicial decision by a competent authority in a Member
State. In such cases, the hosting service provider is obliged to remove
the content or disable access to it within one hour."</blockquote>
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1555559351002&uri=CELEX:52018PC0640">EU Proposal for a Regulation... on preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online</a>, section 1.3<br />
<br />
Both the EU and UK draft legislation propose automated proactive identification of objectionable content, but <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47962394">such provisions have been defeated in the European Parliament</a> on the basis that such a reliable and accurate technological solution does not yet exist and is realistically a pipe dream in the foreseeable near future, and an obligation to proactively monitor, identify, and remove content will be too onerous even for the social media giants, much less smaller publishers and content mediums.<br />
<br />
More likely than not, there is some consensus among governments that online platforms do have a <b>duty of care</b> to address <b>real online harms</b> and have not done so <b>appropriately</b>, <b>proportionately</b>, and in <b>a timely manner</b>, <b>according to their capabilities</b>. The UK and European Parliament documents identify these specific principles as guidelines for the companies and red-lines delimiting the scope of their respective draft legislation. The international consensus also seems to suggest a goal of 1 hour between removal order and compliance, although the realisation that this may be technologically and logistically unfeasible may vary.<br />
<br />
If Singapore's bill is more of the same, why then is it viewed with more suspicion?<br />
<br />
<b>Consensus-building by the Select Committee</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipNxWjyZnt7U4ZnC4Nr7fljpr2YHB04nI97s47rWcVvZNbSsHziWYJv8DQNspEUa8FA5U69fVYDi85etMiMUP8Flz3XWnIrjqsqUo3xq1b60-jgbtDTDh5rEpzVDZ7m1MRVEcANQ/s1600/extraordinary+claims.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="437" data-original-width="720" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipNxWjyZnt7U4ZnC4Nr7fljpr2YHB04nI97s47rWcVvZNbSsHziWYJv8DQNspEUa8FA5U69fVYDi85etMiMUP8Flz3XWnIrjqsqUo3xq1b60-jgbtDTDh5rEpzVDZ7m1MRVEcANQ/s400/extraordinary+claims.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">How the Select Committee won consensus from a wide slice of civil society and academia</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In our analysis of the public hearings of the Select Committee, we note that the committee <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2018/03/5-basic-principles-you-can-learn-at.html">browbeat or pressured liberal-leaning and moderate witnesses into agreeing with the definition and dangers of fake news</a> by Ukrainian witnesses from the first day of the hearing.<br />
<br />
Often, the committee members acknowledged the concerns from skeptical witnesses that "fake news" could be too broadly defined, but urged them very strongly, nay, firmly held their hands in lengthy summaries of the Ukrainian witnesses over and over again, putting to them that "Expert A from XYZ institution has presented evidence that contradicts with your view [or understanding of fake news]. Perhaps you would like to make an amendment to your submission to the committee and change your stand?" "Would you insist that the Myanmar police not have used a gag order against a monk who used fake news to mobilise for a public gathering that would surely break into a riot?"<br />
<br />
Yes, all but the recalcitrant extremists agreed that if this were how fake news were to be defined, they would broadly agree that some form of legislation is indeed necessary. Following the dictum of Carl Sagan, the witnesses were presented with extraordinary evidence that compelled their agreement with the necessity of some fake news law.<br />
<br />
But through this manoeuvre, the select committee had also tacitly committed itself in full view of the Singapore's intelligentsia and civil society that its understanding of "fake news" was limited and circumscribed to extreme threats to public order, public peace, and national sovereignty.<br />
<br />
We at Illusio put that the manufactured consensus (however hard-won) and the trust (however grudgingly and tentative) won from most of the stakeholders involved in the Select Committee process has been squandered entirely in the form taken by the bill.<br />
<br />
<b>Consensus demolition by the Cabinet: 1. Playing the SKIP card</b><br />
<br />
Something seems to have gone terribly wrong with the legislative procedure. <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2018/01/are-fake-news-laws-inevitable-in.html">As we have noted in an earlier post</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Cabinet signals interest and concern on an issue in a Green Paper, a Select Committee is convened... Public hearings need to be convened, a committee report drafted and presented in parliament, the cabinet's response to its recommendations and findings presented in another parliament session, a White Paper drafted by the cabinet, potentially more public hearings convened for feedback, the White Paper debated in parliament, a Bill drafted and read twice before passing into law.</blockquote>
What has happened instead is: The Select Committee report was presented in parliament on 20 September 2018. <b>There was no response from the cabinet to the report</b>. Indeed, there was no debate on the report on that day. <b>The cabinet did not publish a White Paper</b>. The cabinet wrote up the bill and presented it on 1 April 2019, without debate. It was read and the ayes had it.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb0rkPOw1WOBLuDVSo0ZRVaUtQClSm3eORPEM2nCAv6urfNrKKBhPQdFov8ll1ZzttHrXo-pU4ZcZXQvoUhsOAU5ngfztJuw5WYEkLFrtFftMpcCcWrDlqYrTrPqFSspkmEWpdrg/s1600/uno+skip.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="585" data-original-width="410" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb0rkPOw1WOBLuDVSo0ZRVaUtQClSm3eORPEM2nCAv6urfNrKKBhPQdFov8ll1ZzttHrXo-pU4ZcZXQvoUhsOAU5ngfztJuw5WYEkLFrtFftMpcCcWrDlqYrTrPqFSspkmEWpdrg/s400/uno+skip.png" width="280" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The SKIP card in UNO</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<u>The lack of a White Paper is a cause for real concern</u>. Central to any new legislation and especially any <i>novel </i>legislation such as this, is an expression of legislative intent. What is the scope of the proposed bill? Who or what classes of people or entities does it intend to cover and leave out? What are the precise harms the proposed legislation seeks to avert via removal orders? What are the red lines that spell out explicitly the situations that the bill should not apply to?<br />
<br />
These are answered clearly and explicitly in the UK White Paper as well as the EU proposal.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We at Illusio understand that at a National University of Singapore feedback session with academic staff (including law professors!) committee member Janil Puthucheary explained (to a history professor who posed the question, no less!) that no White Paper was published because there was already a Select Committee process.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It should be noted that any select committee is separate from the cabinet. It can (though traditionally avoids) appoint ministers as committee members but it is not the cabinet and does not represent the cabinet. It holds hearings, summarises what has been presented and discussed, and generally makes recommendations that tend to be the consensus(es) among a significant proportion of witnesses. The cabinet is not obligated to agree with the committee's findings or adopt any or all of its recommendations. That is why a cabinet in Westminster-style legislature would respond and give its views on a select committee's report. And that is why a White Paper is needed: to spell out the cabinet's view and legislative intent in a coherent form, especially if it has diverged with the select committee's line.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Consensus demolition by the Cabinet: 2. Diverging from the consensus</b></div>
<div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Remember the consensus that bound the support of the stakeholders and select committee itself: "fake news" and "online falsehoods" are limited and circumscribed to extreme threats to public order, public peace, and national sovereignty, especially from campaigns by hostile state actors.</div>
<div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnqdQ7LNKPhetRuVnVt3MSW_FNSf_fFMxDjyGeq1JDYDBPlM3qa4-IjhaRRd_XBZBT4p8ewQ4oyAXDq8w_8WBIRrSo3baC4Vl7ILI7d7bagr_WEMbLfKfYzUoEuvFrtwjCV4M2Jg/s1600/DREDD-I-AM-THE-LAW.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnqdQ7LNKPhetRuVnVt3MSW_FNSf_fFMxDjyGeq1JDYDBPlM3qa4-IjhaRRd_XBZBT4p8ewQ4oyAXDq8w_8WBIRrSo3baC4Vl7ILI7d7bagr_WEMbLfKfYzUoEuvFrtwjCV4M2Jg/s400/DREDD-I-AM-THE-LAW.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">How some activists see Shanmugam's style of lawmaking</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
We now examine how <a href="https://www.parliament.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/protection-from-online-falsehoods-and-manipulation-bill10-2019.pdf">the text of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulations bill</a> diverges from the consensual understanding established by the end of the Select Committee hearings.<br />
<br />
General interpretation<br />
<ul>
<li>section 2(2)(b) defines a falsehood as merely a statement that is false.<br />It divorces the falsehood from any public order and security threat requirement.</li>
<li>section 4(f) and 7(b)(vi) extends the acceptable "diminution of public confidence" in the State and Government to include "the performance of any duty or function or exercise of any power by" Organs of State, statutory boards, any part of the government or organ of state or statutory board.<br />The expansion of threat to the state and government to include any and every sundry of the state and the civil service ironically diminishes the public order and security threat requirement. If this is a public order law for extreme circumstances, the power should not be wielded willy-nilly by just about anyone.</li>
<li>It is only in 10(b) and 20(b) that identifies "public interest" as an additional and necessary criterion for a minister to order a correction or removal of content.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Purpose of Act</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>5(a) "to prevent the communication of false statements of fact in Singapore and to enable measures to counteract the effects of such communications"<br />This clearly expands the ambit of the law to cover all falsehoods to leave out the public order, security threat, and hostile state action criteria</li>
</ul>
<div>
Competent Authority (aka delegation of powers and delegated authority)</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>6(1)(a), "the holder of any office in the service of the Government or a statutory board"</li>
<li>6(2) "any Minister"</li>
<li>20(1) "Any minister may instruct the Competent Authority..."</li>
<li>55. Minister may appoint a. police officer b. public officers who are not police officers c. employees of any statutory board<br />These clearly expand the power to identify a public order situation to not just any minister but in fact any civil servant, including presumably the rat-catcher at the ENV. Again, the expansion of power to declare a public order situation and demand a removal of content or correction of content, when expanded to just about any pencil-pusher with a fancy job title, diminishes the public order and security consensus.</li>
</ul>
</div>
Going back to the contested meaning of a falsehood, we have:<br />
<ul>
<li>11(4) "A person who communicated a false statement of fact in Singapore may be issued a Correction Direction even if the person does not know or has no reason to believe that the statement is false"</li>
<li>12(4 )"A person who communicated a false statement of fact in Singapore may be issued a Stop Communication Direction even if the person does not know or has no reason to believe that the statement is false"<br />These may imply that enforced clarifications and stop communications directives can still apply if the "online falsehood" is not deliberate, malicious, or conscious, and not clear cut. The minister can still order content to be removed or corrected even if the person has made a reasonable opinion that it is not a falsehood - which isn't the established consensus set out by the select committee and agreed by most of its public witnesses!</li>
</ul>
<div>
As for the code of practice favoured by stakeholders from Singapore's mainstream media and independent online publishers:</div>
<ul>
<li>48(1) A code of practice will be issued eventually by a "competent authority"...</li>
<li>48(6) All online publishers and social media must comply with the code of practice.</li>
<li>48(8) "A code of practice issued under this section does not have legislative effect."<br />Presumably this is not an optional membership, the code of practice will be decided by the "competent authority", with no guarantee of a consultative process or need for agreement to the code of practice, but that code of practice does not have legislative effect? Really?</li>
</ul>
If there is a backlash in Singapore against this bill and a loss of trust in the consensual model of this particular cabinet with its 5G leaders, however muted and polite in the non-radical sections of the stakeholders and corporate interests, these are the probable areas for rectification before the bill is revised and read a second time.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Why has this happened?</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRRQzNcXhEqtwQpPBlqqhoRal951y4AMjK9-F8n61gn67a-IhyphenhyphenHsdydR40qK0R049rigZNX7Phv7T5zZ15ZpPx2OfAIfOjARzlffC7vyKJJLZnBCq9Gv3LckXU0265Tc0xUAmnWw/s1600/cool+hand+luke.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="405" data-original-width="500" height="324" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRRQzNcXhEqtwQpPBlqqhoRal951y4AMjK9-F8n61gn67a-IhyphenhyphenHsdydR40qK0R049rigZNX7Phv7T5zZ15ZpPx2OfAIfOjARzlffC7vyKJJLZnBCq9Gv3LckXU0265Tc0xUAmnWw/s400/cool+hand+luke.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Rights activists would have you believe that K Shanmugam is an evil genius, that the entire process from select committee to the bill was done in bad faith. We at Illusio simply believe that what can be ascribed to malice can be adequately explained by stupidity. And even more charitably, to a loss of competence in communication, amongst other things.<br />
<br />
Historically, the legislative process in Singapore has always been prone to power grabs by a civil service who would rather have power than be transparent and accountable to the people. <a href="https://www.asiaone.com/print/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20121022-378997.html">Cheong Yip Seng's OB Markers: A Straits Times Story has several accounts</a> where senior staff of various ministries used the Prime Minister's Office as a central clearing house to order corrections to news articles, or signal displeasure about coverage - instead of communicating openly with journalists and accepting negative feedback from public as filtered by the press. PN Balji's Reluctant Editor confirms some of these stories as well as details the <a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/lee-kuan-yew-made-journalists-look-behind-backs-veteran-journalist-pn-balji-234141641.html">harsh, adversarial, even bullying attitudes of Lee Kuan Yew's administration towards journalists</a>.<br />
<br />
While the UK White Paper notes (in section 2.3) that "there is already an effective response to some categories of harmful content or activity online. These will be excluded from the scope of the new regulatory framework to avoid duplication of existing government activity", the Singapore civil service seems all too eager to duplicate existing government activity and add on to its already-impressive, albeit potential delegated duties!<br />
<br />
How could a bill of this nature be passed without a white paper? Do ask the Speaker of the House as proper procedure is within his duties and responsibilities. Do ask the parliamentary opposition as it is within their duty to question. Do ask the PAP's backbench as all of parliament has a duty to exercise its scrutiny function!<br />
<br />
<b>Go back to the drawing board, no mission creep, stick to the consensus please</b><br />
<br />
As further note, the cordial public consultation and PR exercises by K Shanmugam and other members of the cabinet in the week are extremely troubling. In recent days, <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/proposed-law-on-falsehoods-has-clear-oversight-mechanism-to-11438132">Shanmugam proposed using correction and removal orders in an otherwise entertaining scenario</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Someone put up a fake photo - Punggol HDB roof collapsed. <span style="font-family: "lato" , sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">Do you know how many young families are living there? People will be concerned. (That's why)</span> SCDF, police, and other assets rushed to the scene. If we have the power to immediately clarify that this is false, and require the person and the (online platform to push a notice to everybody: "Those of you who have read this article, please note that government has clarified that there is no roof collapse." Wouldn't it be better?</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXhWo2ppbqhi_XM8kwXKDbmDmJH8sefJpoLdhd5Eqk9CNksOUFd6A_qNXLovN0jwmt9ftQArG8JzrPoNmDycdXiNZdLCN4mi3Cr0U0rpy-1syzjZBqNj7nteWjXeVnInBJx2_OlA/s1600/fake+photo+hdb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="557" data-original-width="991" height="224" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXhWo2ppbqhi_XM8kwXKDbmDmJH8sefJpoLdhd5Eqk9CNksOUFd6A_qNXLovN0jwmt9ftQArG8JzrPoNmDycdXiNZdLCN4mi3Cr0U0rpy-1syzjZBqNj7nteWjXeVnInBJx2_OlA/s400/fake+photo+hdb.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
We at Illusio are saddened to have to point this out to the learned minister: No it wouldn't.<br />
<br />
What happened in Punggol is not a public order, threat to sovereignty, will cause chaos and riots in the streets, in an hour scenario. Hell, not even that kook claiming on his blog that riots had broken out an hour after LKY's death caused an actual riot, and no authority cut off Singapore's ability to read his blog or thought it would cause a riot, even though it was shared widely on several platforms.<br />
<br />
It was very easily verified by the residents, and the virality of this fake news would have died fast.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/report-of-punggol-waterway-terraces-roof-collapse-a-hoax-hdb-7714182">It was easily clarified by the HDB</a> on its official social media page. The fake news website took down its post within half an hour. The press investigated and published stories confirming it was a hoax. People learned to exercise their powers of skepticism and discernment, however belatedly. Presumably as the news reports did not mention crowds rushing home or a state of panic or a riot breaking out, the people who should've learned to exercise their powers of skepticism and discernment and determine the appropriate response to fake news... were SCDF itself.<br />
<br />
For the minster, ministers, or any employer of any statutory board to step in to order corrections and removals regardless of any real danger or harm to public order, is ultimately self-defeating. This mollycoddling creates precisely the sort of illiterate populace who is vulnerable to the "sophisticated disinformation campaigns" that were sold as the raison d'etre for this law during the public select committee hearings.<br />
<br />
We at Illusio are wont to tell the learned minister how to do his job to sell the bill, but it should surely start by providing a real and historical scenario, in Singapore, which can be used as a baseline for what constitutes a threat to public order and would necessitate the use of this law? Unless of course the minister does intend to use this law for lesser purposes, out of sheer convenience.</div>
</div>
akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10473879.post-62785210766833186792019-02-16T14:51:00.000+08:002019-02-16T14:51:17.318+08:00Does Singapore's Ministry of Health deserve immunity for data breach?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.cio-asia.com/article/3290392/data-breach/singapore-suffers-largest-data-breach-in-its-history-1-5m-affected.html">Singapore's largest data breach happened in July 2018 when a government hospital became the target of cyber-hackers</a>. It is believed the hackers were after the medical data of Singapore's prime minister and cabinet colleagues. There was an inquiry and the local privacy watchdog, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) fined the hospital and its technology vendor a total of S$1 million.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Proving Karl Marx's dictum about history repeating itself as a farce, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47027867">Singapore's second largest data breach happened in 2016</a> when the ministry's very own HIV registry data was downloaded by Mikhy Farrera Brochez, the same-sex paramour of Ler Teck Siang, the head of its National Public Health Unit, but was only disclosed last week.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Why wasn't the public and the patients on the HIV registry informed in 2016? Why is the public and the patients on the HIV registry informed only now? <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/gan-explains-actions-moh-took-over-hiv-data-breach">The minister of health, Gan Kim Yong, explained in parliament</a> the ministry made the right call because in 2016 the police thought they had deleted all copies of the HIV registry data from his devices. Since there was no evidence the data had been published, there was no need to inform those affected because informing them would cause distress and emotional harm.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Surprisingly, the minister suggested affected <a href="http://theindependent.sg/health-minister-gan-patients-affected-in-hiv-leak-can-sue-moh-for-data-loss/">PLHIV could sue the ministry if they felt it made the wrong call</a>.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhikBo2uCAR6GmisFsI_Sb-Fxe_LqFEoyiBQoJN5gYBO2RZ4drUjLtzrD8_nFh5aRIyfRl4nUPYyWVnZrxp9FEjLcTzvBkp226Z_g3wp9iHriM5urOozAbwyNv5Ux64Qm9KTODS9g/s1600/hivclown.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="526" data-original-width="936" height="224" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhikBo2uCAR6GmisFsI_Sb-Fxe_LqFEoyiBQoJN5gYBO2RZ4drUjLtzrD8_nFh5aRIyfRl4nUPYyWVnZrxp9FEjLcTzvBkp226Z_g3wp9iHriM5urOozAbwyNv5Ux64Qm9KTODS9g/s400/hivclown.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Now that's a ministry of health clown show</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a name='more'></a><b>Throwing the gauntlet?</b><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The minister's advice comes across as unfortunate at best, and a passive-aggressive challenge at worst.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We assume that the minister was serious when he presented his ministry's perplexing decision to keep the breach under wraps as the result of a "judgement call" weighing principles of transparency and timely disclosure against the interests and well-being of the patients (i.e. the preference for anonymity and not to be identified as having a positive HIV status).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But how can PLHIV sue the ministry in civil court? They'd have to prove <i>locus standi</i>, which means they must be willing to be named and identified as PLHIV. That is a high, even <i>punitive </i>price to pay, to seek redress wrong and harm for which the ministry may be partially or fully at fault, due to its possible mishandling of the breach in 2016.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And why should PLHIV be made to take a civil suit against the ministry, when there's a Personal Data Protection Commission that should by right convene an investigation and mete out fines? Has the PDPC stopped existing? Or does the Ministry of Health, as part of the government, have immunity from the PDPC? That would be a perverse state of affairs indeed, if an organ of the state is immune to the same processes and oversight that the SingHealth group was subjected to, for an ever-so-slightly-smaller data breach.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg__6axWqrpvmUfU5noSXGf7PmA9v1HZJ-wOriWwkS1n5Zh4v2ObGOKL_wGzhyphenhyphenB1_FBdup4bpTtz1ImnGohOrxqtH5bL8OyXLUJvCtWtNqg2x5RsEbSS-Ipv5Ep4CAT3NAwlcvqYA/s1600/gauntlet.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="941" data-original-width="960" height="313" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg__6axWqrpvmUfU5noSXGf7PmA9v1HZJ-wOriWwkS1n5Zh4v2ObGOKL_wGzhyphenhyphenB1_FBdup4bpTtz1ImnGohOrxqtH5bL8OyXLUJvCtWtNqg2x5RsEbSS-Ipv5Ep4CAT3NAwlcvqYA/s320/gauntlet.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Did Donald Low give the Ministry of Health a free pass?</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="http://theindependent.sg/govt-should-give-sylvia-lim-the-same-benefit-of-doubt-that-it-wants-the-people-to-give-moh-says-lkyspp-associate-dean/">Former senior civil servant and ex LKYSPP dean Donald Low suggests that the Ministry of Health should be given immunity</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I think we can accept the Minister for Health’s explanation that his ministry made an honest “judgement call” not to inform the affected patients of the data breach back in 2016, and that it was not unreasonable for them to assess then that putting out the information would have caused more harm than good.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
We at Illusio believe Low's communique is little more than weak hand-waving. Just because the ministry made a judgement call doesn't mean it should be absolved of blame if it were found to have made the wrong call. In what way was the reasoning as laid out by the minister "not unreasonable"? Low offers no explanation, no yardsticks, no existing standards or guidelines to measure the correctness of the ministry's decision or the harm done to the PLHIV in the registry.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFXCGk4DghF6ZKGP1olSXZGxgYIeNcYw9HrchpG58fbRR7USHnMeZPE-L3fKUgICSM8DS-EkDRFqTrl2wYnE5pNoqRsmgNrgb2ncayP_6nsXtkuRfFgws6d2uuw-I1Gy1sB0PORA/s1600/getoutofjail.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="422" data-original-width="750" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFXCGk4DghF6ZKGP1olSXZGxgYIeNcYw9HrchpG58fbRR7USHnMeZPE-L3fKUgICSM8DS-EkDRFqTrl2wYnE5pNoqRsmgNrgb2ncayP_6nsXtkuRfFgws6d2uuw-I1Gy1sB0PORA/s320/getoutofjail.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Readers will recall that in our discussion on the <a href="https://akikonomu.blogspot.com/2017/12/what-should-singapore-do-about.html">declassification of intelligence documents</a>, the MI5 in the UK voluntarily and selectively releases historical intelligence reports to the National archives, but the minister is entitled to refuse declassification in the <i>interests of national security</i>, as long as the minister enters into (classified) record that he has indeed weighed the factors made a judgement call.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Note that the minister himself did not cite national security as the ministry's reason to withhold disclosure of the breach. Low's suggestion, with the implication that it is entirely appropriate for the Ministry of Health to apply a purely political calculus to manage a crisis where it should instead have applied healthcare (as its domain of regulation and expertise) or data governance principles (as the situation fell under), is either pure stupidity or administrative arrogance.<br />
<br />
<b>How should the Ministry of Health have acted then?</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Ministry of Health is not a healthcare provider; it does not treat the PLHIV on its HIV patient registry. Hence the <a href="http://www.singaporelawreview.com/juris-illuminae-entries/2017/ill-advice-or-ill-advised-negligent-medical-advice-and-the-modified-montgomery-test">Bolam-Bolitho test</a> does not apply. Whether the Ministry of Health can be taken to civil court or just simply thrown the book by the PDPC simply depends on 3 basic tort principles:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>What was the duty of care owed by the ministry to PLHIV on its HIV registry?</i></div>
<div>
<i>Did the ministry's actions measure up or fall short of</i><i> the duty of care owed to PLHIV?</i></div>
<div>
<i>Would other reasonable, responsible, respectable bodies have made the same decision in its position?</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We note that Singapore's HIV registry is a name-based registry which includes confidential information like "<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47027867">addresses, HIV status and other medical information</a>" of PLHIV resident in Singapore, whether they are Singapore citizens, PRs, or guest workers.<br />
<br />
The NHS in the UK has this to say in its <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-information-governance-legal-and-professional-obligations">2007 guidance on data governance</a>: holders and controllers of confidential patient information have a <a href="https://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/About-Singapore-Law/Overview/ch-01-the-singapore-legal-system">common law</a> <a href="http://v1.lawgazette.com.sg/2013-08/823.htm">duty of confidentiality</a> to these patients. They have a duty of care to facilitate and maintain the confidentiality of patient records. Applying the common law duty of confidentiality, the NHS and the Department of Health and Social Care advise that "if information is inappropriately disclosed, the individual can take legal action for breach against the public body concerned." On a design level, the <a href="https://ico.org.uk/">Information Commissioner's Office</a> (a far stronger version of Singapore's PDPC) is to be notified by the organisation's IT head or equivalent <i>whenever confidential records are processed</i>, and it must be notified when breaches have occurred, and it is the arbiter of whether a public authority has properly dealt with a breach.<br />
<br />
The Information Commissioner's Office advises that <a href="https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/personal-data-breaches/">in the event of a data breach</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
If a breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals, the GDPR says you must inform those concerned directly and without undue delay. In other words, this should take place as soon as possible. Example: A hospital suffers a breach that results in an accidental disclosure of patient records. There is likely to be a significant impact on the affected individuals because of the sensitivity of the data and their confidential medical details becoming known to others. This is likely to result in a high risk to their rights and freedoms, so they would need to be informed about the breach.</blockquote>
And here we have it. A reasonable, respectable, and reputable institution on the level of Singapore's Ministry of Health would have made the entirely opposite decision that Mr Gan Kim Yong defended and rationalised in parliament as a good judgement call.<br />
<br />
But was there a real, high risk to the rights and freedoms of the PLHIV when Brochez helped himself to Singapore's HIV registry? Instead of calling in the information and privacy watchdog and experts on this matter, the police were involved. Their lack of expertise in this matter (and inappropriateness as an investigation authority in this matter) is evident, when they judged that because the data was wiped from Brochez and Ler's devices, there was no real risk of the confidential information getting leaked into the wild.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Yet cybersecurity experts advise, consistently across the board, that if data is breached, even if you cannot tell if it has been published elsewhere, <a href="https://www.carouselindustries.com/blog/assumption-breach-part-new-approach-cyber-security/">you MUST assume it has already been stolen</a>. The genie is out of the bottle. And what was the HIV registry data that was breached? Names, contact details, residential addresses, other medical records.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgELBrejlNuO6DwWI3mG8mRaWl2cnaG17ynjYq7PDxVUxhL-xC01Y3jg6elQrnaKHLd6sVm1Vg1IUE3hxImLZQ5UHkMakDzpwrPJfYr5FlBPGQU1H3rXm0yOigonSVxAgD2vMEn4Q/s1600/manywaysigns.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="434" data-original-width="650" height="267" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgELBrejlNuO6DwWI3mG8mRaWl2cnaG17ynjYq7PDxVUxhL-xC01Y3jg6elQrnaKHLd6sVm1Vg1IUE3hxImLZQ5UHkMakDzpwrPJfYr5FlBPGQU1H3rXm0yOigonSVxAgD2vMEn4Q/s400/manywaysigns.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
It is self-evident that the Ministry of Health has failed to deliver the duty of care expected to the PLHIV in its actions following the breach:<br />
<br />
1. Failure of timely disclosure<br />
2. Failure to report breach to the PDPC<br />
3. Failure to design a proper data governance and post-crisis procedure, both of which were recommended by the <a href="https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/75211">World Health Organisation National eHealth strategy toolkit</a><br />
4. Usurping the PDPC's oversight, leading to the wrong organisations coming to the wrong conclusions based on applying wrong sets of considerations<br />
<br />
<b>How can things be set right?</b><br />
<br />
If the 2018 hack of SingHealth records didn't illustrate the need clearly enough: Singapore's healthcare industry and its own healthcare regulator both lack a competent data governance model, even though Singapore may have competently carried out its national campaign to digitise healthcare records.<br />
<br />
It appears that the PDPC was not designed to be an integral part of active data governance, nor part of crisis and breach management.<br />
<br />
As the HIV registry contains not just the details of Singapore citizens but foreign nationals who were resident in Singapore, the fallout cannot be easily contained. Foreign governments, especially European states under the <a href="https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-32018-territorial-scope-gdpr-article-3-version_en">extraterritorial scope of the GDPR regime</a>, have a whip hand against the Singapore government especially if the Ministry of Health is seen to be excused from accountability, responsibility, and even the requirement of competence in this matter. Such an egregious series of lapses require real and overreaching remedies.<br />
<br />
We at Illusio therefore recommend a redesign of the structure of data governance, as well as for the PDPC to be beefed up and empowered as a fully fledged information commission. Further, we recommend parliament pass legislation mandating mandatory disclosure for data breaches, along the lines of the <a href="https://www.oaic.gov.au/media-and-speeches/media-releases/mandatory-data-breach-notification-comes-into-force-this-thursday">Australian model</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggDGQ9uN8loNK5dcbEUMl3foyNFSI4ldz7V7TBCIvT24oH7CFOPHFWcDsfgJ7RjKcXc5UgVP6cHFi_XR93bOP6UnbiCSksKYvq9zw20-p9cVyb2AARECoxcEyg6121kDAIeWCGfw/s1600/restitution.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="200" data-original-width="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggDGQ9uN8loNK5dcbEUMl3foyNFSI4ldz7V7TBCIvT24oH7CFOPHFWcDsfgJ7RjKcXc5UgVP6cHFi_XR93bOP6UnbiCSksKYvq9zw20-p9cVyb2AARECoxcEyg6121kDAIeWCGfw/s1600/restitution.jpeg" /></a></div>
<br />
Instead of giving his ministry the all-clear, minister Gan Kim Yong should convene an independent inquiry, refer the breach to the PDPC, and allow the PDPC to set whatever fines and restitution it sees fit. And hopefully Mr Gan, as minister in charge of the ministry which has spectacularly failed in its duty of care to PLHIV, should offer his resignation to the prime minister after the end of the inquiry and the PDPC hearings we recommend.</div>
akikonomuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750460516384317828noreply@blogger.com0