But hospitals, be they private or government owned, surely have the medical capabilities and medical personnel to handle such trauma victims. Surely, the injured and dying could have been given emergency medical help in Mount Elizabeth first, before they are transferred to TTSH once their condition stabilised? Why was it any other way? It might be protocol, but shouldn't lives matter more over protocol?
The Straits Times Forum recently had a letter writer from a parent who wrote in to complain that the year end school holidays were too long. Most Singaporeans of course disagreed, with the general consensus that the parent who wrote in probably only want free time for herself without the added "burden" of taking care of the kids during the school holidays.
The CPF member, who was at the centre of this storm, shall remain named as Ms Sua here, although the CPF Board did not feel it was wrong to give out her full name. In fact, not only was Ms Sua shamed by having her name exposed, the CPF deemed it right to publish her entire name, medical details, and financial well-being was which was happily shared with the nation on their FB page after she complained about the CPF Board.
Singaporeans have already seen POFMA used on a few occasions these past few weeks, as the Government goes all out to show they mean business, and to present any dissenting, anti-government voices early Christmas presents. of course, all the POFMA thrown to these online voices are all commentaries that goes against the government.
The recent online debate about how foreign students are perceived to receive much more aid in terms of their education in Singapore than Singaporeans themselves had the government scrambling with their PR machinery, first inducing the POFMA to Lim Tean who first made the claim, and then the government acting by announcing more bursary and aid to local students from next year onwards. It is clear that such issues resonates with Singaporeans, and thus, the government had to act fast.
It does not matter in this case whether the CPF Board was justified to to refuse to aid the woman, this was between them and the aggrieved party. The public need to be informed why the Board has its justification, just as we have been told the mother's side of the story. After all, everyone can make their own conclusions after hearing both sides of the story. But was there really a need to name the mother, and even inform the public of the daughter's education background, whereby they indicated the daughter receives government bursaries to help pay her school fees? Why stoop so low?
However, the Minister Ong's statement that he felt this should be reviewed is simply him trying to get onside with the Singaporean public once again, to show that the government listens to the ground, especially as Singapore is nearing the election period. And just to buy himself and the MOE more time, he said that he will only address this in Parliament next year. Why not just address this now? Trying to earn more goodwill from the voting public next year?
After all, how many Singaporean parents can afford to have a maid to look after their kids on top of sending them to childcare? That in itself will cost a bomb. And who can afford to drive their kids around while they go for meeting after meeting, and can still find time to drive home during lunch time?
In an open letter by a Singaporean father who was disappointed that his own daughter finds it hard to go to a local university, he questioned on what basis are the foreign students deemed good enough to attend the local universities under a bursary, denying locals who has good grades to study at said university.
But what about the Government themselves? Can they ever be issued with POFMA? After all, telling half truths and not the full facts is a common tactic used by governments the world over. So, to be better than the rest, why not the Singapore government come out with actual facts, with stats and reports to back up what they want to disprove, instead of just issuing Correction Orders?