Revoking Han Hui Hui citizenship received almost 4000 signature in less than 4 days. But the Reasons of Signing will shock you!

Indeed, the call to revoke Han Hui Hui’s citizenship is one of the most successful petition in Singapore. It received almost 4000 signature in less than 4 days.  And the number is still growing rapidly. Despite Han Hui Hui and her supporter desperate attempt to  look for scapegoat pointing fingers at SPF, Npark, YMCA, Parents, Minister Teo and even the Emcee to  justify her action, netizen generally are not convince at all.

Look at the Reaons of Signing and you will be shock

hit4k

Petition · Revoke Han Hui Hui's Singapore Citizenship! · Change.org

Advertisements

Have we got it wrong, there was no clash, it’s All PLANNED !?! -Han Hui Hui and Roy Ngerg’ gang heckle YMCA saga


ymca6
Overhead :
Today’s Sunday Times quoted HHH as saying to reporters that they had actually planned ‘not to do anything physical to them’ and they only wanted to spread their mesaage.

Wow! So they did plan to do something to the YMCA event except that doing physical harm was not part of their plan. That’s evil. Now you know why she refused to move to the space allocated for her event and insisted on staying in the same spot as YMCA
*****************************************************************************************ymca5

Image source link from Straitstimes-> Special needs children heckled as Hong Lim Park rallygoers disrupt charity carnival

***************************************************************************************************ymca4

   Denise Phua Lay Peng PAGE

I did not realise that some of our special school students were at the YMCA Hong Lim Concert with their teachers on Saturday afternoon. Then the news came from teachers that CPF protestors were marching round the Concert venue and disrupting the children’s programme.
I heard while the kids were not physically harmed, many were alarmed, confused and disturbed by the unexpected unruly turn of events.
The teachers too were affected.

How do such unkind and unruly behaviours help in resolving issues of concern to the protesters?

I pray this will not happen again. Courage to speak up for one’s rights ought to be balanced with consideration for the needs and interests of others.
********************************************************************************
Overheard : 
  • Well said Mdm. Was appalled by the actions of those who disrupted the event. What the kids were doing has nothing got to do with their agenda.
  • They actually set people against their cause. They cause harm to Singaporeans – they seem to think they are more Singaporean than others??? It doesn’t make sense.
    Seems like a personal agenda against the some people. – not really speaking for Singaporeans. Sad.
  • I am disturbed with this development and am disappointed with the behavior of these actors. While I welcome alternative voices in shaping our country, voices made must be accompanied by deeds and actions. The park is more than sufficient to hold 2 separate events, the lack of graciousness is telling. I hope the children are recovering well from the unpleasant experience and actors involved can learn much from this….
  • It’s about ethics… Manners obviously was not part of their lifestyle… Ethics is part of common sense… Everything we do to a degree effects others. It’s a clear lack of logic and ethics that makes this age less ethical in their methods… Selfish people…. Only thinking of their own agenda
  • may the children not be harmed and may the parents feel empowered to protect them – Singapore should be a gracious society and people should be tolerant and caring
  • We owe these kids another chance to perform , and madam , do you think we can have another concert for them and yes we will support !!

*****************************************************************************************************

Parent and Volunteers Spoke Out – Han Hui Hui and Roy Ngerg’ gang heckle YMCA saga

ymca3

  • One parent of special kid speaking out against the harassment caused by Roy Ngerng and gang. And I feel for him.

ymca1

  • Wow, played a national day song when someone was singing on stage. How disruptive And they have the audacity to wave the Singapore flag while frightening children and disrupting a charity event. That’s extremely offensive.
  • We have a lot of first hand testimonies on how the protest disrupted YMCA’s event! Time for SPF to take action.
    Count their lucky stars that Christian organizations generally refrain from suing one another. I am pretty sure that YMCA holds good ground if ever they were to sue Triple H.
  • Many people like the spectators at the YMCA event can testify the chaos when HHH and Roy and their protest followers went around shouting and screaming disturbing the audience !

ymca2

  • now who is the bully ? These children have spend so much time practicing and today is their big day.
    All thanks to the HHH and Roy , their day are ruined !
  • If i’m there, i dun know what i will do for e kids but for sure it’s not gonna be pretty as those hooligans need to be taught a lesson to break such innocents hearts!!!
  • I’m so sad for those kids and their families. So scary for them. And socially must have really confused them. This will have a lasting effect.
  • 看见 HHH 咄咄逼人时,真的是很心寒!
    新加坡给她一个落脚的地方,她却以这样的态度來回报,一点感恩心都没有,比狗都不如!

    表面上是替新加坡人向政府讨公道,然而却诅咒我们的国父,漠视我国的政策,态度野蛮对待 N park 行政人员和警察。。。还有小孩是无辜的,你们都不放过!
    她是谁呀?
    她以为她是慈禧太后!!
    请大家摸摸自己的良心,抛开政治和私心不谈,政府真的有骗我们的 CPF 吗??有吗?
    为何要让这两个外人來攻击自己的国家??
  • They are not stupid per say, they are without compassion. People without compassion is the worse kind ever cos they do not know how to love. People who do not know how to love will never do things for people, they only do things for themselves.

    Sat back & thought for a moment, look at these people & what they are trying their best to convince people to get what is suppose to be ours. Then I look at them after what they have done to the kids. These A**holes are smacking themselves in their face! There they are ignoring the enormous efforts put in by those innocent kids & trying to get support from us???
    Oh gosh, i wish i was there!!!

  • The relevant Authority must take a tough and no nonsense stand and not to adopt the weak and soft stand. It is no point to be appalled or dismayed if the stand taken is the convenient, soft and weak stand. This incident is partly the fault of the government for having adopted the convenient, soft and weak stand in the past and even currently. Hence this is the reality.
  • In all honesty, the kid performers and people at the YMCA are innocent ones, for Roy and HH to do such thing, it is an utter disgrace. They can always do it after the YMCA event, or even so use the demarcated areas on their side. I’m sorry Roy and HH, though you maybe fighting for the ‘right cause’, your behaviour is just over the edge, you’ve lost the battle even before it began.

 

Joint statement from the police and National Parks Board- Han Hui Hui and Roy Ngerg’ gang heckle YMCA saga

 Source CNA ->  Hong Lim Park saw two events held at the same time today, resulting in some unsavoury scenes.  27 Sep 2014

SINGAPORE: Hong Lim Park saw two events held at the same time today, resulting in some unsavoury scenes.

A group protesting against the CPF scheme were seen marching round a YMCA carnival at the Park. They held placards and shouted slogans, frightening those at the carnival and disrupting performances, including those by special needs children.

The YMCA said it had received approval for its event in April. A joint statement from the National Parks Board (NParks) and the police said the application to use the Park was first received from YMCA and approval was given to YMCA on Sep 9. Meanwhile the application from the anti-CPF protest organiser Han Hui Hui, who is also a blogger, was received on Sep 22. It was approved on the same day.

The YMCA event was attended by the elderly and disabled, with performances by children. The general secretary of YMCA Singapore, Mr Lo Chee Wen, said the YMCA Proms @ the Park is an annual event held at public parks in Singapore. Last year, it was held at the Botanic Gardens. The event aims to promote corporate social responsibility by matching organisations with voluntary welfare organisations.

Participants of the protest rally ended up marching around the YMCA event at least four times.

The protesters also got close to Minister of State for Trade and Industry Teo Ser Luck, who attended the YMCA event. Mr Teo gamely greeted them and shook hands with some, despite having vulgarities hurled at him by the CPF protestors.

In a joint statement, the police and National Parks Board said: 

“Speaker’s Corner in Hong Lim Park is designated by the Government as an area for public speaking and demonstrations. Application to use the park was first received from YMCA and approval to use the park was given to YMCA on Sep 9. Ms Han’s application was received on Sep 22 and approval was granted to Ms Han on the same day.

In anticipation of the crowd this afternoon, NParks demarcated and allocated space for both events. There are two lawns at Hong Lim Park, and each event was allocated a lawn. NParks and SPF approached Ms Han to request her cooperation to speak at the allocated space.

We regret to note that Ms Han did not heed our advice and continued to hold her event at the same lawn as YMCA. Ms Han’s group encroached into the YMCA event area, holding placards and shouting slogans, disrupted performances and frightened participants, including special needs children who were performing at the charity event. The Police will be conducting investigations into this incident.”

In response to media queries, the Ministry of National Development said: “Multiple events have been held on the same date at Hong Lim Park previously. For example, Pink Dot 2013, anti-haze speech and protest against LTA cross island MRT Line events happened on Jun 29 2013.”

******************************************************************************

YMCA_3
i
mages source  : Fabrications About The PAP

********************************************************
ymca_4
image source from the net
********************************************************ymca_5********************************************************

Overheard :

  • Such thuggish behaviour seen in Hong Lim Park today. Such a sad day for Singaporean society that politics must come before humanity and charity. Remember, these are the people whom the opposition parties support!
  • Finally! The police will be on the case!! Can a Citizenship be revoked? I wld like it revoked! I’m sure more than enough people will be willing to pay for HHH’s one way bus ticket out of here, back to Malaysia where she belongs!
  • And so, mata now coming in liao. I am sure there is some law somewhere to say that you cannot go to someone’s concert and just yell. Speakers’ Corner is not a yelling corner.
  • With a certain kind of people, when you give them enough rope, eventually they hang themselves.
  • Let the investigations proceed. But these incidents are so well-documented on video that it should be quite straightforward.
    If Han Han Hui is found guilty, she should be arrested, charged and prosecuted.
  • 台上一分钟, 台下十年工。。 。
    Children practice hard for their performance and the applaud from the ground will give them greater confident in doing things the next time.
    Quite sad to see some protester  interrupting event for special needs children…

 

  • Goodness! What in heaven’s name happened in Hong Lim Park today? Who is this Han Hui Hui? I been watching the video of her altercation with the parks guy and the police and I have to say she is pretty damn rude. If she thinks she’s being heroic in standing up to the big bad authorities on camera, she better think again. What has happened to live and let live? One part of park taken, go to another part – is that so difficult? This is a concert by kids, and whatever your political inclination, there’s no call to go frightening the children by heckling and marching around.

    If the Return my CPF lobby is intent on showing up the G as the bad guy who won’t listen and bullies everyone, then they should look at themselves at the mirror. Not much better than the people they criticise.

     

Han Hui Hui and Roy Ngerg’ gang heckle YMCA Annual Event at Hong Lim Park

Overheard :

So let’s have a look at what happened here:

1) YMCA requests for a permit in December 2013 and it gets approved in February 2014

2) YMCA posts a Facebook post on 20 JUNE requesting for volunteers for YMCA Proms @ the Park, stating a date of 27 September 2014 and a TENTATIVE time of 12pm-6pm 

 YMCA of SingaporeYMCA of Singapore  <-

June 20 ·

We are looking for volunteers for the annual YMCA Proms @ the Park! Volunteer openings include ushers, carnival helpers, stagehands, logistics helpers, traffic marshalls and befrienders.

Date: 27 September 2014
Time: 12pm-6pm (TBC)
Location: Hong Lim Park
Other Information: Volunteers will have to attend a briefing at YMCA on either 10 or 17 September 2014

For more information or to register, kindly email volunteer@ymca.org.sg.

About YMCA Proms @ the Park
Through YMCA Proms @ the Park, YMCA seeks to promote corporate social responsibility by matching corporations with voluntary welfare organisations for an outdoor concert and picnic, with the aim of bringing cheer to the beneficiaries through various performing arts and interaction with volunteers in a carnival-like setting. YMCA Proms @ the Park also allows corporations to experience and embrace corporate volunteerism by mobilising their staff to volunteer for a day in serving the less privileged.

3) Han Hui Hui organises #ReturnMyCPF – Jobs way after that (around 23 August or before)
Han Hui Hui created the event.
August 23
link ->  ReturnMyCPF event

4) Realises that the day before, calls YMCA “PAP supporters”, and says that the “PAP supporters” moved their event directly to disrupt their pointless march (supposedly from 10am-12pm to 2pm-8pm) (which is TOTALLY FALSE, by the way) 
hhh
Link – > 
A picture is worth a thousand words

5) Rallies supporters to come and disrupt YMCA event
Refer to this link for videos ->  Hong Lim Park protestors heckle special needs children from YMCA

Totally disgusting. These are the scum of our society.

*****************************************************************************

ymca_hhh
i
mage source : Fabrications Led by Opposition Parties (FLOP)

*****************************************************************************

ymca_2

********************************************************************

Mr Teo Ser Luck has been surrounded by the marching of H3 & Roy gang, he stays cool. The last hour when he was with the folks.

ymca

overheard :

  • Some cameramen from the protest stuck their high powered lens camera while Mr Teo was speaking to some friends of the public. I think they have no concept of respect from these camera people.

*****************************************************************************

overheard :

  • Sibei no standard. Doing this to fellow singaporeans. This is no different from mafia or hooligans.
  • I am appalled!!!!!
    These kids must have invested time and effort to prepare for today’s performance and it’s ruined by Han Hui Hui and Roy Ngerng.
    It takes a lot of courage to perform for an approving crowd, but these kids have a crowd holding placards and shouting.
    Sad sad day for Singapore at Hong Lim Park.
  • Sad indeed. If these idiots can’t even spare a thought for special needs kids when granted a Hong Lim Park permit, just imagine the destruction they can wreak once given more power.
  • Really, don’t blame the authority if this is the last time they are issued anymore permits. Simply trouble-maker. It took Chee SJ so many years to realise civil disobedience is not welcomed here, yet the three stooges are going down this path.
    And I tell you, all the opposition leaders staring at this MUST BE CONCERNED, more than PAP, because now oppies have a very bad name. 
  • Such distasteful hooliganism has no place in our political arena. It’s a shame!
  • This is totally disgusting. These are special needs kids leh. Wahlau! These protesters are really losers.
    Claim to fight for Singaporeans but look at them! They are not fighting for Singaporeans.. they are terrorising Singaporeans!
  • Those looney Stooges are hardly any politician wannabes… simple a Trouble Maker! If they understand the event organised by YMCA is abt, they would not behave like Hooligans, shouting and ranting at those poor kids…
  • She (HHH)  is an utterly selfish little liar. And she’s perfectly happy to destroy a long planned day for children and adults with special needs and the underprivileged to feed her bizarre ego. Appalling behavior. She should be thoroughly ashamed of herself. ”
  • There you have it.
    I can imagine how many hours of training these kids with special needs put in plus the courage to perform on stage. And you have Roy Ngerng shamelessly waving our national flag and arousing his supporters to heckle.
    Shame on you, Roy and Han. You just made the decision so much easier for citizens who are considering if we should have more oppositions to help run the country.

 

Are Contractors really over reliance on Cheap Foreign Workers vis-à-vis Our Government over-reliance on earning easy profit?

Overheard from Tony Yeo

Link – > Are Contractors really over reliance on Cheap Foreign Workers vis-à-vis Our Government over-reliance on earning easy profit?

September 23, 2014 

Are Contractors really over reliance on Cheap Foreign Workers vis-à-vis Our Government over-reliance on earning easy profit?

The Real Singapore had recently published a commentary piece by Mr Roy Ngerng titled “LOCAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES ARE TOO DEPENDENT ON CHEAP FOREIGN WORKERS”……..

I am not a subscriber to the Real Singapore Facebook page and would not have chanced upon it if not for a friend who had commented on the Topic.

As a professional involved in the local construction industry for the last 20 years, I felt compel to share my view on the piece not only because it was peppered with inaccuracies but were written in a way that do injustice to our construction companies who, whether you like it or not, built the many houses that Singaporean called their home. I also cannot help but felt that the content was in fact an attempt to take a cheap potshot at the Government (or the PAP) by disguising it under a title that says otherwise.

Even though Mr Roy Ngerng had started his commentary by stating that he was told by someone who is working in the construction industry about the things that he wrote about, I wonder what is exactly stopping him from carrying out some due diligent check to verify before writing this commentary.

To say the least, the commentary was premised on misinformation and flawed argument coupled with a strongly opinionated agenda to sow discomfort and score some brownie points.

Having said the above, I would like to put forth what I think is so wrong with the piece of commentary.

First and foremost, the notion that foreign workers are paid as low as $10 to $20 a day or $200 to $300 a month needs to be substantiated. Ngerng seems to take a very simplistic method of addition and multiplication to arrive at the monthly wages (i.e $10/day x 30 days = $300). This is already flawed to begin with.

I knew for a fact that the construction industry pays about $1200 to $1600 per month as wages to these workers depending on the type of certificates that these workers have. The ‘Skilled’ workers usually get more than those ‘Unskilled’ workers who has no specific skills. These wages include overtime calculated at 1.5-2.5 times of the basic salaries (overtime usually starts from 5.00pm on a weekdays and the whole of any Sunday or Public Holidays).

These information can be easily verified with any construction company if the author actually makes the effort to call them up for a survey. Of course, companies may not disclose such information to an ‘unofficial’ survey but again, this can also be verified with the workers themselves. Not those that had run into problems with their employers but generally those that have a good stable job with some of the more reputable companies. As of last count, there are at least a few hundred construction companies registered with the BCA under the category of A1 and A2 and I would think a random check across the segment would give a better perspective then just depending on the word of a ‘Friend’.

To dive a litter deeper into this, the cost that a construction company pays to the workers are not limited to just the wages of the workers, they would have to factor in the cost of accommodation, transportation, food, levy, medical expenses and insurances. A breakdown of these will be as follows:

1. Basic Wages + OT – $1600 (Skilled Workers) / $1200 (Unskilled Workers)

2. Levy – $700 (Skilled Workers) / $950 (Unskilled Workers)

3. Accommodation (Dormitory) – $350

4. Transportation – $40

5. Meal Allowance – $200

Total – $2,890 (Skilled Workers) / $2,740 (Unskilled Workers)

The information provided herein can be easily verified with dormitory operators, transport companies and MOM (for levy payable). Of course, the argument is that there will be employers who will try to circumvent and cut cost by providing less than desirable accommodation, dangerous transportation means and the like but that is an entirely different topics altogether and those employers should be taken to task. To focus back on this topic however and in view of the cost per worker that a construction company has to bear, I wouldn’t call them ‘Cheap Foreign Worker” to begin with!

Next, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) had introduced a Buildability Frame works since 2001 for the purpose of steering construction companies away from reliance on labour intensive design and work methods and had in 2010, incorporate this frame work as part of the tender evaluation process for all government projects. This means that every proposal submitted by a contractor will be assessed for its buildability and constructability with emphasis on awarding to the company that best demonstrated an ability to construct at the most optimum price (not necessary the lowest price).The Government had in 2013, also make it mandatory for private developers to incorporate Prefabrication Technology if they were to maximise the GFA for their development which is targeted at improving productivity and rely less on manual workers on site.

In light of the high cost of labour (as shown above) and the incentives to adopt better design and construction methods, one wonders if any contractor would be in a capacity to compete if indeed they were still relying on ‘cheap labour’? If there were any to begin with!

 I would think Mr Roy Ngerng’s assertion of the said notion is therefore untenable.

My Ngerng also wrote about the perceived profit both the Contractor and the Government (I reckon that he was referring to HDB as the Government when in fact they are a Statutory Board of the Government and is not akin to being the Government itself) will purportedly earn in selling public housing and determined a ratio of 60%:40% with the Construction companies earning 60% and the HDB taking 40% with an additional remark that the 40% represent the real profit the HDB stands to gain. I must admit that I lost him there totally because I have no idea how he arrived at that conclusion or for that matter, how ‘that someone” whom he had heard this from came to that conclusion!

For discussion purpose, I will rely on information that are freely available on the web to debunk this myth.

Let’s take a HDB project that was put up for tender known as Yishun Neighbourhood 6 Contract 20 which closed on 1 July 2014. The lowest tender bid was lodged at $96,980,000.00.

The same project was launched for sales by HDB under the name Park Grove@Yishun and has the following selling price (without government grant): –

120 units of 2 Room – from $77,000

204 units of 4-Room – from $263,000

216 units of 5-Room – from $339,000

48 units of 3Gen – from 347,000

Assuming the cheapest unit is for the lowest floor (i.e. 2nd Floor) and an addition of $5000 for every floor above until the twelve floor and the thirteen floor being $5000 cheaper than the twelve, the average selling price per unit type and total selling price for the project will be as follows: –

120 units of 2 Room x ave $103,666 = $12,439,920.00

204 units of 4-Room x ave $289,666 = $59,091,864.00

216 units of 5-Room x ave $365,666 = $78,983,856.00

48 units of 3Gen x ave $373,666 = $17,935,968.00

Total Selling Price = $168,451,608.00

By Mr Roy Ngerng’s logic, he was essentially saying that 60% of $168,451,608 is earned by the Contractor and 40% of that is earned by HDB (referred to as the PAP Government). In perspective, this translates to $101,070,964.80 and $67,380,643.20 respectively.

On his argument that the Contractor stands to earn $101,070,964.80, I noted that the lowest bid received to construct the project is at $96,980,000.00 which is lower than the 60% that Mr Roy Ngerng is perpetuating. If Mr Ngerng were to account for the actual construction cost (i.e labour, material, machine and overhead) required by the Contractor to construct the project (which I don’t think he has the training and ability to), it may surprise him that the Contractor will be more than happy to earn a nett profit of 3% after accounting for all necessary labour, material, machine and overhead.

Without even factoring in the risk that a Contractor has to carry for the whole duration of the construction in terms of escalation in cost of all labour, material and machinery, delay and such, it is clear that the Contractor does not earn 60% from the total sales proceed of a public housing project.

There is obviously no merit in saying so if one were to consider the make-up of that bid price.

On his other argument that the HDB makes a real profit equivalent to 40% from the sales proceed of public housing, I think he cannot be more wrong. It is common knowledge that the HDB offer grant of up to $30,000 per unit for all eligible Singaporean. On the assumption that the applicants for the flats are eligible and were given an average grant of $20,000/unit for each and every of those units that was sold in the above project, these grant would amount to $11,760,000.00.

In short, the HDB does not make a real profit of 40%. At best, they would make $55,620,643.20 (about 33%). However, the HDB has to pay for the land cost . Of course, the next argument will then be the Government transferring the profit to SLA and HDB’s loss is SLA’s gain. However, to put things into perspective, the land cost that SLA is pocketing in the above example work out to approximately $95.79/ft² of Gross Floor Area (commonly known as the GFA and for simple estimation, is assume to be the total floor area of all the dwelling units combined). If one were to search the web and compare this to the land price under the Government’s private land sales programme, they would have noticed that the cost a private developer pays for a piece of land would range from $320/ft² to $350/ft² (for Executive Condo) and $580/ft² to $850/ft² (for private condo).

With that in mind, isn’t it not true that the Government (via SLA) is actually making a loss for the same piece of estate when it sold them to HDB at less then $100/ft²? Where then is the argument of a real profit? Again, it will be easy to argue that the Government should not even be accounting for the land and that it should be free but in real governance, even if one were to look at private limited company, such inter-company transactions need to be accounted for and carried out at arms-length. Not doing so would be irresponsible accounting at best and fraud at worse.

As pointed out above, it is a fact that foreign workers are not exactly cheap to begin with and Construction companies have been steering away from adopting labour intensive working methods to take full advantage of Govrnment programmes and incentives. The HDB (i.e the Government as referred to in Ngerng commentary) also does not actually make extra normal profit from selling public housing and on the contrary, SLA makes a loss for selling the same piece of estate to HDB when they could sell it to the private developers and make a profit from such land sales.

Mr Ngerng’s argument on Contractor’s reliance on cheap labour vis-à-vis the Government’s overly reliant on easy profit is therefore obviously wrong.

In my mind, there is therefore no need to flock a dead horse any further.

There’s one last question on my mind that needs to be cleared from Mr Ngerng’s commentary which is “what happens to those levies collected by the Government”?

I do not have an answer to that question but I could guessed that it was given back to the industry in the form of tangible benefit via Government Funding. For those who are working in the construction industry, I am sure they will be familiar with Government initiatives such as the PIP Fund, MechC, BIM etc. which are initiatives to improved productivity and encourage lesser reliance on foreign labour. To that end, I must say it does help the industry to advance.

I must however clarify that these are my guesses and nothing more than that. Perhaps one of our MP would raise a Parliamentary question about this at an opportune time but I will leave this at that for the time being.

In summary, I must say that though our Government are not perfect and we could well be unhappy with certain policies, the good work that they have done in the construction arena cannot be faulted without any concrete proof and mere assertion with the intent to cast aspersion should not be tolerated and should be corrected. Further, to drag the construction companies as a whole into petty politics for the purpose of scoring brownie point does a great disservice to the man and women who are contributing to building this nation.

******************************************************************************

Image from population.sg -> A Sustainable and Vibrant Economy

Why MP Intan need to defend a Grassroot ? Even WP, MP Low Thia Khiang said he knew nothing of his protege of 10 years !

  Intan Mokhtar  <–

Please refer to the Straits Times article today, by Carolyn Khew, whom I spoke to.
————————————–
MP Intan Azura Mokhtar says she does not know Yang Yin personally

Updated today, 26 Sept 2014,  at 08:07 AM

Member of Parliament Intan Azura Mokhtar said yesterday that she did write a letter of appeal regarding Mr Yang Yin’s application for permanent residency (PR) here. But she did so only at the behest of Madam Chung Khin Chun.

Questions had been raised over the former China tour guide’s role in the Jalan Kayu Neighbourhood Committee, after pictures of him at various grassroots activities surfaced online. The People’s Association confirmed that he had been a member of the neighbourhood committee since July 5 last year but resigned on Sept 8 this year.

Dr Intan, who is an MP in Ang Mo Kio GRC and adviser to the committee, said she did not know Mr Yang personally. She recalls meeting him only when he was participating in a cooking activity.

She does remember the time Madam Chung approached her.

“She first came to see me and sought my help in May 2011… for her grandson,” said Dr Intan. “This is what she told me and I referred Madam Chung’s request to the authorities.” She said she responded only because Madam Chung was “a resident of my constituency and a Singaporean”.

“If Mr Yang had come to me, I wouldn’t be able to help him because he’s not a Singaporean,” she said. “What I would have told him is that you probably can apply for PR to the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority directly.”

Dr Intan also said she later received a piece of “feedback” on Mr Yang. She did not reveal the nature of the feedback as there are ongoing court proceedings concerning Mr Yang, but said it was forwarded to the authorities the same day.

Dr Intan also explained why she had initially referred to Mr Yang as a grassroots “leader”, when asked about him two weeks ago. She said she considers all grassroots volunteers “grassroots leaders”, reiterating that Mr Yang “did not hold a key position… he was just an ordinary member”.

In recent days, Dr Intan’s Facebook page has been inundated with questions about Mr Yang. Some claimed that she had gone into “Internet hiding” by not addressing the questions and making her Facebook page private.

When asked if comments about Mr Yang had been deleted from her Facebook page, she said the staff administering the site may have done so and she does not know what “Internet hiding” is.

Dr Intan also made it clear that only citizens and PRs can join the grassroots, although others can help out as ad-hoc volunteers. When asked if taking part in these ad-hoc activities can help in an application for permanent residency, she said that was up to the immigration authorities.

When contacted last night, Madam Chung said she remembered seeing Dr Intan “a few years ago”, but could not recall what was discussed.

In response to queries from The Straits Times, the ICA made it clear that volunteering in grassroots organisations is not part of its criteria when assessing applications for PR and citizenship.

It said: “Applications for Singapore Permanent Residence or Singapore Citizenship (SC) are evaluated on a range of factors including family ties, qualifications, income and length of stay in Singapore. While volunteering in community service such as with PA grassroots organisations had been suggested as a possible criterion, it has not been part of ICA’s criteria when assessing SC or SPR applications. Each application will be assessed on its own merits.”

The ICA also added: “Individuals who provide false information in their applications for immigration facilities will be dealt with firmly under the law. In addition, they will have their immigration facilities cancelled or revoked.”

CAROLYN KHEW, TOH YONG CHUAN

**********************************************************************************************
images from Dr Intan’ FB
intan2
intan1

**********************************************************************************************

Overheard :

  • Stay strong Dr amidst all these and continue doing good for the country and community.
  • Trust in your judgement and integrity Dr Intan Mokthar, do not take too personally of all the negative comments on you, when you are up there, this stuff bounce to happen. My say, no one can judge in a short time the real motive of being a grassroots leader as volunteers, only time will tell. If he want to fake it, what can we do? He is smart cunning to buy yours and other residents heart but like Malay proverbs, “Sepandai- pandai tupai melompat, akhirnya jatuh ke tanah juga”, he will get his deserve judgement from the court, karma for his ill intention. As volunteers, let’s do our best to serve the community. Thank you Dr. Intan for all your love and passion in serving our community. God bless you with Good Health and hope to see you to become Minister soon because you are deserve it.
  • Persevere on, continue to do what is right
  • They are holding you responsible to further inflame hatred for the PAP. That’s what they do online. Most use their Avatars, too much of a coward to show their true identity, to spew caustic and indefensible retorts. Keep faith that the truth will prevail. We believe in you.
  • Why MP Intan need to defend a Grassroot?
    A Grassroot doesn’t link to any Party but only to serve the residents.
    What Grassroot do outside is beyond the control of a MP.

    Like MP Low Thia Khiang says…
    [ I am a Member of Parliament, not a private investigator! Mr He said that I should take responsibility for the matters regarding Mr Yaw. May I know how he thinks I should take responsibility?]

    So will it  b fair for MP Intan?Since it is now an Investigation by SPF,let the Police do their job

  • Yang Yin’s actions to cheat the elderly widow pertains to his private life. How is MP Intan going to know that this Yang Yin is a cheat if he did not give any hint of such behaviour in his activities at the grassroots organisation?

    You are holding the MP responsible for Yang Yin’s behaviour in his private life? Even LTK said he knew nothing of his protege of 10 years, Yaw Shin Leong’s private life. And didn’t LTK present Yaw Shin Leong to the residents of Hougang as the BEST during the 2011 GE. And mind you, YSL worked closely with LTK in the CEC!

    Why the double standard? Quizzed LTK at that time or not?

  • The people harassing Intan here are demented. The internet really brings out the worst of humankind.
  • Internet hiding? More like internet bullying. Should find some of those awful ones and seek them out to expose them. Especially the trolls.
  • LTK did said YSL was the best choice for Hougang SMC in GE 2011. But his best candidate betrayed the ppl of Hougang. He just disappeared after he committed adultery. LTK kept quiet and only came out to disclose the affair later as he had no other choice. Who is that woman YSL having an affair with? Till today no one knows. Am sure LTK knew but why no disclosure of this woman. So base on their logic and arguments LTK is answerable and why didn’t the oppies ask LTK to resign at that time? And now they are pressing Dr Intan and even PM Lee to resign. Is it logical? Dr Intan has not done anything wrong. She does not need to answer these oppies moron. Just let the case to the court. Whether Yang Yin has done wrong or the relatives are trying to get the money we will know during the court proceeding. If Yang Yin commits an offence then he deserves the punishment. So Dr Intan continue your good work at Jln Kayu and AMK GRC.
  • The rabid opposition Internet lynch mob are trying to paint a picture that Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar was privy to the fact that Yang Yin was a cheat (and even that is yet to be determined by the courts).

    Seriously, have those wankers got their hands on technology from the movie, Minority Report?

    I’m sure PAP hasn’t, and the only crime Dr Intan is guilty of is being human.