February 2008
Sheep For Good Reason
American Idol-judge Simon Cowell was quoted in The Straits Times on Dec 13, 07: “(Money) allows you more freedom. It gives you more of a choice with your destiny. I’ve always been petrified of working for a boss I didn’t like and whom I was in fear of.” How kind of ST to alert Singaporeans to such a notion of empowerment, not that the people will be able to put two-&-two together to understand why our leaders are squeezing our pockets now.
Just some three months or so ago, it was reported in the ST that taxi touts at Orchard Towers, asking tourists for a standard-fare of $25 (and some -- $35), were arrested for flouting the rule to charge by the meter. (Times are hard these days when inflation hits, ‘enterprising’ cab-drivers went to town to conduct their own supply-&-demand method of charging fares.) Well-well-well, look what I discovered one day standing in the long taxi-queue at VivoCity! There are now authorized standee-signs around the queue area promoting SMRT cabs for a standard-fare of $35! Naturally, it’s targeted at those who don’t wanna join the long-long queue, and naturally, those signs have been approved by the authorities, since there were even ‘promoters’ milling around to sound the offer out loud to commuters in the queue.
Singaporeans may not bother to put two-&-two together but logic would deduce that the practice of charging a standard fare is illegal when carried out by the individual cab-driver. But once Big Brother has a hand in it, it’s completely legal! So, it’s really nothing to do with the practice itself then, but a question of who does it. Really, what’s right and wrong? It’s up to Big Brother! (Think of the let’s-have-casinos issue!) Besides, I’m sure there’s a legit excuse that those SMRT cabs offering the special hiked rate of $35 a ride are bigger Space cabs and London cabs! Like as if commuters bother about cab-size when all they want is to hop in a cab to get from point A to point B (unless they are looking for a cab to sit more than four passengers). Alas, who’d bother to enter into such splitting-hair arguments with our authority? We all know the higher price to pay when one does!
On Jan 1, ’08, the top story in the ST was ‘A year to remember’ and it listed out various issues and achievements of the past year. Issues named were “Shortage of prime office space, overheated construction industry, tight labour market, rising inflation and cost of living”. What? No mention of the world-record hike in State Ministers’ salaries, and the new age-limit to withdraw one’s CPF (Central Provident Fund) savings being revised to age 85? Those were non-issues? Indeed, they weren’t. Now you see what I mean when I mentioned a couple of months back that it’s scary not to be around to understand things for yourself in Singapore because after that, there’s only The Straits Times’ perspective to contend with! And you thought it’s rightfully a NEWSpaper. Wrong, babe, it’s a nation-building broad-sheet. And don’t you go arguing if it’s newspaper first and foremost or nation-building broad-sheet first and foremost, cuz they’ll have all the right rationale to shut you up. (Hush-hush, the media is completely in the Government’s hands!)
Alright, there was some tiny mention of the ministerial pay-hike (highest salary in the world, I should add) tucked away in a ‘Looking back 2007’ report on Dec 29. ’07. It spelt out that our PM now earns S$3.76 million a year as his basic salary, up from S$2.46 million. And most of all, he is donating all of his salary increases to charity for the next five years. Wonder why that is so if he really needs that sum of money to justify what he does? – which was the overall rationale for the pay-hike. Oh, he’s generous, I see. Well, he must be to donate so much to charity every year. I certainly don’t doubt that!
Writers Peh Shing Huei and Li Xueying also stated in the year-roundup report that “the pay hike issue remains an emotive one for many”. So I take it that it’s an issue that could find itself in some conscientious artists’ work, especially if their work is of an emotive nature. Well, for that reason, I’d say let’s not forget this occasion of ‘emotive’ branding decreed by ST itself. Alas, no ‘credible’ artist in Singapore dares take it on, thus far. To do so, he or she must be an ‘incredible’ artist, yah?
Lord knows, in this town, being able to justify one’s motive is everything. So, artists… the Peh and Li comment sure sounds to me like you have reason enough now to take on the emotive issue of the State Ministerial pay-hike in your artistic endeavor. Question again – who dares?
Oh, don’t over-state the question. In this hip-&-funky age of ours, the system is likely to help ‘procure’ one to show the world, if need be, that we have such dare-devils on a necessary stage! Wink-wink. That’s what having the last say is all about. Otherwise, why bother having the media under full control? -- X’ Ho
