Amobee, the mobile advertising company bought by SingTel for $321 million last year, has bought Gradient X, a young Los Angeles-based developer of a real-time bidding platform for mobile ads, which has just come out of beta.
The undisclosed sale price is understood to run to tens of millions of dollars – not bad for a startup that had only raised $3.75 million from backers, reports TechCrunch.
According to Trevor Healy, the CEO of Amobee, the acquisition is as much about picking up a product that fills a need at Amobee, as it is about picking up some key talent. “The founders and engineering team of Gradient X are technology rock stars, and when we met them we knew they had to be a part of the top team at Amobee,” said Healy.
“We are excited to join Amobee, which is globally recognized as the leader in mobile marketing,” said Brian Baumgart, CEO of Gradient X.
With the acquisition of Gradient X, Amobee will be able to offer companies the ability to make media buys through multiple channels and formats like video and HTML5, with bidding and pricing marked in real time, and with analytics for improved targeting. This is expected to give media buyers a better return on their spend.
Gradient X will remain in LA, and Amobee plans to capitalize on that by setting up a sales office in the city as well.
Amobee, a division of SingTel’s Digital L!fe Group, is headquartered in Redwood City, California, and has offices in Europe, Asia, Australia, Latin America and throughout the United States. Helping its customers run targeted, leading edge mobile ad campaigns on a global scale, Amobee was declared the winner of the “Mobile Marketing & Advertising Agency of the Year” award at the 17th Annual Global Mobile Awards, held at the GSMA Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.
Amobee serves not only SingTel but other carriers as well as including AT&T, Sprint, Vodafone and Telefonica. But the Asia-Pacific portion of its business is now growing. Whereas last year it made up 10 per cent of Amobee’s revenues, this year that rose to at least one-third, according to TechCrunch.
SingTel is believed to have bought Amobee to gain better control over ads across its network of operations, and offer publishers a more attractive, targeted advertising option than going with one of the other established players, such as Google.
That strategy will take on a new twist for SingTel in the coming years. SingTel is one of the 18 carriers that has signed on to work with Mozilla in the development of the Firefox OS for mobile.
SingTel subsidiary buys US startup
Haze to return next year
By Amy Chew
Corruption by Indonesian local governments and weak law enforcement are blamed by environmentalists for the recurring forest fires that spew noxious fumes over to Malaysia and Singapore.
Greenpeace Indonesia warned of more forest fires to come as the country approaches 2014 general elections as historically, local authorities give out land concession in exchange for funds for their respective political campaigns.
“This has happened in the past. I ask the public to be aware of this, to make sure that our forests and peatland are not sacrificed for political deals,” said Bustar.
Corruption by local governments often resulted in authorities turning a blind eye on fires started in the land concession held by large plantation companies.
“There are lots of corruption taking place at the local level. Foreign investors operating in Indonesia should not pay bribes so that they can carry out wrongdoings,” said Bustar Maitar, head of Greenpeace Indonesia forest campaign.
While the central government has strengthened its efforts at reducing deforestation by placing a moratorium on the issuance of new land concessions since 2011, local authorities have not fallen in line.
“It is very difficult to control everything at the local level,” said Greenpace’s Bustar.
On June 14, Riau governor Rusli Zainal was detained by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) for his alleged involvement in two separate graft cases. One of them involved a forestry permit case.
Indonesia’s Forestry Ministry confirmed the central government has not issued any new land permits since 2011 but admitted there were instances of local authorities giving out licences.
The regents (in a province regency) has the authority to issue land permits,” said Hadi Daryanto, secretary-general of Indonesia’s Forestry Ministry.
Prior to Indonesia’s ousting of the late autocractic President Suharto in 1998, land matters was controlled by the central government.
As part of the reform process, Indonesia devolved power from the center to the provinces right down to the regencies in 1999.
Consequently, deforestation increased exponentially as provincial governors and regents used their newfound authority to issue land permits at will.
In 1998, deforestation totaled two million hectares per year. In 2001-2003, the rate rose to 3.5 million hectares per annum, according to the Forestry Ministry.
“The euphoria of 1999-2003 over Regional Autonomy without governance resulted in the high rate of deforestation,” Daryanto added.
Currently, the central government practically only holds 15 per cent of the authority to protect the forests, with the other 85 per cent in the hands of local administrations due to regional autonomy, according to Daryanto.
To rectify the problem, the Indonesian Parliament is currently debating a bill to withdraw the right to decide land matters from regents and instead place the authority in the hands of provincial governors.
“The Parliamentary debate is still going-on,” said Daryanto.
Greenpeace’s analysis of NASA hotspot data in Sumatra 11th to 21st June revealed hundreds of fire hotspots in palm oil concessions that are owned by Indonesian, Malaysian and Singaporean companies.
Bustar said large Malaysian and Singaporean corporations need to “clean-up” their suppliers to ensure they are not engaged in setting fires to clear the land.
Large companies source for supply from smallholders who typically cultivate between 2 to 5 hectares of land. Small holders account for 35% to 40% of Indonesia’s total palm oil output.
“They (large plantations) need to raise the awareness of smallholders not to burn the land and supply them with machinery to chop down the trees,” said Bustar.
“As plantation companies are large corporation with much resources, they must bear the greater responsibility for preventing fires,” Bustar added.
Forest fires from the Indonesian islands of Sumatra and Kalimantan have emitted noxious haze to neighbouring countries in 1997, 2002, 2005 and 2008.
The haze in 1997 was one of the worst ever, as the fires burnt for months before they were put out, causing an estimated economic loss of US$4 billion to the region.
The severity of this year’s haze highlighted that little has been done despite the passage of time to eradicate this problem.
Indonesia authorities also face great difficulties in investigating the fires in the effort to bring guilty parties to justice.
“Quite a few (plantation) companies will put up a fight to prevent us (investigators) from entering their land to investigate,” said Indonesian fire investigator Bambang Hero Saharjo.
“Often, they (companies) also falsify their maps…making it difficult and time-consuming to verify the location of hotspots,” said Bambang.
Educate the educated
By Robin Low
When I was studying in Singapore, I too had felt the stress of exams. I did what everyone else was doing — memorizing notes, regurgitating textbooks, mugging through “10 year series assessment books” — and got good grades.
However, rather than focus on creativity, capability and intelligence, I find this approach favors diligent scholars. Our system is skewed so students who do well academically are given opportunities for highly paid government positions or entry into politics. The over emphasis on grades in an exam-centric system creates tremendous stress on students. This is because exams and streaming end up tied to the value of the people. No surprise many parents pay for private tuition and enrichment classes for their children.
In his latest National Day Rally speech, PM Lee acknowledged the current system was stressing parents and students and announced upcoming changes. But, will the changes be too little too late for the tiny red dot?
“Every School a Good School” sounds like a good start. The top 5 Junior Colleges in
Singapore produce 80% of the top scholars. This however, is because they only accept top students. It is socially unhealthy when most students in elite schools come from similar socio-economic backgrounds. This reinforces notions of exclusivity. It also threatens social mobility through education. (http://www.moe.gov.sg/initiatives/every-school-good-school/)
Because Singapore’s education system is centralized, best practices are shared and new “innovative ways” are introduced constantly. Based on this systematic approach, many students do very well in exams for Math and Science. However, people like Apple Co-founder Steve Wozniak have questioned Singapore’s creativity.
In 2006, the Ministry of Education launched a new policy: “Teach less, Learn More” to create a flexible system which promotes independent thinkers. According to feedback from teachers and parents, this drew mixed reviews. While teachers thought students spoke with greater confidence, some shared they still relied on rote learning to help students clear exams because assessments had remained the same. (http://www.nie.edu.sg/newsroom/media-coverage/2012/teach-less-learn-more-have-we-achieved-it )
A centralized bureaucratic education system poses many challenges. At planning stage, more initiatives seem ideal. However, implementation is a different story. “Innovative projects” are supposed to encourage students to be creative and to develop critical thinking. However, due to their training and pressure to maintain school rankings, well-meaning teachers may steer students towards scoring good grades for the project and remove most of the decision making process.
Because creativity and critical thinking are difficult to measure, the effectiveness of a new initiative can be judged on students’ feedback. While some new initiatives may give students room to do research and learn to think critically, many will not try them, as they are afraid mediocre grades will affect their future. Those who do try them may not like the ambiguity and lack of defined scope in the syllabus. This is the challenge in a grades oriented environment and the learning culture built up from young.
With too many reporting procedures and accountability structures to align schools with national direction, teachers spend more time on paperwork than teaching. They are also expected to think outside the box while performing well — within the box.
Society also has a part to play when it comes to “lack of creativity. Talent in the arts, sports, music, leadership ability, etc. is not sufficiently recognized. There may be a few outspoken and bold students but they are probably also labeled as trouble makers. In an orderly society that follows rules and regulations, creative people who do not conform get into trouble with the law. Local artists, Samantha Lo and Leslie Chew have got into trouble for expressing their views with art.
The challenge of Singapore’s education system goes beyond education. It will not happen by planning and through innovative ways of teaching and borrowing models from other countries will not work. It has to come from societal change and having more meaningful conversations with the people. Empowering citizens to co-create our future maybe the best move for a brighter future for Singapore.
VW's resignation: some clues better than some truths
By Kumaran Pillai
News Analysis
The exit of Vincent Wijeysingha from the Singapore Democratic Party can be traced to the change in the party’s political strategy in the last three to five years.
The party has steadily moved towards the centre, perhaps to win more votes. Wijeysingha gave me an interview some time ago and I remember asking him: What made you join the SDP?”
He said that back in 2007 the SDP had stated that it was in support of repealing 377A and it also reiterated that point in its vision:
“As a nation, we must not only show tolerance but also acceptance of our fellow citizens regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation, or political persuasion.”
In what appears to be an email exchange published on their website between John Tan, the Asst Secretary General of SDP, and a SDP supporter, John wrote:
“The SDP, on the other hand, while trying to be as practical as we can at some level, must constantly be guided by our foundational tenets. When we say equality for all, we mean equality for all.”
Prior to GE 2011, SDP often championed non-mainstream issues such as the abolition of the death penalty, repealing of 377A and promotion of free speech and assembly.
The party’s run-ins with the law were notable and their activists took pride that they made sacrifices for the greater good of the country.
All this stopped, partly due to the influx of new members who have begun to influence the core team with a more “moderate” positioning.
Transitioning from a radical left wing party to the middle is not an easy undertaking. It is a delicate process and sometime it requires a leadership change to make that paradigm shift.
Like other political parties, SDP looks unified from the outside; they look like a team with strongly-driven values of liberal democracy, but in actual they are split along the lines of morality. The irony is, while the liberals in the party saw Wijeysingha as the likely successor to Dr Chee Soon Juan, the conservatives thought that he was a liability.
Responding to Dr Balakrishnan’s gay agenda insinuations, party leader Chee Soon Juan said:
“We are not pursuing the gay agenda and none of our MPs will,” he says at the beginning of the video, and repeats himself near the end: “Will the SDP pursue the gay cause? I answer forthrightly and without equivocation: No.”
There was a perception among the party conservatives that the middle ground comprises those who are opposed to any extension of rights to the LGBT community and having a gay candidate would cost SDP precious votes.
To add insult to injury, some of the more statistically-inclined members have put a number to it. According to them, having Wijeysingha on board would mean a loss of 4 to 10 per cent of the popular vote.
Needless to say, the grapevine had it that SDP lost in Holland-Bukit Timah because of Wijeysingha’s sexuality.
There was also concern that his recent outing on his Facebook before the Pink Dot event would cost them more votes in the next election.
In order to mitigate the risks of losing the previous 20+ per cent vote swing, SDP on the other hand made a tactical move to “side-line” LGBT issues and to focus more on the bread and butter issues.
As recently as July 11, Chee posted this curious statement on his party’s website::
“I had stated in 2011 during the general elections that the SDP would not pursue a gay agenda. I say again: Neither the Party nor any of our members, including Vincent, will embark on a gay agenda.”
In pursuit of the political middle ground, it appears that the SDP has let down the LGBT community by rescinding on their liberal values. It is no longer guided by its “foundational tenets,” that there will be equality for all.
Wijeysingha found that the party he helped to build has shifted away from its core values. But he has vowed to bring those values, including equality for all, to the civil society space.
From a strategy point of view, SDP’s shift to the middle ground might look like an expedient political move. But it may not work.
Both Workers’ Party and the People’s Action Party have crowded that space… For the SDP to enter that fray at this juncture can be suicidal.
As Singapore politics matures, what might look like fringe causes can become vote winners in the years to come.
Look at how the Green Party has performed in Germany. Although they are far, far away from forming the government, they do influence politics in a big way.
SDP needs some patience and the will to stick to its principles to make headway in Singapore politics.
Maslow's tyranny and Singapore's needs
By Nazry Bahrawi
For his unwitting role in shaping Singapore, Abraham Maslow can be seen as the modern equivalent of Sang Nila Utama. Like the Hindu prince, the American psychologist was central to defining this island-state on the back of something imaginary.
If Sang Nila’s illusionary lion gave us our name, Maslow’s concept of human motivations is imprinted into our soul.
Popularly known as ‘Maslow’s hierarchy of needs’, this theory states that human needs are structured and incrementally fulfilled. We operate by first satisfying our basic physical needs such as sleep and food, then working our way through a series of other needs before finally seeking to attain self-actualisation through the pursuit of virtues like morality and creativity, among others.
Agreeing that material needs matter most when Singapore first gained independence, political elites were quick to profess economic pragmatism as our national philosophy. Policies were crafted to ensure that resource-scarce Singapore attracts foreign investment and stays that way.
Almost 50 years later, signs are suggesting that Maslow was not quite right – people do not necessarily pursue their needs in stages, but all at once.
Take the recent Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) survey that found Singaporeans expressing a desire for a less competitive and more compassionate society. Also consider the emergence of a greater number of ordinary Singaporeans championing non-economic, organic causes like the anti-death penalty campaign, LGBT rights and Internet freedom.
Things are changing even in the business sector, as more young Singaporeans venture out to set up SMEs with some degree of civic conscience. A good example is Poached, an online lifestyle magazine that injects their otherwise ‘fluff’ articles with a dose of social commentary.
Despite these indications, policymakers are not quite ready to rethink their appropriation of Maslow’s theory.
Having proposed that Singapore is fast becoming post-pragmatic at a closed-door conference three years ago, a senior political figure said to me that Singaporeans have not fully resolved their bread and butter issues. I distinctly remember him saying with conviction: “Recall what Maslow said.”
Newer political leaders are no different. Reacting to the above-mentioned IPS survey, MP Zainal Saparin was quoted as saying: “When ours was a growing economy, and survival was a key concern, there was a lot of emphasis on being hardworking, accumulating wealth, fighting for a better life.”
But contrary to Maslow’s postulation, Singapore is proving to be a place where even the poor dreams. We are capable of self-actualising even if we have not slept nor ate enough.
One possible way of sidestepping the tyranny of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is to look for alternative measures of progress. A viable example is the Social Progress Index (SPI) introduced just this year. The SPI tabulates national progress by measuring GDP growth in relation to social and environmental outcomes. Some ASEAN member-states like Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia have already become signatories to this index. Why not Singapore?
Another suggestion is to establish a national body that will fund serious study of the arts and humanities in the same manner that the National Research Foundation (NRF) and A*Star sponsor science and technological research. Such an institution will be different from the National Arts Council, which focuses on funding practitioners, because its aim is to build up a repertoire of cultural critics and experts who can help Singaporeans make sense and appreciate this much-ignored aspect of human life.
This disjuncture at this juncture of the Singapore story has placed us in danger of losing the plot. What will be our next move?
Nazry is a lecturer at the Singapore University of Technology and Design, and research fellow at the Middle East Institute-NUS.
Why some drugs cost more in Singapore
By Richard Philip
You may have noticed that some commonly prescribed drugs for long-term conditions such as diabetes and high blood pressure cost more in Singapore than across the Causeway in Malaysia, or other parts of the world. There are a number of reasons why the same drugs are priced differently across countries.
Drugs fall into two broad categories – generic drugs and branded drugs. Generic drugs, which are copies of branded drugs whose patents have expired, are generally inexpensive throughout the world. Branded drugs are much more expensive because of the start-up investment, research, and marketing expenses that go into producing a new drug from scratch and bringing it onto the market.
Most pharmaceutical companies set the price for a branded drug based on a country’s ability to pay for that drug. So, it can cost more in one country than in another.
Drug makers expect countries with a high per capita GDP to pay more for branded drugs than countries with a low per capita GDP. This can lead to a huge price differential between countries. This price differential is further amplified by the difference in foreign exchange rates.
Focused on getting a handsome return on their investments, pharmaceutical companies are keen to sell branded drugs at the highest price a market can bear. Say, for example, the best available treatment for a particular condition is surgery that costs $30,000, and there is a 5 per cent risk that the patient undergoing the surgery may die. Now, if a pharmaceutical company develops a drug that is as effective and has only a 1 per cent mortality risk, even if that drug costs 30 cents to produce, the company will price its new drug regime higher than $30,000, because the best available treatment is the benchmark, explains Dr Jeremy Lim. Dr Lim, the principal consultant at Insights Health Associates in Singapore, is the author of the book, Myth or Magic: The Singapore Healthcare System, which will be available in bookstores in mid-September.
“The pharmaceutical company would think that, if, its drug is as effective as the current surgical treatment and has five times lower mortality risk, it deserves to charge a premium. Hence, the company would charge $30,000 plus whatever premium it deems to be appropriate,” says Dr Lim, whose previous experiences include being a senior consultant with the Ministry of Health (MOH) in Singapore, and director of research and education at SingHealth, Singapore’s largest healthcare group.
Another reason why branded drugs cost less in some countries, and more in others, is that, in certain countries, people can buy prescription drugs over the counter because of lax regulatory controls. Although laws in those countries may state that certain medicines are to be made available by prescription only, or by a registered pharmacist, in practice, it is often possible to get those drugs over the counter. This means, a patient does not have to bear the costs involved in having the drug prescribed to him.
“When it is a prescription-only drug, the administrative cost goes up because you need a doctor to prescribe the medicine, a pharmacist to dispense it and the storage of the drugs needs to be audited and monitored, and you need paper trails. The control mechanisms are tighter and they cost money,” says Dr Lim.
A third reason why drug prices vary from country to country is limited economies of scale resulting from smaller volume drug purchases. The more a healthcare provider, whether it is the government or a private hospital, buys of a particular drug, the cheaper the price gets.
Government subsidies for drugs also play a role in price differences. The Singapore government does not subsidize branded drugs unless they fall within the Standard Drug List maintained by MOH, or come under one of the government’s subsidy schemes. Patients taking a non-subsidized branded drug would therefore have to pay the full price of that drug, and hence, would end up paying more than patients in a country where that drug is heavily subsidized, Dr Lim notes.
Even within a single country, the same drug can cost differently at different hospitals. One reason for this is that hospitals buying more of a particular branded drug can benefit from economies of scale. According to Dr Lim, hospitals mark up the selling price of their drugs up to about 35 per cent to defray operating costs.
“While this percentage formula is administratively easy for hospitals and healthcare facilities, it can lead to substantial cost pressures on patients. A 30 per cent mark-up of a one-dollar drug is 30 cents, but the same mark-up for a thousand-dollar drug is $300,” he adds.
Marvellous Melbourne
By P Francis
HATTRICKS are an achievement usually scored by strikers on a football field. So when a city is named the most liveable city in the world by an independent panel for three successive years, then that city must be doing something right to receive such a rare accolade. Melbourne scored 97.5% for stability, healthcare, culture and infrastructure.
According to the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) latest rankings of 140 cities, the best ones to live in are Australia, Canada, Austria, Finland and New Zealand – except for Austria and Finland, it is no surprise the other three are huge immigration targets.
Following closely on the heels of Melbourne, were Vienna (97.4%) in Austria – the home of The Sound of Music –Vancouver (97.3%) and Toronto (97.2%), both in Canada, completing the top four. It is significant that four other Australian cities were in the top 10: Adelaide (96.6%) was 5th again (jointly with Calgary in Canada), Sydney 7th and Perth 9th. It is also remarkable that Canada has three in the top 10. Helsinki in Finland was 8th, while Auckland in New Zealand rounded off the top 10.
In Asia, Osaka in Japan managed 12th; Tokyo, Japan 18th; Beijing, China 74th; Mumbai, India 116th. So where was Singapore? Research, unfortunately, could not unearth anything on the island republic, which was ranked by Business Traveller Asia-Pacific last year as “the most livable city in both Asia-Pacific and the world. Within Asia-Pacific, the Lion City is followed closely by Kobe and Hong Kong.”
As expected, prominent Melbournians waxed lyrical about the city’s latest achievement. They pointed to the heritage architecture, lovely gardens and parks, hub of arts and culture, beaches and the string of major events hosted by Marvellous Melbourne. Often dubbed the ‘Sporting Capital of The Word’, it is home to Formula 1 motor racing, Australian Open Grand Slam tennis and the Melbourne Cup – a horse race that stops the nation on the first Tuesday every November.
Add to that the multicultural precincts, such as Carlton, Richmond, Springvale and Boxhill, which offer distinct flavours in cuisine and shopping. The friendly people living in harmony, well-planned streets and expressways, trams, trains and buses are vital ingredients in a success story.
Jumping on the bandwagon were an exuberant Lord Mayor Robert Doyle, Tourism Minister Louise Asher and former premier Jeff Kennett – all singing a litany of praises in rare accord about how easy it was to sell the attractions of the Victorian capital that they love: from the fine hotels to the exhibition venues and sports stadiums.
The Herald Sun reported that Lord Mayor Robert Doyle had said continuing to drive down crime and an underground rail line linking North Melbourne to Domain on St Kilda Rd were crucial to retain liveability status. “Overall it is a remarkable testament to our remarkable city,” Cr Doyle said. “That doesn’t mean there are things we can’t improve.”
Meanwhile, The Advertiser in Adelaide trumpeted that the South Australian capital has overtaken Sydney as one of the world’s most liveable cities, with recent major infrastructure boosting its international profile. Economist Intelligence Unit survey editor Jon Copestake said from London that just 1.6% separated the five Aussie cities surveyed. “’Australian cities continue to thrive in terms of liveability; not only do they benefit from the natural advantages of low population density, but they have continued to improve with some high profile infrastructure investments.”
The release of the EIU rankings has been criticised by the New York Times for being too anglocentric in that “The Economist clearly equates livability with speaking English.” This view may have been goaded by the fact that the best US cities in the survey were far down the list with Honolulu 26th and Pittsburgh at 30th!
The rankings also had the worst city as Damascus (Syria), followed by Tehran (Iran) and Douala (Cameroon). Obviously, cities with war and acute poverty scored very poorly in the survey.
Make no mistake about it, the EIU assessments are not geared to find heaven on earth. On the contrary, they source the ideal places where there is an array of goods and services easily available, effective infrastructure and low personal risk. What is not included is the cost of living.
Yet, more immigrants are arriving Down Under, particularly in Melbourne. Asad Sheikh, of Indian Spice Pavilion in Scoresby Village, was born in India. He moved to Singapore from 2002 to 2008 before emigrating with his family to Australia and is in the process of taking up citizenship. He said that, despite working as a chef in Singapore’s four- and five-star hotels, the lure of Australia was too much to resist: “I wanted better education for my children and a peaceful lifestyle, so I came to Melbourne. I am now building a new house for my family.”
Having lived in the world’s No. 1 city for 23 years, I have seen the Melbourne sprawl extend from a radius of about 30km from the CBD to about 40km. Outer suburbs in the south-east, such as Ferntree Gully, Boronia, Wantirna, Rowville and Dandenong were considered in ‘the sticks’ (rural). Today, property in these areas have more than tripled in price as the newer suburbs of Berwick, Narre Warren, Packenham and Skye are not so desirable because of the peak hour traffic snarl.
Medical facilities, including hospitals and research are well established. Monash, Melbourne and Deakin universities spearhead tertiary education here. Various types of cooked food originating from different immigrant source countries are easily available, while most of the ingredients and spices are sold at the local supermarket and Asian grocery outlets.
Housing affordability is debatable within local circles, but when compared to overseas houses they are reasonable. Singaporeans could buy a house in the outer suburbs for less than the price of a HDB flat.
As for weekend leisure trips or week-long holidays, there are many places on the fringe of Melbourne, including the Mornington Peninsula and its seaside towns, the famous Philip Island and its Penguin Parade, the Bellarine Peninsula on the other side of Port Philip Bay and the coastal towns of Portarlington, St Leonards, Torquay on the Surf Coast, Lorne, the Twelve Apostles and Apollo Bay to name a few. Add the historic regional towns of Bendigo, Ballarat and Geelong; the Dandenong Ranges; country attractions in Nurmukah and Lakes Entrance to widen the choice. These enjoyable trips are only a few hours away. For those who have Lady Luck in their pocket, the Crown Casino Complex offers a myriad of food and shopping besides the cards, dice and poker machines.
To be honest, much more can be done to improve Melbourne – from the frequency and quality of the trains and trams to the congestion and high parking costs in the CBD. Perhaps that is the hallmark of a popular metropolis, which also has a very busy container port on its doorstep. With the high frequency of international and domestic flights zeroing in on Tullamarine Airport and the smaller Avalon Airport, perhaps the ‘earmarked’ land for a Frankston Airport in the south-east – to ease the load – should be seriously considered now and work started within the next two years.
Anyone out there fancy a wager that Marvellous Melbourne could steal the coveted crown once again in 2014?
P. Francis is an English tutor in Melbourne, who has more than 20 years’ journalism experience with newspapers, books and magazines in Singapore and Australia.
Ex-Singaporean fights Aussie polls
By Janice Teo
Australia has big dreams and high hopes for Asia. So big that politicians on both side of the fence are calling this the Asian Century for Australia – and they’ve produced a government White Paper called Australia in the Asian Century to prove it.
A government website, asiancentury.dpmc.com.au shows just how serious about it they are – there are links to country strategies and cultural exchange programs with Indonesia, India, South Korea, South-east Asia and of course the grand-daddy of them all, China.
As the website states: “The scale and pace of Asia’s transformation is unprecedented and the implications for Australia are profound.”
There is perhaps no better time to be an Asian in Australia than now.
Into this fray comes ex-Singaporean and businessman Henry Heng, who is the CEO of Refresh Water, a Perth bottled water company that has six factories in four Australian capital cities.
Heng, 57, was a stockbroker with Singapore stockbroking firm Vickers Ballas and ran a small but successful chain of daycare centres and a bookshop in Singapore as well.
He is a soft-spoken man with a passion for profit whether it be business, politics or his persona life.
“Being a businessman, I don’t like to do something for no results. I decided to go into politics when I realized that today, with the current political climate, I can make a contribution,” he says.
Asians make up 10 per cent of the population in WA. This state, with its mineral wealth, has benefitted more than any other in Australia from resource-hungry China.
“Yet there are no Asians in state government,” says Heng. “With such a large number of Asians here, we could really do with an Asian voice to represent and familiarize Australians with the culture and the politics of the region.
“For instance, it’s quite pointless to try and sell eco-tourism to the Chinese market; generally when Chinese travel, they want to eat, they want to shop. These are valuable insights to a country trying to appeal in a big way to a huge market.”
So this year, Heng made the big move into politics and stood for election to the WA state government.
In addition to being Asian, Heng is also a Christian, which explains why he is standing with Family First, a party that campaigns for Australia to return to biblical and family values, to its Christian heritage and roots.
“I’ve always been passionate about public service, but being an Asian I never thought there was any hope for me,” he said. “But things have changed.
“Australia is now aggressively building ties with the region on both sides of the political fence I think, and Asian ownership of Australian businesses and cattle stations is becoming quite an issue.
“At the same time, Australia is suffering from an erosion of values and I believe we need to see the country return to its Judeo-Christian roots. Strong families I believe are the foundation of a strong country.”
He feels he has found the perfect platform for these twin passions – business and family values. “A vote for me is a vote for small business and a vote for strong families,” he says.
He was not successful in his bid, even though a simple election jingle written by a friend got more than 40,000 views on YouTube and attracted publicity from all the major media outlets who, never ever having seen this kind of election tactic before, were frankly quite bemused at its corny but catchy Sunday School flavour.
Unfortunately for Heng, the views did not translate into votes even though people in the street were recognizing him as ‘the man with the jingle’ by the end of the campaign, but he is undaunted and has thrown his hat in for a Federal seat by running as second ticket to the party’s primary candidate, Linda Rose, in Australia’s General Election this Saturday (Sept 7).
He knows that he will not win, but under Australia’s system of voting preferences, he can give all his votes to Ms Rose and thus bolster her final count.
But are Heng’s dreams too big? How does such a minority party make any kind of difference in Australia or in its legislation?
The answer lies in Australia’s two-tiered political system – an Upper House and a Lower House.
The Upper House consists of senators from a variety of political parties. It has the power to block legislation initiated by the government. To push legislation through, the government can and does barter terms with minority parties for their support.
This is where Heng hopes he and/or his party, if elected, will have a voice.
When he and his family moved to Perth 17 years ago, entering politics in Australia was the last thing on his mind, though in Singapore he was active in grassroots organization and was vice-chairman of the Queenstown community centre youth group.
“I never entered politics in Singapore because firstly it’s not an easy thing to be selected by the PAP, and opposition parties then are not like they are now. Singapore has become much more open,” says Heng.
“I was in Singapore during the 2011 election campaign and I saw people at opposition rallies unafraid to be seen on camera. In my day, anybody who attended an opposition rally would hide behind their umbrellas, their handbags, anything just to make sure they weren’t seen.”
Whatever the circumstances were that kept Heng out of politics then, he now stands firmly in the spotlight.
Is Capital Punishment Relevant Today?
By P. Francis
BARBARIC to some, has capital punishment gone past its use-by date? Is the march to the gallows obsolete? Does the electric chair or death by lethal injection strike fear in would-be criminals? These questions have sparked fiery debates for years between the righteous and the ‘bleeding hearts’.
Today, how many countries still have the death penalty? The USA – the world champion of human rights – is one of 58 countries continuing with it; 97 nations have abolished it and the rest have not used it for 10 years, according to wikipedia. However, Amnesty International has reported 140 nations have abolished the death penalty. Last year, only Latvia abolished it while 21 countries had executions and 63 passed the death sentence.
An eye for eye comes from the best-selling book of all time – the Bible. However, freedom fighter Mohandas Gandhi, who always advocated peaceful means of civil disobedience, has been attributed the quote: “an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind”. The great Mahatma (Sanskrit for ‘Great Soul’) seems to have had a valid point and huge support.
Meanwhile, over seven weeks this year, there has been a strong move to galvanise the world against the death penalty:
12-15 June: Madrid hosted the 5th World Congress Against the Death Penalty in Spain this year – attended by 90 countries. Anabel Sánchez Sierra wrote in Periodismo Ciudadano: “Key issues discussed included the abolition of the death penalty, along with the related issues of adherence to human rights treaties, the procurement of a moratorium on death penalty convictions, and the establishment of penal code reforms. The idea for this international event was generated at the previous convention, held in Geneva in 2010. At that time, Spain committed to creating the ‘Comisión Internacional Contra la Pena de Muerte’, or International Commission Against the Death Penalty (established that same year at the World Day Against the Death Penalty) for the purpose of achieving a universal moratorium on the death penalty within the next five years.”
The attendees at the congress heard messages from South Africa’s Nobel Laureate Desmond Tutu, UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, Pope Francis, and other influential leaders. Rachel Zeng of the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC), who was there, confirmed: “Ms Ong Xiao Yun from Think Centre and myself from SADPC were in Madrid for the congress. I was there as part of Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN).”
So did Singapore send an official representative to the congress? Ms Zeng said: “Not that I know of.” However, Madasamy Ravi, a lawyer and member of ADPAN, Singapore was involved in the plenary session on Asia.
28 June: The UN News Centre said that Ban Ki-moon urged United Nations Member States to move towards the abolition of the death penalty, and called on countries where the procedure is still practised to increase transparency to allow a serious debate on capital punishment. “The taking of life is too absolute, too irreversible, for one human being to inflict on another, even when backed by legal process,” Mr Ban said opening the high-level event and panel discussion at UN Headquarters in New York, on ‘Moving away from the death penalty – Wrongful Convictions’. “We have a duty to prevent innocent people from paying the ultimate price for miscarriages of justice. The most sensible way is to end the death penalty.”
27 July: A report on news.com.au said that fewer executions of death penalties occurred last year according to the Italian NGO Hands off Cain. The report said the worldwide figures fell from 5,004 in 2011 to 3,967 in 2012. The total of nations without capital punishment rose from 155 to 158 for the same period. “The significant decrease in death penalties is to a great extent thanks to China, where they dropped from 4,000 to 3,000 in just a year,” Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino said at the presentation of the report. China saw a drop of 10% each year from 2007 because a new law required death sentences to be heard in the Supreme Court, the report added. However, China remains top of the Hands off Cain blacklist, ahead of Iran (580 in 2012) and Iraq (nearly doubled to 129 in 2012). The report added: “Although 33 of the 40 countries that still have the death penalty are ruled by despots, some ‘liberal democracies’ returned to capital punishment in 2012.”
Singapore still enforces death by hanging – the last Australian hanged in the republic was Van Tuong Nguyen on 2 Dec 2005 for drug trafficking about 396.2g of heroin – more than 26 times the amount for which the death penalty is mandatory in the Lion City. Despite pleas for clemency by the Australian Government, the Pope, Queen Elizabeth and Amnesty International and other groups, the Singapore Government stood firm, perhaps on principle – so much so that Australian PM John Howard could not sway his Singapore counterpart Lee Hsien Loong to help the accused, who was remorseful, co-operated with the police and had been baptised as Caleb while in Changi prison.
Australia’s Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) last month screened a two-part dramatised miniseries produced by Khoa Do – called Better Man – which relived the trauma and tragedy of the events and how it affected Van’s mother and twin brother. It was a powerful performance and sent an unmistakable message to those travelling overseas that there are severe penalties in some countries, especially Singapore, and to respect their laws.
However, a minute concession has been made to Singapore’s capital punishment law. On 9 July last year, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean told parliament that he was easing the death penalty for traffickers, but only if they had acted solely as a courier and did not supply or distribute the drug.
Meanwhile, there will be a stay of executions at Changi since the laws have now been amended to accommodate the tweaking on 14 Nov last year. The more than 30 prisoners on Death Row – mostly on drug offences – will be able to re-apply for sentencing. This could mean life imprisonment with the rotan (caning).
With regard to murder, Law Minister K. Shanmugam told the House – on the same day as the DPM – that the government wished to retain capital punishment only for murders with an intention to kill. If there was no outright motive to kill, the sentence could be either the death penalty or a life sentence.
This begs the rhetorical question: If Van Tuong Nguyen had been arrested in Singapore for drug trafficking this year instead of more than 10 years ago, would he have avoided the hangman? Perhaps not, because nothing may have changed until his case generated wide publicity to prompt the amendment.
Only this week, Gopinathan Nair Remadevi Bijukumar, 37, had his murder conviction reduced to life imprisonment and 18 strokes of the cane – the third re-sentencing since Singapore’s law on the death penalty was amended.
Indonesia, too, has a Death Row where two Australians await execution for drug offences committed in April 2005. Ringleaders of the group dubbed The Bali Nine by the media, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, were sentenced to death by firing squad. Appeals for clemency to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono have been in vain and their execution is imminent.
However, some Australians have said: “Do the crime, do the time!” They have argued that these drug mules cause widespread pain, suffering and sometimes death to youngsters and they deserve the maximum sentences.
But, in the Ten Commandments, made famous in the blockbuster movie of the same name by Cecil B DeMille – starring Charlton Heston as Moses and Yul Bryner as Pharaoh his half-brother – in 1956, the sixth commandment proclaimed Thou shall not kill.
In Australia, the death penalty was fully abolished in 1985. Last September, the horrific rape and murder of Irish woman Jillian Meagher made headlines around the world. She was attacked as she walked home on a busy street after Friday night drinks with colleagues in inner Melbourne. Subsequently, more than 30,000 people marched down Sydney Road in Brunswick – the scene of the crime – demanding safety for women in the streets. The killer, Adrian Ernest Bayley, had been on parole and sought yet another victim. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a 35-year non-parole period. In this instance, some people asked if Australia should bring back the death penalty for repeated offenders or serial killers.
The other high-profile murder happened two months later and centred on Sarah Cafferkey, who was murdered by someone she knew – after a row over drugs in his house at Bacchus Marsh in outer Melbourne. The killer, Steven James Hird, who had killed before and served time in jail, had stabbed the victim 19 times before stuffing her in a dustbin and covering it with cement. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment without parole. “Was that enough?” some concerned citizens have questioned again.
Looking back to 2011, the Herald Sun reported that Victorian Liberal MP Bernie Finn called for the return of the death penalty, especially for drug kingpins. He received a backlash. Opponents of the death penalty said the re-introduction of capital punishment would make Australia a pariah in the eyes of the world. However, Finn found support in Crime Victims Support Association president Noel McNamara, who said: “I think the death penalty should be brought back for anyone who takes a life or causes a (loss of) life like happens with drug traffickers. Of course, there’s nothing like permanent rehabilitation on the end of a rope.”
But Melburnian mother of two girls Ms M Go, who grew up in Indonesia, disagreed. She said: “I don’t believe in capital punishment. You cannot bring back the victims, who died. Instead of capital punishment, they should be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. They are the product of parents and society and were not corrected at home and in school. The Bible also said to offer the other cheek and not hit back.”
Ferntree Gully’s Debra Weston, a working mother of three girls, is not comfortable with the death penalty: “Basically, I would like to say ‘yes, bring it back’ – but mistakes can be made. People may be framed or wrongly convicted.”
On the other hand, Wellington Village newsagent Isaac Awat, a Catholic from Iraq, felt strongly about the weak sentencing of hardcore criminals. He said: “Australia should bring back the death penalty for the dangerous people, like those who killed Jillian Meagher and Sarah Cafferkey.”
Basically, there are two schools of thought for and against enforcing the death penalty. In between, there are some who believe that the death penalty still has a purpose as a strong deterrent to serious crime, such as repeat, multiple or serial killers. Under their plan, the condemned would be held on Death Row for a few years until all avenues of appeal are exhausted. This ‘middle’ group believes even a life sentence without parole would be a drain on taxpayers’ funds. More importantly, these high-risk killers have nothing to lose by attempting a jail break and even kill again if they escape.
For the moment, the jury is out on the relevance of the death penalty and in some countries the noose still dangles on the gallows – perhaps even gathering dust. Make no mistake about it, this problem will fester and not go away for a long time!
P. Francis is an English tutor in Melbourne, who has more than 20 years’ journalism experience with newspapers, books and magazines in Singapore and Australia.
Ballot boxes: Tan Jee Say wants thorough police probe
The empty ballot boxes deserve a thoroughgoing police probe, says Tan Jee Say. Mr Tan, who contested the 2011 presidential election, is surprised by the sudden discovery of two empty ballot boxes. This is irregular. The ballot boxes are supposed to be discarded after the elections, said the Elections Department.
The Elections Department filed a police report after it received an email from a member of the public on Tuesday about the empty ballot boxes found. The Elections Department did not say where the boxes were found or which elections they were used for. But they were purportedly found in a school room and based on pictures circulating online appear to be from two polling stations in the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC and were used in the 2011 presidential election.
Mr Tan, who contested the election, said: “I am surprised this has happened. Looks like there is unfinished work by some people. Now that a police report has been lodged, I hope the police will thoroughly investigate into it.”
The Elections Department, which is under the Prime Minister’ Office, stressed the discovery of the empty, used ballot boxes had no implications on “the secrecy of the vote and the electoral process”.
“They (the boxes) are supposed to have been collected by the Elections Department’s contractor, along with other discarded items, from the counting centres for general disposal,” it said. The discovery of used empty ballot boxes would mean that “these were missed by the contractor at the point of collection for disposal”, the statement added.
Police said: “The persons interviewed by the Police have told the Police that the ballot boxes were empty when they found them, with no ballot papers inside. Preliminary investigations indicate that these were empty boxes left behind in the counting centre intended to be disposed of. ”
Investigations are continuing, police added.