In the past few years, blogging has come into the limelight as a very efficient method of publishing one's opinions to the world. Previously, though the Internet allowed people to share information throughout the world, publishing was limited to the comparatively few owners of a website.
With the advent of blogging though, now everyone can have a website from which to publish his or her opinions to the world. This new phenomenon has become especially prevalent in Singapore, where people from all walks of life, whether young or old, are making use of this astonishing new technology to share their life, experiences, and views with others.
However, the other not so benign side of blogging has also been evident lately, with many bloggers receiving attention for all the wrong reasons. Whilst the ability for all to be able to publish and mass communicate with the outside world is an exciting new thought, what is dangerously missing from the equation is the responsibility and accountability that the media and other established form of publication holds. This has led to many vulnerabilities for blogging to be abused.
Three examples highlight the different areas in which this new technology is suspectible to abuse. Firstly, the recent case of twenty-five-year-old Nicholas Lim Yew and 27-year-old Benjamin Koh Song Huat, who were both charged under the Sedition act for the first time in 10 years for making racist comments in their blogs. Next, the public uproar, outrage, and outcry ensuing when blogger and ex- RJC student Wee Shu Min's elitist post was publicised. Finally, the Sarong Party Girl, who caused quite a debate about the morals of Singaporeans when she posted nude photos of herself online.
The problems that could result if such incidents continue to occur unchecked are no small issue. For one, racial tensions could be very easily inflamed by a careless remark or an individual with extreme views. A very simple example how one person can single handedly spark a massive response through this is the Prophet Muhammed cartoons, where a single drawing almost sparked racial bloodshed.
Though freedom of expression is an important element in any democratic society, responsibility must be exercised by those empowered with this new ability. To this end, rules put in place to ensure the harmony of Singapore have to be strictly enforced. However, it is inevitable that between the responsibility required and the freedom of blogging, some individuals will choose to abuse this priviledge. As such, the best response to prevent the boon of blogging from backfiring is to ensure that our society is able to coexist harmoniously, regardless of race, language or religion. To a further extent, wealth, education, morals, beliefs, and many other social faultlines will have to be included as well- only then can we get the best out of this powerful new technology.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Unrest in Myanmar
The recent crackdown by Myanmar's military rulers on protesters has sparked an international uproar and drawn much attention to its regional affairs.
Although the protests only began in mid-August, the origins of this issue go way further, back to 1962 when the military seized power in a coup. Ever since, the junta has ruled its country with an iron fist, quashing its opposition firmly, and often, brutally. Myanmar held its last elections in 1990, when Aung San Suu Kyi's National League For Democracy won by a landslide, but was never allowed to govern. Suu Kyi and other prominent leaders of the NLD were placed under arrest.
The recent wave of protests originated from the sporadic demonstrations that broke out in August because of the doubling of price in fuel - a massive economic blow to its citizens, who are already bordering upon Third World poverty.
However, Myanmar's monks, who had previously been supportive of social order for years, became embroiled in the affair when they demanded an apology for their alleged rough treatment by military officials. When they failed to obtain this, they began mass protests, which the public soon joined.
Myanmar's monkhood is a force to be reckoned with within their own country. It numbers about 400 - 500 thousand, about as large as the military. More importantly, they are highly revered in Myanmar's largely Buddhist community, where the monks form the core of society's moral and social values. When they began their protests, speculation was rife over whether the military government would use force to deal with them.
Now, it seems the question has been answered, with at least 13 dead and hundreds arrested.
The repercussions that Myanmar's military government will face though, are by no means light.
Prior to this, the quest for self government and democracy has been underway in Myanmar for years already. Now, joined by the monks and the citizens, some analysts are going as far as to predict the downfall of the junta and its replacement with a democratic government, headed by none other than Suu Kyi - democracy activist, Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and political prisoner.
However, judging from the military's stance, it does seem that between the present state of affairs and that prophesied, there lies much violence, bloodshed, and tragedy.
Unsupported by the very people it governs, condemned by most of the outside world, and facing enemies on all sides, the military government has few avenues to deal with the current situation other than brute force from the police and military.
These means though, have managed to keep it in power for 19 years, through a combination of intimidation, deprivation, suppresion, and a sheer lack of opposition.
The junta's leader, General Than Shwe, made his stand towards any such prospective opposition chillingly clear, when he mentioned in a National Day speech: "Judging from lessons of history, it is certain that powerful countries wishing to impose their influence on our nation will make any attempt in various ways to undermine national unity."
He vowed to "crush, hand-in-hand with the entire people, every danger of internal and external destructive elements obstructing the stability and development of the state."
Ironically enough, his army is crushing the very people they are supposed to protect.
The possible implications that might arise from this are manifold; a successful deposing of the military government might be the catalyst for Myanmar's economic turnaround in the long term. Dubbed "Asia's rice basket", it is no wonder that many countries in the region are eager to prevent unrest within it. Even China, its closest ally by far, urged it "to seek stability in a peaceful manner and work towards democracy and development."
On a larger scale, a democratic Myanmar will join the multitude of nations worldwide in the rise of democracy. This of course will be good for the welfare of its citizens as opposed to its military dictatorship.
In conclusion, the severe state of affairs in Myanmar portends two very contrasting futures for the people of Myanmar - either the democratic rule of the country or the brutal suppresion of opposition in a repeat of the 1989 crushing of the democratic challenge to military government.
This time, though, the odds are quite differently stacked- countries worldwide have rallied behind the people and condemned the military junta, while the widely revered monks have thrown their weight behind the movement as well. As such, between the possible outcomes the former is the more likely of the two to occur.
Although the protests only began in mid-August, the origins of this issue go way further, back to 1962 when the military seized power in a coup. Ever since, the junta has ruled its country with an iron fist, quashing its opposition firmly, and often, brutally. Myanmar held its last elections in 1990, when Aung San Suu Kyi's National League For Democracy won by a landslide, but was never allowed to govern. Suu Kyi and other prominent leaders of the NLD were placed under arrest.
The recent wave of protests originated from the sporadic demonstrations that broke out in August because of the doubling of price in fuel - a massive economic blow to its citizens, who are already bordering upon Third World poverty.
However, Myanmar's monks, who had previously been supportive of social order for years, became embroiled in the affair when they demanded an apology for their alleged rough treatment by military officials. When they failed to obtain this, they began mass protests, which the public soon joined.
Myanmar's monkhood is a force to be reckoned with within their own country. It numbers about 400 - 500 thousand, about as large as the military. More importantly, they are highly revered in Myanmar's largely Buddhist community, where the monks form the core of society's moral and social values. When they began their protests, speculation was rife over whether the military government would use force to deal with them.
Now, it seems the question has been answered, with at least 13 dead and hundreds arrested.
The repercussions that Myanmar's military government will face though, are by no means light.
Prior to this, the quest for self government and democracy has been underway in Myanmar for years already. Now, joined by the monks and the citizens, some analysts are going as far as to predict the downfall of the junta and its replacement with a democratic government, headed by none other than Suu Kyi - democracy activist, Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and political prisoner.
However, judging from the military's stance, it does seem that between the present state of affairs and that prophesied, there lies much violence, bloodshed, and tragedy.
Unsupported by the very people it governs, condemned by most of the outside world, and facing enemies on all sides, the military government has few avenues to deal with the current situation other than brute force from the police and military.
These means though, have managed to keep it in power for 19 years, through a combination of intimidation, deprivation, suppresion, and a sheer lack of opposition.
The junta's leader, General Than Shwe, made his stand towards any such prospective opposition chillingly clear, when he mentioned in a National Day speech: "Judging from lessons of history, it is certain that powerful countries wishing to impose their influence on our nation will make any attempt in various ways to undermine national unity."
He vowed to "crush, hand-in-hand with the entire people, every danger of internal and external destructive elements obstructing the stability and development of the state."
Ironically enough, his army is crushing the very people they are supposed to protect.
The possible implications that might arise from this are manifold; a successful deposing of the military government might be the catalyst for Myanmar's economic turnaround in the long term. Dubbed "Asia's rice basket", it is no wonder that many countries in the region are eager to prevent unrest within it. Even China, its closest ally by far, urged it "to seek stability in a peaceful manner and work towards democracy and development."
On a larger scale, a democratic Myanmar will join the multitude of nations worldwide in the rise of democracy. This of course will be good for the welfare of its citizens as opposed to its military dictatorship.
In conclusion, the severe state of affairs in Myanmar portends two very contrasting futures for the people of Myanmar - either the democratic rule of the country or the brutal suppresion of opposition in a repeat of the 1989 crushing of the democratic challenge to military government.
This time, though, the odds are quite differently stacked- countries worldwide have rallied behind the people and condemned the military junta, while the widely revered monks have thrown their weight behind the movement as well. As such, between the possible outcomes the former is the more likely of the two to occur.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
More incentives for students to complete third language programmes
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/295068/1/.html
The newly added incentives for students to continue with their Third Language programmes all the way up to O levels have much relevance towards pupils in RI, especially towards Sec 1 or 2 pupils whom may very presently be considering dropping their third language.
It is a very prevalent phenomenon in RI, and indeed amongst other schools too, that newly enrolled Secondary 1 students sign up to take a Third Language with much enthusiasm, only to drop it in time to come, their enthusiasm greatly doused by failed exams and busy timetables.
As such, to encourage students to continue with their Third Language, those who pass their third language at the O levels will now receive two extra points, though this is now only limited thus far to students taking the Malay or Chinese Special Programme.
The rationale behind such a move is obvious: Singapore lies in the immidiate vicinity of many Malay speaking and Muslim states. To be able to speak Malay would thus be an obvious advantage in the region.
Furthermore, the rise of China and the Middle East as an economic power means that being able to speak their languages will allow one to better communicate in these countries and thus be able to better exploit economic opportunities in these regions. Singapore being a globalized city, it has to be able to relate to various countries if it hopes to attain success.
However, will such incentives be effective in boosting the rates of Third Language enrolment, and for the vast majority of students in Singapore's educational system, is the need for a Third Language that important?
Adding another language to the myriad of subjects already on a student's timetable places much added stress on him; what more, students generally do not speak this language anywhere other than the classroom. Such limited education of a language will not serve well at all to endow a student with the ability to speak it; in the end, it amounts to grand waste of time unless a pupil is academically capable and well inclined.
The adding of a Third Language as a boost to a student's O language points may potentially create a problem similar to that facing Higher Chinese now: students taking up the subject for the sake of the extra points and promptly dropping it after admission into a JC of their choice. Even if more students take up Third Language because of this, it will still ultimately not grant them the competitive edge, and this initiative will have failed in its objective.
Also, as not all of Singapore's future workforce will be based overseas, not all students will pursue careers which require them to speak multiple languages.
At the end of the day, what we must remember is that taking a Third Language is ultimately a trade off; if we are willing and able to pursue another language in spite of the stress it brings, then well and good. Otherwise, any number of addded incentives will still not encourage students to take it up.
The newly added incentives for students to continue with their Third Language programmes all the way up to O levels have much relevance towards pupils in RI, especially towards Sec 1 or 2 pupils whom may very presently be considering dropping their third language.
It is a very prevalent phenomenon in RI, and indeed amongst other schools too, that newly enrolled Secondary 1 students sign up to take a Third Language with much enthusiasm, only to drop it in time to come, their enthusiasm greatly doused by failed exams and busy timetables.
As such, to encourage students to continue with their Third Language, those who pass their third language at the O levels will now receive two extra points, though this is now only limited thus far to students taking the Malay or Chinese Special Programme.
The rationale behind such a move is obvious: Singapore lies in the immidiate vicinity of many Malay speaking and Muslim states. To be able to speak Malay would thus be an obvious advantage in the region.
Furthermore, the rise of China and the Middle East as an economic power means that being able to speak their languages will allow one to better communicate in these countries and thus be able to better exploit economic opportunities in these regions. Singapore being a globalized city, it has to be able to relate to various countries if it hopes to attain success.
However, will such incentives be effective in boosting the rates of Third Language enrolment, and for the vast majority of students in Singapore's educational system, is the need for a Third Language that important?
Adding another language to the myriad of subjects already on a student's timetable places much added stress on him; what more, students generally do not speak this language anywhere other than the classroom. Such limited education of a language will not serve well at all to endow a student with the ability to speak it; in the end, it amounts to grand waste of time unless a pupil is academically capable and well inclined.
The adding of a Third Language as a boost to a student's O language points may potentially create a problem similar to that facing Higher Chinese now: students taking up the subject for the sake of the extra points and promptly dropping it after admission into a JC of their choice. Even if more students take up Third Language because of this, it will still ultimately not grant them the competitive edge, and this initiative will have failed in its objective.
Also, as not all of Singapore's future workforce will be based overseas, not all students will pursue careers which require them to speak multiple languages.
At the end of the day, what we must remember is that taking a Third Language is ultimately a trade off; if we are willing and able to pursue another language in spite of the stress it brings, then well and good. Otherwise, any number of addded incentives will still not encourage students to take it up.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Aging workforce and later retirement: how to cope?
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/295219/1/.html
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,139676,00.html
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/295212/1/.html
In the recent National Day Rally speech, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong brought up a pressing issue: the rising life expectancy and its implications for elderly workers and retirees.
As Singapore grows more affluent, naturally living standards rise along with life expectancy. As such, more and more people are living past their retirement age. These people face a whole myraid of problems:
1. Financial shortfall
By far probably the most pressing problem facing retirees, many of today's middle aged workers will doubtlessly be worrying about their post-retirement age lives.
The idea is simple: As people live longer, they need more and more money to fund their expenses, which may even amount to more than their present ones. However, at present, most Singaporeans just aren't earning enough to save up for their retirement, let alone the prospect of illness.
To be able to save up enough to support oneself after one's retirement is a herculean task.
Assuming a person wishes to maintain his current living standards and expenses after retirement, which is also highly unlikely given rising healthcare costs, he will have to save up enough to last him for the 18 years from retirement to life expectancy, during the average 42 years of a person's working life.(21-62 years.)
This amounts to one needing to save about 43% of one's total income to support one's retirement, which is all but practically impossible, even without having a family to support.
2. Loss of children as financial supporters
It used to be that parents would raise their children, and then when they grew old, children would then take care of their parents in a role reversal. With the prospect of having to set aside about half of their own income just to settle their retirement though, and still having to content with supporting their own family, the elderly indeed no longer are able to count on their offspring being their financial support.
3. Longer working life
The retirement age has been raised to provide an avenue for workers to continue to have a steady flow of income into their elderly years, and also buys them some extra time to build up more savings, but how effective will this measure really be?
As stated in the news reports, less people are relishing the prospect of adding more years to their working life, wanting instead to withdraw their CPF earlier to pursue their plans while they still can, instead of waiting till old age prevents them from doing so.
However, if they do so instead of continuing to work, how are they to be able to support themselves financially after retirement?
Furthermore, even if they opt to continue to work, how many companies will be willing to retain these aging workers instead of hiring younger and more energetic workers, who are willing to settle for lower wages? Not to mention foreigners, who are competing with our locals for jobs. ( and not just the top end ones, foreign workers are taking over jobs from all levels from CEOs to cleaners and construction labourers )
Money issues aside, being a non economic contributor also brings with it certain stigmas.
In light of these problems, the good news of increased life expectancy does not sound like good news at all.
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,139676,00.html
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/295212/1/.html
In the recent National Day Rally speech, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong brought up a pressing issue: the rising life expectancy and its implications for elderly workers and retirees.
As Singapore grows more affluent, naturally living standards rise along with life expectancy. As such, more and more people are living past their retirement age. These people face a whole myraid of problems:
1. Financial shortfall
By far probably the most pressing problem facing retirees, many of today's middle aged workers will doubtlessly be worrying about their post-retirement age lives.
The idea is simple: As people live longer, they need more and more money to fund their expenses, which may even amount to more than their present ones. However, at present, most Singaporeans just aren't earning enough to save up for their retirement, let alone the prospect of illness.
To be able to save up enough to support oneself after one's retirement is a herculean task.
Assuming a person wishes to maintain his current living standards and expenses after retirement, which is also highly unlikely given rising healthcare costs, he will have to save up enough to last him for the 18 years from retirement to life expectancy, during the average 42 years of a person's working life.(21-62 years.)
This amounts to one needing to save about 43% of one's total income to support one's retirement, which is all but practically impossible, even without having a family to support.
2. Loss of children as financial supporters
It used to be that parents would raise their children, and then when they grew old, children would then take care of their parents in a role reversal. With the prospect of having to set aside about half of their own income just to settle their retirement though, and still having to content with supporting their own family, the elderly indeed no longer are able to count on their offspring being their financial support.
3. Longer working life
The retirement age has been raised to provide an avenue for workers to continue to have a steady flow of income into their elderly years, and also buys them some extra time to build up more savings, but how effective will this measure really be?
As stated in the news reports, less people are relishing the prospect of adding more years to their working life, wanting instead to withdraw their CPF earlier to pursue their plans while they still can, instead of waiting till old age prevents them from doing so.
However, if they do so instead of continuing to work, how are they to be able to support themselves financially after retirement?
Furthermore, even if they opt to continue to work, how many companies will be willing to retain these aging workers instead of hiring younger and more energetic workers, who are willing to settle for lower wages? Not to mention foreigners, who are competing with our locals for jobs. ( and not just the top end ones, foreign workers are taking over jobs from all levels from CEOs to cleaners and construction labourers )
Money issues aside, being a non economic contributor also brings with it certain stigmas.
In light of these problems, the good news of increased life expectancy does not sound like good news at all.
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Survey finds 20% of primary school students experienced bullying
Bullying is certainly not a new phenomena; however, the publicity surrounding it certainly is.
As a law of nature, power projection by the more dominant upon the less happens everywhere, not just in the classroom. We see it happening in the workplace, in relationships, in governments, empires, and even in the savannahs of North Africa.
On a less grand scale, bullying as a social phenomena among children has occured generations way before ours; today's grandparents and parents probably have tales to tell of bullying during their younger days.
Many psychologists have come up with various theories to explain why bullies behave the way they do; however, the most prevalent amongst them is that bullies feel the need to affirm themselves through the depreciation of others.
When on average a total of one third of one's schooling life is spent in school, being perpetually tormented emotionally, psychologically, and sometimes physically is not a very pleasing prospect.
The effects of bullying on the mental health are disturbing; though not prevalent in Singapore, 'bullycides' , suicides related to bullying, are common in the United States and Europe.
Bullying undoubtedly has negative effects on our young. Being victimized from a young age, they tend to develop feelings of insecurity and inadequacy, and grow up a shadow of the person they could have been. The emotional growth of a young person, after all, is just as important to his development as that of his talents.
As such, bullying if not effectively managed may lead to a generation of emotionally traumatized Singaporeans emerging from education into the competition of the real world where little quarter is asked and none given.
On the other hand though, one has to consider the possibility that the phenomenon of bullying has been over-hyped up by the media.
More than ever before, communications have grown and spread widely throughout the world in the 21st century. Together with this new spurt in the prescence of the media, the scope and range of news reports have enlarged, and newscasters are now able to turn the camera on anything in the world.
Thus, our generation is probably the first to turn the camera spotlight of the media on the occurence of bullying amongst children.
Now, one has to consider again that bullying has not suddenly emerged only recently, but has been experienced by generations before us.
The sudden severity accorded to this issue then, stems from one of three possible factors:
1) Today's children are mentally 'softer' than those of yesteryear.
2) Today's bullies have become more vicious than before.
3) Newly drawn attention to the otherwise forgotten realm of childhood bullying sparks more concern amongst people.
Few will dispute that the world has become a more dangerous place ever since World War II, the nuclear bomb, and the Internet came to be.
As I type this response, consider that I could well be learning how to build a dirty nuclear bomb, all on the very same computer.
The world has also become one filled with more comforts. Few will also dispute that the advent of the remote control, cable television, and again, the Internet, has not made life more entertaining.
And of course, comforts tend to soften people.
Finally, in ther reports of the news 'bullying' as a term is often misused to refer to any form of speech, action, or even behavior that might cause distress, no matter how minute, to another person.
As such, acts not considered bullying by children come to be labelled as 'vicious torment' by shell shocked adults are convicted that the realm of childhood is no longer as innocent as it was.
So, as to whether we should be alarmed at the 20% of students being bullied in primary school, perhaps we shall have to let the results speak in time;
whether bullies are getting more vicious, victims are getting weaker, or all this being much ado about nothing, only time will tell.
As a law of nature, power projection by the more dominant upon the less happens everywhere, not just in the classroom. We see it happening in the workplace, in relationships, in governments, empires, and even in the savannahs of North Africa.
On a less grand scale, bullying as a social phenomena among children has occured generations way before ours; today's grandparents and parents probably have tales to tell of bullying during their younger days.
Many psychologists have come up with various theories to explain why bullies behave the way they do; however, the most prevalent amongst them is that bullies feel the need to affirm themselves through the depreciation of others.
When on average a total of one third of one's schooling life is spent in school, being perpetually tormented emotionally, psychologically, and sometimes physically is not a very pleasing prospect.
The effects of bullying on the mental health are disturbing; though not prevalent in Singapore, 'bullycides' , suicides related to bullying, are common in the United States and Europe.
Bullying undoubtedly has negative effects on our young. Being victimized from a young age, they tend to develop feelings of insecurity and inadequacy, and grow up a shadow of the person they could have been. The emotional growth of a young person, after all, is just as important to his development as that of his talents.
As such, bullying if not effectively managed may lead to a generation of emotionally traumatized Singaporeans emerging from education into the competition of the real world where little quarter is asked and none given.
On the other hand though, one has to consider the possibility that the phenomenon of bullying has been over-hyped up by the media.
More than ever before, communications have grown and spread widely throughout the world in the 21st century. Together with this new spurt in the prescence of the media, the scope and range of news reports have enlarged, and newscasters are now able to turn the camera on anything in the world.
Thus, our generation is probably the first to turn the camera spotlight of the media on the occurence of bullying amongst children.
Now, one has to consider again that bullying has not suddenly emerged only recently, but has been experienced by generations before us.
The sudden severity accorded to this issue then, stems from one of three possible factors:
1) Today's children are mentally 'softer' than those of yesteryear.
2) Today's bullies have become more vicious than before.
3) Newly drawn attention to the otherwise forgotten realm of childhood bullying sparks more concern amongst people.
Few will dispute that the world has become a more dangerous place ever since World War II, the nuclear bomb, and the Internet came to be.
As I type this response, consider that I could well be learning how to build a dirty nuclear bomb, all on the very same computer.
The world has also become one filled with more comforts. Few will also dispute that the advent of the remote control, cable television, and again, the Internet, has not made life more entertaining.
And of course, comforts tend to soften people.
Finally, in ther reports of the news 'bullying' as a term is often misused to refer to any form of speech, action, or even behavior that might cause distress, no matter how minute, to another person.
As such, acts not considered bullying by children come to be labelled as 'vicious torment' by shell shocked adults are convicted that the realm of childhood is no longer as innocent as it was.
So, as to whether we should be alarmed at the 20% of students being bullied in primary school, perhaps we shall have to let the results speak in time;
whether bullies are getting more vicious, victims are getting weaker, or all this being much ado about nothing, only time will tell.
Singapore takes over ASEAN Chairmanship from Philippines
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will deliver an ASEAN lecture next Tuesday to kick off Singapore's tenure as the new ASEAN Chair.
This handover to Singapore was made official at the close of the 40th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in Manila on Thursday.
Singapore said that as Chair, its priority will be the three Cs – Charter, Community and Challenges.
Philippine Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo formally handed over the Chairmanship of ASEAN to his Singapore counterpart at the closing ceremony of the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting.
Singapore's Foreign Minister George Yeo said: "I remember telling Bert a year ago – 'You have to cook the dishes in your kitchen, then when it comes to our turn, we will serve the dishes and no one mistakes the waiter for the chef'."
Light moments aside, the new Chair knows there is a lot of serious work to be done, which includes a possible review of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).
Mr Yeo said Singapore intends to re-look at ARF's mechanism to ensure better follow-up action.
The November ASEAN Summit in Singapore will also see the leaders endorse three important matters – the ASEAN Charter, the ASEAN's blueprint to forge an economic community by 2015, and a declaration on tackling climate change and global warming.
Mr Yeo said: "At the end of this year, there will be an important meeting of the United Nations in Bali on climate change and leading up to this, climate change will be one of the topic items on the agenda at the ASEAN Summit, the ASEAN Plus Three Summit, the East and the APEC Summit.
"So it was good that at the ARF meeting this morning, there was complete solidarity on this point to confront the problem, which is our collective problem."
Mr Yeo added that the focus of ASEAN's 40th anniversary celebrations, which will be observed in all the ten member countries, will be on young people.
He said: "They may not be quite sure who are all the members of ASEAN, but they know generally that it is something good, something which brings the region together, reduces conflict and creates cooperation.
"They might not be sure how much cooperation there is, they might not know how much it impacts their daily lives. All that we do, boils down to security, making this a safer world for each of us, and about economic development, namely investments, jobs and better lives for people."
And Singapore hopes this cooperation will allow ASEAN to meet the challenges ahead, to become One ASEAN at the heart of a dynamic Asia.
Source: Channel NewsAsia
This handover to Singapore was made official at the close of the 40th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in Manila on Thursday.
Singapore said that as Chair, its priority will be the three Cs – Charter, Community and Challenges.
Philippine Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo formally handed over the Chairmanship of ASEAN to his Singapore counterpart at the closing ceremony of the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting.
Singapore's Foreign Minister George Yeo said: "I remember telling Bert a year ago – 'You have to cook the dishes in your kitchen, then when it comes to our turn, we will serve the dishes and no one mistakes the waiter for the chef'."
Light moments aside, the new Chair knows there is a lot of serious work to be done, which includes a possible review of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).
Mr Yeo said Singapore intends to re-look at ARF's mechanism to ensure better follow-up action.
The November ASEAN Summit in Singapore will also see the leaders endorse three important matters – the ASEAN Charter, the ASEAN's blueprint to forge an economic community by 2015, and a declaration on tackling climate change and global warming.
Mr Yeo said: "At the end of this year, there will be an important meeting of the United Nations in Bali on climate change and leading up to this, climate change will be one of the topic items on the agenda at the ASEAN Summit, the ASEAN Plus Three Summit, the East and the APEC Summit.
"So it was good that at the ARF meeting this morning, there was complete solidarity on this point to confront the problem, which is our collective problem."
Mr Yeo added that the focus of ASEAN's 40th anniversary celebrations, which will be observed in all the ten member countries, will be on young people.
He said: "They may not be quite sure who are all the members of ASEAN, but they know generally that it is something good, something which brings the region together, reduces conflict and creates cooperation.
"They might not be sure how much cooperation there is, they might not know how much it impacts their daily lives. All that we do, boils down to security, making this a safer world for each of us, and about economic development, namely investments, jobs and better lives for people."
And Singapore hopes this cooperation will allow ASEAN to meet the challenges ahead, to become One ASEAN at the heart of a dynamic Asia.
Source: Channel NewsAsia
Survey finds 20% of primary school students experience bullying
A survey conducted by the Singapore Children's Society found that one in every five primary school students could be a victim of bullying.
Among the 165 primary school students surveyed, more than 20 per cent experienced bullying, of which 65 per cent suffered verbal abuse and 42 per cent were physically bullied.
While verbal bullying refers to name calling and the use of abusive language, physical bullying means students were beaten, or had things thrown at them.
"We realised that some of the consequences of bullying could be children not being able to concentrate in class… There are students also telling us that they have difficulty sleeping at night because they have experienced bullying in school," said Tan Bee Joo, head of Student Service Hub, Singapore Children's Society.
In fact, over ten per cent of the victims surveyed skipped school to avoid being bullied. And four out of five victims said their bullies came from the same class.
The survey also showed that one in every three victims chose not to tell anybody about the problem.
However, six out of every ten students surveyed said they felt angry when bullied.
According to the survey, over 60 per cent of the bullies who confessed to their acts were actually victims of bullying themselves, which means bullying might encourage copycat behaviour.
Source: The New Paper
Among the 165 primary school students surveyed, more than 20 per cent experienced bullying, of which 65 per cent suffered verbal abuse and 42 per cent were physically bullied.
While verbal bullying refers to name calling and the use of abusive language, physical bullying means students were beaten, or had things thrown at them.
"We realised that some of the consequences of bullying could be children not being able to concentrate in class… There are students also telling us that they have difficulty sleeping at night because they have experienced bullying in school," said Tan Bee Joo, head of Student Service Hub, Singapore Children's Society.
In fact, over ten per cent of the victims surveyed skipped school to avoid being bullied. And four out of five victims said their bullies came from the same class.
The survey also showed that one in every three victims chose not to tell anybody about the problem.
However, six out of every ten students surveyed said they felt angry when bullied.
According to the survey, over 60 per cent of the bullies who confessed to their acts were actually victims of bullying themselves, which means bullying might encourage copycat behaviour.
Source: The New Paper
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
