Politics: Referee kayu

Ng Chee Meng, secretary general of the National Trade Union Congress (NTUC), must be the luckiest Singaporean. Ng was a one-term member of Parliament (MP) with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) before his Sengkang team famously lost to the Workers’ Party (WP) in the 2020 general election (GE). Despite Ng failing to win an electoral mandate, NTUC controversially kept him on as secretary-general, a role that since 1980 had been filled by cabinet ministers. Ng’s lucky to have kept this well-remunerated job, a privilege that losing or retiring PAP candidates—but rarely opposition ones—often enjoy within the establishment. (Ng and his two brothers are all military men and part of the governing elite.)

Ng was lucky again that the PAP omitted him from its Sengkang slate for the upcoming GE, where he’d likely face the same formidable WP team featuring Louis Chua, He Ting Ru and Jamus Lim. And the release of last week’s report by the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC), which features significant gerrymandering, makes him three times lucky. The EBRC has resuscitated the Jalan Kayu single member constituency after it’s been dormant for almost 40 years. It’s been carved out of the adjacent Ang Mo Kio group representation constituency, a stronghold led by Lee Hsien Loong, senior minister. And this week, Ng went on a walkabout there with Lee. He later wrote on Facebook that he’s familiar with the neighbourhood, given that he’s been living in Seletar Hills for 20 odd years, and he also “grew up” there because of his youth flying activities.

How lucky to have a new political district created on your doorstep. If the PAP does indeed field him there, the hometown boy would seem like a shoo-in. That said, rumours are swirling that opposition heavyweights, including Chee Soon Juan of the Singapore Democratic Party, may contest there, in what could be a multi-cornered fight. If Ng somehow contrives to lose again, will he still keep his NTUC post? If that happens, better buy 4D liao.

Society: Kena ‘ambush’ siah

Last week, K Shanmugam, law and home affairs minister, appeared shell-shocked, in a video he published, by “deliberate rowdyism, rudeness” from two young Singaporean activists at his weekly meet-the-people session (MPS). Josephine Teo, minister for digital development and information, also described an “ambush” by similar people at her MPS.

Gosh. Poor ministers. If two young women can so easily rattle “Shan”, what hope do we have when extremists flex? And if JoTeo is so unnerved by unforeseen agendas, how will she keep us safe from hackers and scammers?

The truth, perhaps, is that we’re all captives of an archaic model of democratic engagement, one the two women are helping to shift. For more, read “The parts we leave out”, the response by Jom’s editorial team to last week’s brouhaha.

Society: Shoe bog

A footwear recycling project run by Sport Singapore (SportSG) and petrochemical giant Dow appears to have hit a dead-end. The project was rolled out in 2020 with the promise of transforming donated shoes, sneakers and sandals into material to make surfaces for running tracks and playgrounds. Hundreds of thousands donated. Three years later, a Reuters investigation found many of the donations in Indonesian flea markets, in violation of that country’s laws. SportSG and Dow blamed their supply chain partners, and walked back some contracts. Now, it appears as if there was little demand for the shoe mulch to begin with. More than 80 percent of the 400,000 pairs collected are kicking their heels in a Tuas warehouse, unable to find any takers. Paul Fong, country director, Dow Singapore and Malaysia, expressed hope that prospective partners would emerge, even as he promised that the shoes would not be sold or donated elsewhere. So much for the project’s “circular economy”.

Dow, one of the world’s biggest plastics makers, has a history of greenwashing. It was one of several large oil and chemical firms behind “Renew Oceans”, a mooted US$1.5bn (S$2bn) 2019 programme to reduce plastic waste, which was wound down quietly a year later. “These are some of the richest and most powerful companies on the planet, and what they’ve come up with are some small, community litter picking projects that make for nice photo opportunities,” a senior Greenpeace executive said. In 2018, Dow backed Renewlogy, a company that claimed it could convert hard-to-recycle plastic into diesel. Turns out, it couldn’t and so ended up merely burning said plastic to power a cement plant. Nearly two decades prior, Dow paid US$2.2bn (S$2.9bn) in compensation to victims of asbestos in the products of Union Carbide—a company it merged with in 2001. Union Carbide is also responsible for the 1984 Bhopal Gas tragedy that killed more than 3,500 people in India and injured more than half a million, including the unborn. Dow has refused to even brook compensation for the victims, ignoring repeated summons from Indian courts. 

“Others see an old shoe. We see the future” is the tagline of the SportsSG-Dow “green” partnership. With Dow’s terrible history of indifference mingled with incompetence, even an amateur prognosticator could have predicted how things would turn out.

Society: Don’t catch me, can?

In “Catch Me If You Can”, the 2002 crime comedy-drama, Leonardo DiCaprio plays Frank Abagnale Jr, the now 76-year-old American, cheque forger and imposter, whose biography the film’s based on. There’s a thrilling scene when Frank comes a hair’s breadth from getting caught. Through sheer, brazen nerve the conman manages to escape; tricking Tom Hanks’s Carl Hanratty, an FBI agent in hot pursuit of him, into believing that he’s a Secret Service agent. “Just do me a favour and sit tight for a second, while I get this evidence downstairs,” Frank tells Carl, clutching on to his forgery tools as he slinks out of the hotel room. He gets his comeuppance soon enough; proving perhaps that over-confidence, bordering on cockiness, can lead to one’s downfall.

That’s what Chin Tung Sheng, described by one Redditor as Singapore’s homegrown Abagnale Jr, may have discovered too late. The recently sentenced Singaporean “influencer”, who pleaded guilty to seven charges, had admitted to committing various offences between 2020 and 2023. This included cheating, forgery and breaking into a Sentosa bungalow, where he stole designer items worth at least S$151,000. 

The 26-year-old joins a growing band of young criminals who participate in “post and boast” culture on social media. Chin had flaunted his ill-gotten riches on Instagram, where he amassed over 334,000 followers. Cryptocurrency fraudster Malone Lam Yu Xuan, 20, paraded his flashy lifestyle online too: designer clothes and jewellery, luxury vehicles and rented mansions, all paid for with crypto he allegedly stole. In a Straits Times (ST) article, experts lament how social media makes crime seem aspirational rather than reckless. “Algorithms reward spectacle,” said Gopal Mahey, a counsellor. In the “digital clout economy”, crime is a brand, with more offenders documenting their offences; “treating it as entertainment rather than an act of harm.” 

Flex culture—a flagrant, materialist remnant of the 2010s—appears to have reared its uglier head: evolving into a nefarious and ever more insatiable creature. In some Australian states, new “post and boast” laws target “people who seek to gain notoriety” on social media by bragging about their crimes, such as posting actual footage of criminal activities. Young people are committing these offences for validation, acceptance and status; fuelled by impulsivity, insecurity, as well as a false sense of invincibility. What’s to stop them? Surely, the answer lies in society; right in our homes and our communities.

Society: No money ban lorry

Singapore has “the dubious distinction of being the only wealthy country” to allow workers to be transported in the backs of lorries, Tommy Koh, ambassador-at-large, had said in 2023, after 25 business bodies, worried about costs, shamefully defended the practice. “Work out a practical solution quickly,” Tharman Shanmugaratnam, president, said shortly after, on the campaign trail. “Because it’s actually a complex logistics exercise.” The Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics (HOME), a migrant workers’ rights group, has done just that this week, in its latest report on the transportation of migrant workers, which calls for a complete ban, through gradual, incremental steps.

Among several recommendations, the report proposed that the government provide an initial 12-month transport subsidy to aid firms transition from lorries to safer transport alternatives. Drawing from focus-group discussions with 34 migrant workers, it calls for a “holistic, considered approach, one that includes equitable allocation of resources and active inclusion of migrant workers in urban planning decisions” to ensure their transportation is improved. This would involve greater scrutiny of, among other things, the remoteness of migrant workers’ dormitories, and the excessive work hours endured by lorry drivers. 

Moreover, the negative public perception of them affects their ability to access public transport and integrate with local communities. “The workers themselves don’t feel out of place if they’re mingling with Singaporeans. I think it’s the Singapore residents that have a problem with that,” said Debbie Fordyce, president of Transient Workers Count Too, another migrant workers’ rights group. Migrant workers in the construction, marine shipyard and process sectors, who make up 23 percent (456,800) of the non-residents’ population in Singapore, are often treated through “a system of temporariness”—a term articulated by Fordyce, where migrant workers are seen as permanent transient workers who are never part of the local community, leading to a reluctance to implement long-term measures that prioritise their safety, dignity and inclusion. HOME’s report also shows that some bus operators charge extra maintenance costs for renting buses to ferry migrant workers, because they “may bring odour and dirt with them that stains or damages bus seats.” Some claim that parents may be unhappy that their children have to later ride on the same bus.

Ultimately the issue demands of us an interrogation of our underlying values and principles. What does it mean when we cite reasons such as “financial constraints” and “practical operational challenges” as barriers that hinder our ability to seek alternative forms of transport for migrant workers? Why is there a difference in standards of safety held towards migrant workers and local citizens? Perhaps it’s easy to overlook these questions when we’re comfortably seated in the back of an air-conditioned bus or taxi, are distracted by skyscrapers cutting through the blue sky, and have failed to notice the lorry carrying migrant workers passing by.

Society: Getting Palestinians to SG

In the wake of October 7th 2023, Singaporean society has been having deeper discussions than ever before about our historical relationships with Israel and Palestine. Even as these important systemic interrogations continue, it’s heartening to see more immediate actions and donations towards helping those in Gaza, ones for which it’s easier to build consensus here. One of the most significant has been the Palestinian Scholarship Initiative (PSI), a community-led effort to raise S$400,000 to sponsor at least two Palestinian students pursuing university education in Singapore. Less than six months since it launched, it’s already achieved over half its goal, with over 900 donations ranging from S$3 to S$20,000. Over 150 Palestinians have expressed interest, with most under 25 and/or from Gaza.

This week, Lawrence Wong, prime minister, rubber-stamped the initiative by attending a briefing-cum-iftar with the PSI team, including co-chairs Yaacob Ibrahim, former minister, and Anthea Ong, former nominated MP. “This initiative will provide opportunities for Palestinian students to pursue university education in Singapore, empowering them to uplift their families and communities,” said Wong on Facebook. Skeptics might sneer at his apparent politicking, ahead of a crucial GE. The PAP has been repeatedly caught off-guard, since the onset of Israel’s war on Gaza, by activists’ desire for greater public discourse on the issue. Wong’s appearance at the event may seem like a sop to disillusioned voters, particularly amongst Gen Zs and the Malay community—the two groups, according to Jom’s voter sentiment survey, more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians.

Yet that view might excessively indulge a base cynicism. We can both keep up the pressure for a more democratic approach to foreign policy, while applauding Wong’s efforts to get Palestinian students to Singapore. Better still, you can do your part to help by donating here.

Some further reading: “Genocide in Gaza? Our moral responsibility” by Jom’s team

History weekly by Faris Joraimi

A late-19th century Hindu temple in downtown Kuala Lumpur will soon be demolished to make way for a mosque, “Masjid Madani”, with Anwar Ibrahim, prime minister, expected at its groundbreaking ceremony. At 130 years old, Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman Temple predates the Federation of Malaysia itself. Its planned demolition raised uproar not only because it’s a precious landmark, but also for its replacement by a mosque (because surely there aren’t enough in Malaysia), that will also be named after the prime minister’s policy framework, “Malaysia Madani”. The term “madani government” (kerajaan madani) is now a shorthand for the Anwar administration. Madani, however, can mean different things. A loanword from Arabic, it can be rendered as “civilised”, “civil” or “urbane”, from the root m-d-n, meaning “to found/build cities” or “to civilise”. From this root, other terms related to cities are derived, such as the Arabic words for city (madīna), civilisation (madanīya), to be civilised or sophisticated (mutamaddun) and the process of civilising or refining (tamaddun). This last word entered the Malay language (as tamadun) by the early 1900s to refer to the modern concept of civilisation, as colonialism divided humanity into a hierarchy of “civilised” and “primitive” races. Such new concepts entered via Arabic as it was Cairo-educated Muslim intellectuals who first led experiments with political modernity in the Malay world. 

How did we get to Anwar’s “madani” and Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman? As Islamist movements gained ground in the 1970s, trying to capture state machinery and direct them towards the realisation of Islam in public life, Muslim intellectuals in Indonesia debated the place of religion in modern political contexts. Out of this intense discourse, Nurcholish Madjid, a thinker and student organiser, popularised the term “masyarakat madani” (madani society). Muslims, he argued, needed to embrace pluralism, democracy and tolerance: “civilised”, in other words? But there’s another meaning here, as madani also means “Medinan”, referring specifically to the city, Medina in Arabia, where the Islamic prophet Muhammad founded his first community of followers in 622 AD. Historically, this was a multi-religious community, based on shared rights, obligations and security. Not everyone agrees: Islamists long to restore the Medinan community as their perfect society of pious, obedient believers led by God’s law. 

In 1995, Anwar, then finance minister, attended the Istiqlal Festival in Jakarta and took up the concept of masyarakat madani, envisioning an Islamic society that upheld liberal values like human rights and freedom of thought. When he finally became prime minister in 2022, madani to him had come to mean economic justice, good governance, anti-corruption and multi-racialism. Many Malaysians aren’t convinced. And surely we don’t need to sacrifice a century-old temple to realise these ideals? At least the mosque wasn’t proposed by the government, but the landowner. The Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) announced a relocation plan for the temple, and “assures (the public) that every step it takes will align with the principle of religious freedom guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.” So goes the balancing act of “civilised” society.

Arts: Demolish, rebuild, repeat

“SAM M.I.A.” For several years now, this acronym has been emblazoned on the hoarding around the former premises of the Singapore Art Museum (SAM) along Bras Basah Road, emulating the little round stickers it dispenses to visitors upon entry. Missing in action? Not quite. M.I.A. stands for “Museum In Action”, which vacated its long-time home at the former St Joseph’s Institution (SJI) in 2019 and, since then, has been living it up down by the port at the Tanjong Pagar Distripark. It’ll soon have a new neighbour: AGAM Theatre Lab. The Tamil theatre company has raised about $400,000 for its new 3,111 sq ft space (about the size of three four-room HDB flats), including its first-ever 110-seater theatre. Subramanian Ganesh, the group’s founder, is dreaming big. With the risks of venue rental mitigated, he wants to lean into longer seasons with shows that might run for weeks, not just days, and even host an international Tamil theatre festival. He told ST, “When I go to theatres in Broadway to watch a production like Phantom Of The Opera and reach the lobby, I already feel like I’m part of the performance. I want to create that.”

Both this portside locale and the Bras Basah.Bugis precinct are now the sites of sweeping developments in arts place-making as old buildings are replaced by newer projects, and older institutions find new homes in the buzzy arts belt. Over the past few years, this area has seen the end of aged malls and complexes like Golden Wall Centre, Selegie Centre and Peace Centre, which will be (and have already been) replaced by swanky hotels and mixed-use projects; but also a slew of spanking new theatres and spaces. The Singapore Indian Fine Arts Society will get a new outdoor amphitheatre in Middle Road later this year for its traditional performing arts programmes, and the photography art centre DECK is getting a new building to replace its old container block home along Prinsep Street, which when completed in 2027 will boast three galleries, a black box theatre, a library and a cafe. The state also has designs on the empty SJI building; they’re currently assessing the 160-year-old national monument for a possible Singapore Design Museum. 

This terraforming of cultural terrain, while fertile for sites that have lain fallow, does come at a cost. Hoe Su Fern, long-time researcher of cultural policy and creative place-making in Singapore, points out the high-pressure expectations placed on tenants and spaces who are part of state-subsidised arts housing programmes to “deliver urban rejuvenation outcomes”, all while struggling to sustain their own practices. Especially in a nation-state where “aggressive investment” in arts infrastructure tends to make place management “top-down, deliberately planned, and results-oriented”. Arts place-making here is, perhaps, a little less “Missing In Action” and a lot more “Monopoly In Action”. 

Tech: AI hops into beer 

Heineken has launched its first global generative AI (GenAI) lab, in Singapore. Developed in collaboration with AI Singapore, the lab will focus on creating scalable solutions, such as automated marketing content generation and financial reporting systems, while fostering AI talent development. Heineken hopes to position itself at the forefront of AI-driven transformation in the beverage sector by taking advantage of Singapore’s robust AI ecosystem, skilled workforce, and supportive government policies. The company is not new to the GenAI landscape. It has already demonstrated effective GenAI applications, such as its financial insights platform, which offers immediate access to 10 years of financial data, and its cutting-edge knowledge and insight management system, transforming how marketing teams retrieve consumer and market intelligence. Other beverage companies aren’t too far behind. AB InBev, which owns Budweiser and Corona, uses AI to forecast demand and optimise supply chains, while Carlsberg leverages machine learning to develop new beer flavours. Seems like beer lovers’ mugs of joy will soon runneth over. 

Tech: War in the age of robots

From fighting with ah boys, guns and tanks to fighting with computers and autonomous robots. This is what the next generation of Singapore’s defence is starting to look like, with two significant partnerships being announced at the Singapore Defense Tech Summit. First, Singapore’s Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA), the Republic of Singapore Air Force, and US-based Anduril Industries have joined forces to advance mission autonomy for manned-unmanned teaming. This collaboration will use Anduril’s Lattice for Mission Autonomy platform, which purports to enable “teams of diverse robotic assets to work together under human supervision to dynamically perform complex missions in any domain”. By developing autonomous behaviors, it should enable faster, more informed decision-making by soldiers. Over the next year, these capabilities will be tested in simulated environments.

Second, Singapore’s Ministry of Defence, DSTA, and DSO National Laboratories have partnered with France’s Mistral AI to develop generative AI models for the Singapore Armed Forces. The initiative will fine-tune Mistral’s large language models and create a mixture-of-experts model to enhance decision-making and mission planning. AI Singapore will also contribute to this effort, ensuring the models are deployable in secure environments, and aligned with stringent defence requirements. These collaborations highlight Singapore’s strategic focus on integrating autonomy and AI into its defence ecosystem, positioning the nation as a leader in next-generation military innovation. Furthermore, it is a significant step in alleviating the demographic pressures from declining Total Fertility Rates that will lead to fewer ah boys becoming men.

If you enjoy Jom’s work, do get a paid subscription today to support independent journalism in Singapore.