Skip to main content

The Yees Strategy Caught Singapore (Authority) By Surprise?

I respect the decision of the Yees not to bail Amos out. It must be a very hard and difficult decision for any parent not to bail out their children, not to mention we are an Asian society. Perhaps, this also caught the PAP government by surprise. Is this a strategy? If not, what is the rationale behind this move?

It is really a ‘far bigger problem than Amos Yee’. #2
Is this a depreciation of the Asian value that Lee Kuan Yew and the PAP always champione and uphold? Is this a social change moving ahead of policy change which caught the PAP by surprise? Is the PAP government acting on behalf of ‘silent majority’ or her own ‘group thinking’ inner cycle?
In a normal case, as the Attorney’s General Chambers explained below, it is rather easy to post a bail.
The AGC said Yee "is remanded not because of breach of bail conditions", but because no one posted bail.

The AGC added that Yee's bail is in "non-cash terms". "In other words, the bailors need not deposit the cash value with the Court."


"Instead, they have to pledge that they are good for the money and demonstrate that they are able to effectively ensure attendance of the accused and also ensure his compliance with bail conditions," a spokesperson for AGC said.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/amos-yee-remanded-as/1792668.html
However, Amos’s parents do not or fail to post a bail. I do not know the real reasons. Strategically speaking, it is an interesting move, perhaps a smart and clever one. It opens up more debates, locally and internationally. It generates more news, some even incorrect.  Amos’s parents may want the society to help to educate his son as they are not able to give a good teaching to his son. It is a family as well as a social problem. If this is a social problem, the PAP government will have a duty to explain.  Singaporeans would like to know the causes.  
The PAP standard operating procedure is to leave everything to the Courts. Whether social or family problems, the Courts make the final judgement and Singapore should not blame the PAP for the behaviour of a naughty boy!   Is this the behaviour of a responsible government?
However, this Amos case is different. People are debating and Singaporeans want to know more, Christians or non-Christians.  Singaporeans also want to know how social media can play a constructive role in a Smart Nation, besides the hard technology (ageing population, healthcare, transport) that the PAP government wants to promote and encourage.    
It is a trial goes beyond Amos and his parents. Singapore is on trial: our education system, our social media, our child protection laws, our government handling of the case, our Court for upgrading the bail, and many more. Amos case is caught between celebrating 50 years of independence and engaging a Smart Nation journey. Looking back the past and seeing future, it exposes our weaknesses and reminds us that the PAP has yet to change as shown in this unique Court case.  They are using old (LKY) laws and thinking to try a case in a Smart Nation.  Based on the old laws and practices, the outcome is expected.
Smart Nation needs innovation and entrepreneurship as PM Lee just announced. Entrepreneurs must take risks and be different.  PM Lee defines urban challenges as healthcare, transport and ageing population. Risks and returns for solving these urban challenges are measurable like the logical problem of finding Cheryl’s birthday#3.  It is a difficult mathematics problem but poses less problems for the PAP scholars.   
PRIME Minister Lee Hsien Loong has called on leading entrepreneurs and investors from around the world to use Singapore as a test bed for solutions to urban challenges such as healthcare, transport and an ageing population.  http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/spore-offers-be-test-bed-urban-solutions


Is social media also an urban challenge in a Smart Nation?  It is certainly a great challenge for the PAP in the social media. And how to effectively engage netizens is an increasing pressing problem for the PAP government. The risks and returns are difficult to calculate as compare to developing a solution in transport or healthcare industry.  Perhaps, PM Lee do not think social media can produce any good business model in our Smart Nation.  He prefers hard technology solution rather than soft solution.

Are we smart enough to solve the Amos problem? This is not a math problem and has different solutions.  However, the PAP government is only willing to offer one standard solution. I wonder this is a workable solution in a Smart Nation.   
#1
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/no-bailor-yet-teen-online-rant
#2
(https://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/singaporescene/what-amos-yee-is-going-through-is-far-bigger-than-101656795.html
#3
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/singapore/11534378/When-is-Cheryls-birthday-The-tricky-math-problem-that-has-everyone-stumped.html


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...
277 comments
Read more

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...
51 comments
Read more

对话一定要有共识吗？还是求取多元性来丰富自我？

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识，尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然，行动党就会说，我国的政治将会出现分裂，新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗？文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗？如果是共识，那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识，而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路，一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗？看来，行动党对于过去，仍然依依不舍，行动党的共识，就是国家的共识，新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解，尊敬并且互相学习，吸取对方的优点，填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果，如果只是强求共识，而忽略多元性和不同的意见，甚至否定他人的意见，那么，这个共识，是否具建设性，破坏性，还是分裂性，那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见，信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见，信仰和理念都是好的，善的。但是，对方未必会欣赏，未必会接受。因此，对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见，改进自己的治国方针，然后，交给人民去决定，而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识，而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 （乐观的看，行动党的全国对话，也不过是改进自己的治国方针，通过自己的小圈圈，自我讨论，研究，更新和改良行动党的政治策略，然后，在下一次大选时，拿出来让选民决定。因此，所谓的共识，在全国人民还没有决定前，仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜，行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台，吸收更多对手的意见，不同的观点，将它们纳入自己的政治策略中，然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是，行动党没有这个雅量，也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此，它只能企图通过全国对话，硬要说这是全国共识。所以，充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略，绝对不能说是全国共识。） ‘己所不欲，忽施于人’我们不喜欢的，不要强加他人身上。同样的，我们喜欢的，也不可以强加于他人身上。例如，有些人不喜欢吃有些食物，我们却很喜欢吃这类食物，但是，我们要尊重个人的喜好，不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点，下一回提供食物时，就会通过多些选择，而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度，我们会了解马来族的要求，尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...
Post a Comment
Read more