Random Discourse – Post Presidential Election

Leave a comment

The Presidential Election is over and Sunday is a rather disappointing day for me because Dr Tan Cheng Bock didn’t win. 83.44% of 2.27 million eligible voters cast their votes and Tan Cheng Bock was beaten by a hair thin margin of just 0.33%. Tony Tan’s supporters can ungraciously say that even if Tan Cheng Bock had won, he would also be another 35% president. But the difference is that a Tan Cheng Bock win would be a lot less abrasive and a lot more acceptable to some of those who voted for Tan Jee Say. That is a fact because when Tan Jee Say has fallen behind, the hashtag #AnyonebutTonyTan starts making its rounds on Twitter. In other words, Tony Tan is a 35% President both in name and in fact while Tan Cheng Bock will only be one in name.

Personally, I had expected Tan Cheng Bock to win. It was not by detailed analysis. It was simply gut feel. I went to a customer site with a colleague and on the cab, the colleague said he would vote for Tan Cheng Bock. I was drinking myself silly in a pub and one of the usual patrons came up and asked me who I would vote for and toasted me for saying Tan Cheng Bock. Among my two drinking partners, one has already decided to vote for Tan Cheng Bock while the other said he would go with that as long as that is the popular choice. I asked someone who I haven’t spoken to in a long while and she said Tan Cheng Bock. Tan Cheng Bock was so overwhelming a choice among the majority of my friends and that was in spite of the online propaganda by the likes of Temasek Review Emeritus. To me, “Doc” (as his team on Facebook affectionately calls him) is simply the people’s choice outside the online community and it was something spontaneous and not orchestrated. If there was a movement online canvassing for votes for Tan Cheng Bock, all of that effort appeared to be individual and uncoordinated. In my case, I had simply forwarded what I liked to my Facebook wall, and to those friends who have not decided on who they would vote for. To me, Tan Cheng Bock is the black horse which would come from behind and surprise everyone. In fact I had generally refrain from criticising the other candidates publicly and when I had to post anything critical of them I had make it clear I regarded them as ‘political smear’, so that anyone who wants to read them would read with a pinch (or a bucket) of salt.

A day before the polling day when I met an ex-colleague for lunch, he spoke of tactical voting and has advised that the votes for Tan Cheng Bock and Tan Jee Say be consolidated to deny Tony Tan the presidency. He mentioned that if we failed to do so then Tony Tan would definitely win. In fact, it was a foregone conclusion even then that Tan Kin Lian is finished and we were hoping for a last minute miracle in which he would pull out of the race to avoid humiliation and to throw his support behind either Tan Cheng Bock or Tan Jee Say.

I understand the concept of tactical voting, but I find it difficult to abandon Tan Cheng Bock for Tan Jee Say. The reason is rather simple. I knew very little about Tan Jee Say. All I have is just what he had said during the campaign period and I would be a fool to take all that at face value and give him my vote. On top of which, a Tan Jee Say win would be as bad as a Tony Tan win since they stood on the opposite end of the political divide. While it maybe said that Tan Jee Say is being true to himself by aligning solidly with the opposition camp, it simply reinforces the impression that neither a Tony Tan nor Tan Jee Say win will do anything to bridge the politcal divide. So even though it was a risky (if not painful) decision, I stayed my course and voted for Tan Cheng Bock. My ex-colleague said we might as well have voted for Tony Tan. I had told him to stand firm and vote for the candidate he believed in all the way to the end. To vote against one’s own preferred candidate simply because one thinks the candidate is unlikely to win is just making one’s vote meaningless.

On hindsight, perhaps I should have convinced him to vote for Tan Cheng Bock instead. I should have told him that it is rather impossible for Tan Jee Say to win. After all, while the national average for the opposition vote is 40% in the recent General Election [GE], that average is generally boosted by the overall good showing of the Workers’ Party [WP], and the good showing of the Singapore Peoples’ Party [SPP] at Bishan-Toa Payoh and Potong Pasir. That means the die-hard opposition base is actually much lower, and I estimate it to be around 35% due to the resentment over public transport, housing and the surge in foreign labor.

It may have been logical for Tan Jee Say aligned himself primarily with the opposition. Unfortunately, that almost certainly sank his bid more so than his confrontational stance in the debates. His deliberate, pointed barbs against Tony Tan did nothing to endear him to the PAP camp at all. While that may present his supporters an impression of self-confidence (i.e. the impression he is already running neck and neck with Tony Tan), it also made him looked arrogant. It may play very well to the rabidly anti-PAP camp, but it does nothing to endear him to the middle voters (a part of those who has chosen to vote for any opposition only in the recent GE) because he had treated the other two candidates as just also-runs and insignificant. By failing to engage the other candidates, it really leave very little room for voters to engage in tactical voting because there is very little common ground (if not none at all). It also means he wouldn’t be able to win all of that 35% of the opposition votes. In my case, that arrogance and disrespect was simply offensive. It was as offensive as Tony Tan interrupting Tan Jee Say when he was speaking on the ISA. I am dismayed that someone of Tony Tan’s stature had rudely interrupted before Tan Jee Say finished speaking.

I hadn’t bother to write anything of these things down on my blog or any social media platform, nor speak to any of my friends or colleagues about these because I didn’t want to influence how people decide on their choice BEFORE the Presidential Election. Above which, I really don’t relish the idea of being flamed by the rabidly anti-PAP camp even though I could delete all such comments at my discretion. Furthermore, offending the supporters of the other candidates would leave very little room to convince anyone to change their decisions or to convince those who are undecided. That’s not mentioning that since I want to vote for a President who would unify the people, and I don’t think criticising the other candidates will help Tan Cheng Bock win at all. It was rather unfortunate that the supporters of the other candidates are not so restraint.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock, you have fought the good fight. You have inspired some of us and given us hope. You are right that even though we lost, we have also won.

Then again… I still preferred it to be your photo hanging on the offices of all government department and civil services in Singapore. On Sunday morning, I finally understand the anguish of SPP supporters in Potong Pasir. It is definitely a loss that is really, really hard to swallow.

Current Affairs – Presidential Elections 2011

8 comments

Singapore will be voting for the next President on the Aug 27th, 2011. Unlike the previous two elections where all contenders were disqualified and the selected endorsed candidate waltzed into the Istana, this time round there are four candidates.

Four! Which means there’s a possibility that the next Elected President may be elected with less than 50% of the popular votes. Conspiracy theories flew fast and furious, and it suggested that all four candidates were granted their eligibility certificate to divide the opposition vote to ensure victory for the government endorsed candidate.

I won’t talk about the merits of each candidate (or the lack thereof). I will simply talk about the candidate I had decided on all along, even though at one point I had wavered. The candidate I will cast my vote for is Dr Tan Cheng Bock.

When I read that Dr Tan has voted against the Nominated Member of Parliament [NMP] scheme, I respected the man for standing up against his party. After all, I have always considered the NMP scheme to be a waste of public monies, or as the hated Mah Bow Tan put it – raiding our reserves. A friend even called it a elaborate charade orchestrated the PAP for the Western democracies to show that Singapore allow dissenting voices. Even though an NMP may speaks passionately about a matter, he / she has no voter backing compared to the Non-Constituency MPs [NCMP]. As if having no voter backing isn’t bad enough, a particular NMP has championed an issue that in my opinion has the least of importance to Singaporeans in general. In fact, I even felt he was deliberately putting the weight of his position as an NMP behind the issue while claiming to be doing so in his personal capacity. It was with some relief when he wasn’t re-apppointed again.

I know I would be standing on thin ice if I had considered this to be my sole reason for voting for Dr Tan. And I also know that if I quote from the election flyer he sent to my mailbox it would only bored everyone else. So I won’t bother regurgitating most of that.

However, I would still like to talk about Dr Tan the general practitioner [GP]. A colleague mentioned some time ago that his wife suddenly felt very ill while they were out many years ago. Far from home, my colleague took his wife to the nearest clinic he can find. It was a pretty rundown clinic with minimum renovation, a far cry from those with nice furniture and posh set up. tHERE, he met a kind, old GP who took his time ensure a proper examination is done and speak kindly to them to reassure them that everything is alright. They didn’t even know who he was at first, until very much later they saw him speaking on TV during one of the Parliamentary sessions. They further confirmed they were not mistaken by checking the appointment card. What really touched them was that he didn’t just try to ‘process’ them and ‘get it over with’ much like some of the young GPs tend to do. The human touch of Dr Tan left them with a fond memory until this day.

No matter what the credits are for each candidate, there will also be many negative comments and remarks going around about them. In Dr Tan’s case, it was his stand on the ISA arrests in 1987. A fellow brother-in-Christ pointed out that the Internal Security Act [ISA] denied the detainees a fair trial completely, not to mention that it provides an avenue for the PAP (or any ruling party in the future) to use it against their political opponents. Even so, I am neutral about the ISA as it is useful against certain threats to our national security – such as the members of the Jemaah Islamiyah [JI]. To elaborate, I can agree than the ISA is a blunt tool but I am not for getting rid of that tool until a better tool is in place.

Thus, it is my personal opinion that Dr Tan’s stand on that matter back then should not be held against him since he was not part of the decision makers. I understand this matter is of great importance to some because the Elected President would hold the final decision on whether anyone should be detained under the ISA. But I am not for the argument that a candidate’s support for the ISA would mean he would stand back and allow the ruling party (whichever one it might be) to persecute its political opponents.

Before I end, I was once accused as PAP hater by a guy who couldn’t accept that I could settle for Chee Soon Juan if I am asked to chose between him against say Vivian Balakrishnan, Wong Kan Seng or Mah Bow Tan. I doubt I could really deny being one when one goes through the stuff that I have posted on this blog. But this time round, I beg to differ from the vociferously anti-PAP and I ain’t going to vote based on party affliation. I will vote based on which candidate I can most agree with and I have found the other three wanting in that department.

I ain’t going to sway anyone from their decisions. But may the person who win be the best for our country. Majulah Singapura!

Random Discourse – SingaForeigns

Leave a comment

I have quite a number of friends who are foreigners, some I had known from the days I joined the workforce back in 95, and some in church since 98. A few of my friends and relatives also married foreigners – Vietnamese, Thai, mainlander Chinese and Hong Kongers among them. All of these people are pleasant to be with, and at times we even made fun of each other. For example, some of my Malaysian friends will not hesitate to tell me what they were taught about Singapore’s separation in 1965 (i.e. that Singapore seceded from Malaysia and not kicked out as we were taught) and I will at times make fun of their Chinese accent or the purported corruption of their politicians.

All of these were nothing more than light-hearted banter, and we know where to draw the line so that it won’t offend each other. In fact, it has certainly never crossed my mind to drive any of them out of Singapore. Unfortunately, there are those foreigners that I clearly want out of my country, post haste and with extreme prejudice. That is when I snapped into the ‘Ordos Xenos’ persona.

Unfortunately these days, I snapped into that persona very often. The reason is that I am sick of this government telling us that we need them. Even when I can agree that Singapore need them to build a greater population for economic growth, the hopeless local main stream media can stop spinning the stories as if Singapore will implode and disintegrate without them. The plain facts will do and the government can stop pretending that only the finest and the best were let onto our shores. Stop treating us like idiots because when 40% of the population here are foreigners, we can see for ourselves the quality because the justification that all these people who got Permanent Resident [PR] status or citizenship are talented hasn’t even got a leg to stand on. After all, even fish soup sellers gets PR… but that is still a decent job and there may be very little (if not no) Singaporean fish soup sellers so I’ll close one eye to that.

Now, I don’t mind the Bangladeshi worker who will build our flats or clean our streets. But I mind when they pee at our void decks in the middle of night. I mind when they hang around and ogle at our women at our public swimming pools and defile the pool to the point that Singaporeans can no longer use them for recreation. It annoys me greatly that my friends now have to go to swim in pools in a condominium, or at a club. A friend mentioned that they have a nice swimming complex in Jurong East, but the people staying there can no longer enjoy it because it is choked full of people who aren’t there to swim!

I don’t mind the Indians taking up IT jobs in many companies. But I mind when they are not able to speak proper English and cannot even write an email in proper English. It make us wonder how they passed their exams to be actually qualified in what they do. Not to mention it make us wonder how they smoked through the interviews to even get employed. Where is the quality? What talent? Frankly, I really hope one of the guy in my office was joking when he asked “What is Google”. We are simply hopeful that what happened was he didn’t catch the humor behind the phrase – Google is your friend. (see above)

I don’t mind the mainlander Chinese worker who works at the hawker centre or coffee shop to keep cost down. I can even tolerate one of them taking up a position in our universities. But I mind their utter lack of social graces – for e.g. when they shout across the train to talk to each other or talk loudly on the phone in the MRT or the lift. I mind when someone called Zhou Hou boasts about beating up a Malay person and calling that person a dog with complete disregard to his religion (see below). I mind when they denigrate our people and look down on our country like a certain Wang Peng Fei (see that frakking maggot on the right). It really doesn’t matter that Wang might have gotten his ideas from an overseas forum. It doesn’t matter that he took those ideas and turned it into a video. The very fact is, it should not have been done at all. People like Wang Peng Fei and Zhou Hou didn’t even have basic manners – i.e. that when one is in another person’s home, respect those living there. So much for 5000 years of history and civilization. Basic manners probably all went down along the Yellow River into the sea during the Cultural Revolution.

(I know some self-styled “open-minded” Singaporeans tried to act smart and ridicule those of us who made a fuss when foreigners talked bad about us or ridicule us. But remember this, you fish-faces. I’ll admit even among our races there may not be true racial harmony but at least we have racial tolerance. We have painstakingly maintained that tolerance and that has maintained the peace since the racial riots of 1969. So, the next time you start off with your smart-aleck comments again, at least try and remember because no matter how hard we whacked one another we know where to draw the line.)

I don’t really mind the white people coming to Singapore to take up some jobs too. But I mind when they beat up our people and it takes Singapore’s usually efficient police unusually long (more than a year) to investigate and deal with the culprits (see screen shot on the left). I would still mind even if the judge found them guilty and sentence them to a jail term and / or a small fine, because that doesn’t compensate the poor souls who end up in hospital. I mind this a lot because it felt as if I am still one of “Great Britain’s” colonial subject even though Singapore gained self rule since 1959, a good 52 years ago. I also mind when some of our people still defer to the white man as if the white people knows better. It saddens me greatly, that while politically we have freed ourselves from colonialism, the minds of these ‘cockasian’ Singaporeans remained enslaved in colonialism. Perhaps these ‘cockasian’ Singaporeans also read the news of the London riots with utter disbelief and denial.

I don’t mind the Filipinos taking over service positions, such as call operators, sales person, waiters, or waitresses and even nurses. Hell, I don’t even mind if they turn Lucky Plaza and Ion Orchard into Little Manila. But I mind those who actually questions our Operationally Ready NSmen’s dedication in defending and protecting our land of birth, and has the audacity calls us morons while enjoying our hospitality. If she is suggesting that some of us will run at the first sign of war, it would a clear demonstration of what Sigmund Freud called ‘moral projection’. It is ironical because I assumed that Rachelle Ann Beguia will head off to Changi airport on the first flight out to the Philippines at the slightest hint of trouble in Singapore. I personally hope that the National Heart Center will have as much courage as the East Asia Institute of Management. I will settle for nothing until that silly b*tch pack herself onto a flight out of our little red dot. I want none of her apologies even if they are done on her knees or with tears streaming down her eyes. I simply want her to LEAVE. MY. COUNTRY. NOW.

And don’t ever come back, even as a tourist because I don’t welcome her. Good riddance to bad rubbish, really!

Personally, I would say the same for some of these new citizens too – even to some of those who have served National Service [NS]. Sure, there will always be those who had it easy. But I don’t really care whether someone served his NS as a clerk that never get his uniform dirty or spend any time in the mock jungles of Singapore. I am simply glad for those whose NS is nothing more than a walk in the park. I am also glad that even those who had a terrible time, because they never had to serve a tour of duty under enemy fire. But for some of those frakking maggots who had an easy time in NS, please stop belittling it because it utterly disrespects those who have given their all. Not to mention that it is a grevious insult to the families of those who lost their sons in NS for whatever reasons. In the past I believed I could have called anyone who served NS a brother… but frakking maggots like these is where I draw the line!

As for that ex-PRC family who went to the Community Mediation Centre [CMC] to complain about the Indian neighbour cooking curry… whatever makes them think that what they cooked would actually smell pleasant to someone else too? Why don’t they fucking try making some smelly tofu and see what everyone else will say? Even though the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports [MCYS] said that the CMC did not compel the Indian family to only cook curry when the complainant’s family is away, the fact remains that they should not even have brought the matter up in the first place!!

Let me quote this:

“If you reject the food, ignore the customs, fear the religion and avoid the people, you might better stay at home.”

– James A. Michener

To these “SingaForeigns”… Tuck Yew all seriously, all right?!

Recommended Read:
Chillycraps: majulah mobile phone

Random Discourse – Fare Increment Confirmed

Leave a comment

As I expected, the Public Transport Council [PTC] has rubber-stamped / approved the fare increment request again. From 8 October this year (in conjunction with the opening of the final 12 Circle Line train stations), adult commuters using the ezlink card will see an increase of 2 cents for each ride. Senior citizen fares with concessionary cards will see an increase by 1 cent for each ride. The fare hike is expected to affect nearly nine out of ten commuters.

Was anyone really expecting the PTC to completely reject the fare increments? Just remember that 60.1% of Singaporeans voted to maintain the status quo and stop dreaming! For those who voted along with that 60.1%, they shouldn’t even complain. You make your bed, you sleep in it!

Even though I am definitely unhappy that the fare will increase, I am glad senior citizen concessionary hours will be extended to a full-day throughout the week. On top of which (according to the main stream media [MSM]), “their fares on the North East Line and Circle Line will also be adjusted downwards”.

I personally would like to congratulate the Workers’ Party [WP] on this, since it is written in pg 44, pt 14 of the WP Manifesto – Concession passes on public transport for the elderly should be extended to all operating hours. It is clear that the support the WP received from the people is well deserved. Keep up the good work done. I can’t speak for everyone but I personally think it is clear which party has the well being of the people at heart.

Anyway, now that full day concession has been given to senior citizens, the remaining goals (at least for me) would be to raise the the height for children getting concession from 0.9m to 1.2m. It is clear that as children today have better nutrition and thus they will reach 0.9m earlier. In short, the height limit should be reviewed just as the HDB income cap for Build-To-Order [BTO] flats should be reviewed. MSM can even spin a story about the transport operators doing a part in raising the Total Fertility Rate [TFR] in Singapore. A positive public relations spin about the transport operator’s hitherto almost non-existent ‘corporate conscience’ might actually even make them look a little better. That’s not forgetting the government can also consider it an addition to the baby bonus given to new parents without the need to raise taxes.

Next, concession for polytechnic students should also be reviewed. Right now, polytechnics are considered tertiary institutions just like universities. Thus polytechnic students pay more than their peers in the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) and Junior Colleges (JCs). I have no idea how that classification is arrived at in the past but it is my considered opinion that it is not only inappropriate and outdated, but no longer relevant today. Does the PTC not consider it absurd that parents of polytechnic students are “penalised” for their children’s choice of post-secondary school education? I won’t go into arguing that a polytechnic diploma is hardly the equivalent of a university degree since that will definitely open another can of worms. However, I am certain how this change would ease the burden of and lower the cost of living for some parents. Last I checked the hybrid polytechnic concession pass (i.e. for both bus and train concessions) cost $97 a month, while that of a JC / ITE Student is $52.50. By giving polytechnic students the same concession as JC / ITE Students, there would be an annual savings of $534! That is even better than the 20% rebate on income tax this year! If the transport operators want to tell us that this means everyone else will have to pay more then they should tell us exactly what is the impact of that to their current multi-million annual profits.

Being a realist, I will not expect the PTC to deny any of the transport operators’ requests to raise fares especially when most of the people in the council consists of people who probably don’t use public transport exclusively. If I remember correctly, the operators are also represented in that council and thus I cannot help but consider all that deliberation on how much increments to approve is just for show.

Simply put, even though I still don’t like the fare increments a single bit, I’ll drudgingly accept it as an inevitable evil. But instead of making noise to demand no fare increments, I would prefer to channel my energies into getting some of the concessions which the public has always been asking for (like the examples above). At the very least, even if the improvements to service standards failed to materialise just like before, at least some people will be getting some benefits. Or to put it in a very negative way, at least we can still deceive ourselves into believing we have make some gains even though we know for a fact the fares will always increase to line the pockets of the major shareholders of SMRT and SBS Transit (namely Temasek Holdings and the Singapore Labour Foundation respectively).

And talking about improving service standards… a friend told me that someone said commuters should first allow the transport operators to increase fares first and then work on improving service standards. He joked that this is about as absurd as a young man telling an old man to allow him to sleep with the daughter first and then he’ll work out how to marry her later.

I am really amused by this jokes he thought of. Some where at the back of my mind, I seem to recall reading that humour is a human response to a dilemma without going crazy. Considering that this friend drives, perhaps his dilemma here is that neither getting a car or accepting the annual fare increments is acceptable to him. So, he made the best of his situation by simply cracking a joke about it.

Random Discourse – Fare Increment = Wage Increment for Transport Workers

Leave a comment

“But if we cannot raise bus fares, how will that impact your fellow workers? I am sure you will understand that it is not fair if they cannot get wage increases.”

– Lim Boon heng

Will the People’s Action Party [PAP] please end this wayang now? It doesn’t take much brains to guess that the fare review was deliberately delayed before the General Election to keep it from being an election topic. Above which, I know for a fact the Public Transport Council [PTC] will approve all fare increments. The PTC might not approve the full amount the transport operators asked for to show they have been “judicious” about it, but who knows that the amount asked for wasn’t already inflated in the first place? Just think about it, the transport operators are still making record profits almost every year! I shudder to imagine how much more profits would there be if the PTC wasn’t*erhem* “judicious”.

When I first read what Lim Boon Heng said, the very first thing that came to mind was, “Just how low will they go to justify the fare increments?” Some where at the back of my head I seem to recall the National Trade Union Congress [NTUC] (if not Lim Boon Heng himself) has always told workers not to expect wage increments as if it is an entitlement. So I am really sorry to say this stinks of hypocrisy.

Is Lim Boon Heng not aware just how absurd and idiotic this is? How is it fair that we must allow for fare increments to ensure that these two semi-monopoly have profits so that their workers get wage increments or to cover their cost when no one else is guaranteed the same? How is it fair to some of us who haven’t had a wage increase for years to be told that we need to fork out more from our pockets so transport workers get theirs? Stop telling me about fairness when our gripes about the horrible service standards remained the same all these years.

But since Lim Boon Heng wants to talk about fairness, I would personally love to see some of that fare increment goes into the more concession for senior citizens and extended to polytechnic students. How is it fair that polytechnic students are made to pay the full fare when their A-Level or ITE peers are subsidised? How is it fair that senior are forced to take public transport only at selected hours only when they are expected not to retire? As I recalled, wasn’t it Lim Boon Heng who sounded the death knell for retirement and that means even senior citizens go to work during peak hours in the future? If I am not wrong, under the to be enacted re-employment legislation, the wages of senior citizens “could be adjusted down taking into account the employee’s productivity, performance, responsibilities, any earlier reduction made when an employee reached 60 years of age, etc.. So how is it fair they are now told to pay more for someone else’s wage increment?

Surprisingly, the transport operators (or was it the PTC) have always turned down request from the public for fairer subsidies for these two groups. The reason they gave was that the current concessions given is a form of cross subsidy – i.e. the cost of the concession is borne by full fare passengers. Thus, it is their opinion that giving more concession would “increase the cost for full fare paying passengers”.

I would have been moved to tears if not for the fact that the transport operators are making obscene profits year on year (SMRT – S$161.1 million, SBS Transit S$54.3 million). Frankly I wondered whether they were genuinely concerned that we might be paying more, or that more concessions for senior citizens and polytechnic students simply meant less profits. Perhaps if their respective CEOs are awarded with less director fees and remuneration, that would have been enough to finance those concessions. After all, SMRT CEO Saw Phiak Hwa was rewarded only S$1.8 million in 2010.

I repeat what I have always said in the past pertaining to more fare concession for senior citizens and polytechnic students – Show us the frakking bill. Just frakking show us how much more we really have to pay so the above concession should be given. Let us decide whether we want to foot that bill instead of acting like the PTC or the transport operators actually cared when they obviously don’t.

I wondered if Lim Boon Heng is aware he opened a can of worms with his silly and almost senile comment. And didn’t he retire from politics? I recalled there was quite a show when he announced his retirement, complete with tears and the likes. It was a spectacular act worthy of the Oscars.

So, Lim Boon Heng should stay retired. My advice is that he also do this for his own good – Shut up and sit down. And I ain’t even being rude because to any other people I would have simply said, “What the lanfang was that? Tuck yew seriously!”

Addendum: On the matter of concession, I would also like to see the height for young children raised from 0.9m to 1.2m since children these days have better nutrition and would grow faster. It would be unfair to expect children to be of the same size as those back when this stupid regulation was set.

1 … 20 21 22 23 24 … 186