Support Site for The Unemployed & Underemployed
Tuesday January 23rd 2018

Is there any other better way to engage the blogging community besides suing Alex Au?

I have read through Alex Au’s blog posts and felt uncomfortable¬† as some of the allegations were truly hard-hitting and bordered on defamatory.

However, I disagreed with the latest Prime Minister’s defamatory suit against him.

The government is going backwards on how it is dealing with the influential blogging community by using  the legal way.

Is there a better way to deal with hard-hitting bloggers like Alex Au who has written some sense and  brought up alot of pertinent questions on the AIM issue even though he touches on corruption a tad too insensitively?

Alex Au of course will have no choice but to back down and remove his articles with an apology but is this the best way to deal with a hot-potato issue?

Sociopolitical sites like TRE,TOC and Yawning Bread have a strong following and each site could command at least 10, 000 reads a day.

During pre-election period, their readership could double or even triple.

Its influence is far-reaching and the government does not seem to have a viable  alternative to counteract its strong following.

Will the government continue to sue bloggers in future for bringing out sensitive  issues that matter to Singapore even though some may border on defamatory?

I remembered how the former NKF chief Mr Duric sued people who accused him of malpractices when he was actually the true culprit.

I am not saying that our government is guilty of any malpractices here with regard to the AIM project but there are simply too many questions that went unanswered.

Almost the whole of Singapore is now  talking about the AIM issue  and I am sure that  the remarks made on the matter  are not of the pleasant kind.

Town Council chief Dr Teo Ho Pin’s feeble attempt to tackle the Action Information Management (AIM) issue only makes things worse.

He simply reiterated that the AIM sales was good for all town councils but didn’t address the elephant in the room – why was¬† AIM only successfully¬†won¬†by the solo bid made by a company that consisted of three ex-PAP MPs?

The AIM matter is a potential time-bomb which  will further discredit the government if it is not handled properly.

Its’ timing is also made worse by the fact that the Prime Minister has to make a call on the Punggol East by-election soon.

All eyes will be on how the AIM fall-out will affect PAP’s by-election chance if it is called within the early part of this year.

Trust has also to be earned and once it is breached it will take a long time for it to be regained.

The ruling party’s ¬†credit rating¬†¬†must have¬†¬†nosedived alot since two top government officers from SCDF and CNB were implicated in a corruption cum sex scandal case last year.

Moreover, our Prime Minister should actually be the person to answer all those tough questions on AIM  as the leader of the government and not  always let his sub ordinates take the rap.

He has yet to also properly answer to the previous Speaker of Parliament’s Mr Michael Palmer sex scandal issue and DPM Teo Chee Hean was the one fronting for the ruling party all this while.

As for the AIM scandal, top on most Singaporeans’¬†mind¬†would ¬†be why only one bid was submitted during the tender exercise two years ago ¬†and more significantly why ¬†it¬†was submitted by ¬†a firm held by three ex-PAP Members of Parliament (MP) with a pay-up of only $2?

No one has came out to properly address the issue head-on.

Should our government now clamp down on future questionable tender if it smells of unethical practices?

How many of such similar  government tenders were successfully held by companies which are owned by ex-MPs with only one single bid?

We have known of MPs holding multiple directorships in companies and  it is so common that no one now blinks an eye.

We have always felt proud that our government has conducted it’s business¬† above board so that no one will accuse it of any malpractices.

Our ex-Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew has ensured that the government operates efficiently and is transparent in all its’ official dealings.

Let us hope that the current regime will be able to carry on the good works laid down by our founder.

Sometimes, a simple apology is what most people want as no one expects our government to be error-free…

Written by: Gilbert Goh

Number of View: 4569

Reader Feedback

11 Responses to “Is there any other better way to engage the blogging community besides suing Alex Au?”

  1. Ace says:

    First they try to convince you, failing which, they tried to confuse you. However when these does not work, they condemn (sue) you and call you daft.

    Alex appropriately titled the article using the word “Blowback”. Now his blog will have even more hits from this event. You remove 1 article and get to read a hundred articles from the Yawning Bread. Free advertisement in the MSN as well.

    What’s the point of winning this battle which will eventually cause you to lose the war.

  2. sal says:

    Same old method….find a scapegoat.

  3. Lau says:

    Please swap the picture with cartoon at least not so hypocrite looking la!

  4. wong says:

    The truth is out there and so best to be told – things needs to be explained and come clean . What was the party slogan ” whiter than white “?

    make sure you live up to ehat you promised PAP .

  5. jj@39 says:

    Half German Nazi party + Italy fascist party + Half Russian communist party + Half PRC communist party = PAP

  6. James says:

    who terminate who? i am still confuse? $2 dollar setup… i smell something fishy..

    Nay i not going to trust this garverment next time..

  7. xa.low says:

    It seems directors of Aim receive no fee or payment of any kind. It is a wholly-owned PAP company. In this transaction, the TCs came out slightly ahead, they were able to continue using the financial software, did not face an increase in maintenance and support charges whilst a new system is being developed. Looking at the figures, AIM itself didn’t make any money – which is why some people are asking why then did it bid for this job.

    On this, I think that there are people out there who are not out to make a profit but help out in some small way that they can, contribute something back. I am sure Mr Goh, who runs Transitioning, understands what it means to try to help out in ways different people can without needing a profit motive all the time.

  8. Godd says:

    Do u people follow the AIM Go read all articles ,

    It says the contract is for 8 years, each of the 14 town councils pay $875 per month? How much would that be ? Did you pass your Primary 4 Mathematics? Clue: 8 x 12 x 14 x 875 equals
    The software property rights was sold to AIM for $140,000 and lease back to the town council each paying $875 per month.
    This is what I understand . Am I right ?
    no profit ? Revenue is 1.176 (1,176,000) million , no maintenance expense
    Bought for 140,000. Work out the profit?
    Any other agenda apart from profit?
    Would a PAP company want to provide services to an opposition ward?

    Do work for the good mankind, you must be a PAP supporter who will not lose your Job to a FT, good luck ,

  9. Godd says:

    Ok , correction, It was sold for 140k for the remaining one year of the contract, not the whole 8 yeAr. So only 12 x 1 x 14 x 875. Work out to be 147k

    The point is the company AIM is a PAP company. Will the company be happy to provide services to opposition constituencies?

  10. Godd says:

    Next, are the remaining 13 town councils be continuing using the proprietary software rights and pay. $875 per month , there will be profit!
    There are 40 % non PAP voters who are citizens of Singapore .
    Let’s have zero conflict of interest for public services be it town councils engaging services or other public services engaging companies. Do not have political companies, PAP or opposition likewise provide essential services to the citizens. Neutral companies best would be no political affiliations.
    But I am against 2 million foreigners especially those who insult the country but are working here. Insulting Citizens would also be inappropriate. I live in few countries since 1979 and respect the countries I lived whether I was or am there

  11. Godd says:

    I am not against foreigners, how Can I when I have lived in many countries.
    The issue is to let into Singapore 2 million foreigners and they are replacing the 3 million born and bred Sg whose forefathers risked their lives to discover Singapore generations ago. Our forefathers developed this nation from a British colony and I am Against massive influx of foreigners who can here to insult citizens. This is a small country, with limited space, even UK , USA or Australia where I lived with huge land area have only 5% to 8% of. Immigrants. Eg 5% of 320 million in the USA is 16 million foreigners out of 304 million American citizens , in Singapore is 2 of 5 million is 40 % non Sg citizens and Singapore is only 700 sqkm of land space and USA is 9,800,000 sqkm which is 14,000 times bigger than Singapore.
    I can even accept 10 to 15 % provided they respect Singapore culture and I do not even expect foreigners to learn Malay, Indian or Chinese culture.

Leave a Reply