BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | How to reduce future climate risk
More ammunition for green parties to ask their governments what they are doing to stop the rot.
---------------------------------------------
How to reduce future climate risk
Viewpoint
By Daniel P Schrag
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University
Human society is performing a remarkable and uncontrolled experiment on the Earth.
Because of the combustion of coal, oil and gas, carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are already higher than they have been for at least 430,000 years.
If such activities continue, CO2 will rise to levels not seen on the Earth for 30 million years or more.
CO2 is not the only cause of global climate change, but it is the primary cause. Reducing CO2 emissions is a necessary step to avert a potentially catastrophic future.
Many countries have adopted a global target of 550 parts per million (ppm), roughly a doubling of the pre-industrial value, as a safe and reasonable level that can be achieved over the next century.
It seems unlikely that substantial and effective actions will be sustained if the US is not engaged in the process
The truth is that no scientist really knows what CO2 level is safe. What we do know is that even if CO2 levels stabilised today, the Earth would continue to warm as oceans and ice sheets gradually adjust over decades and centuries to their new atmospheric boundary conditions.
Because the response times of the oceans and glaciers are so long, by the time we see a catastrophe on the horizon, such as the collapse of the Greenland ice sheet (equivalent to six metres of sea level rise), it will likely be impossible to stop it.
The coal issue
Even a stabilisation level of 550 ppm may be very difficult to achieve. Once released from a smokestack or tailpipe, CO2 remains in the atmosphere and surface ocean for centuries.
Moreover, the lifetime of a coal-burning power plant can be 50 years or more, so energy choices we make today will determine our path for the next many decades.
With the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by Russia, the world sits at a crossroads.
Many developed countries are taking bold actions to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions. However, it seems unlikely that substantial and effective actions will be sustained if the US is not engaged in the process.
Certainly it will be difficult to persuade developing countries to participate without US involvement.
Do the political and economic incentives or the relatively minor emissions reductions introduced by the Kyoto Protocol lead to the long-term investments in infrastructure that are required to stabilise carbon dioxide below 550 ppm? I suspect not.
Although it is good for countries to agree to work on the problem together, I fear that the Kyoto Protocol does little to face our major challenge: how to get energy from coal without releasing CO2 to the atmosphere.
Coal has the highest CO2 emissions per unit of energy, and coal will remain inexpensive long after the supplies of cheap oil and gas diminish over the next few decades.
Even with more widespread use of renewable energy technology and nuclear power, coal will remain a major source of energy, particularly in those countries with the highest energy demands.
Thus, it is not a question of whether China, India, and the US will use their vast coal reserves but rather how they will use them.
In the rapidly growing economies of China and India, new pulverised coal plants are being built at an alarming rate.
US opportunity
There are some alternatives on the horizon, including coal gasification technology that produces a concentrated effluent of CO2 that is easier to capture and store underground.
But whatever technology is used, the developed world must work with the developing world to prevent the release of CO2 from coal combustion into the atmosphere if the goal of CO2 stabilisation is to be achieved.
This analysis identifies a new opportunity for the US to play a leadership role in reducing our exposure to future climate change.
One could envision bilateral agreements between the US and China, for example, in which the US provides financial assistance to US companies who produce energy in China without emitting CO2, while China provides access to its rapidly growing energy market.
Whatever the specific strategies may be, the time to act is now. There is a window of opportunity for the US to work on this problem, but it will not last long.
After the next several decades, so much investment will have been made in traditional energy generation technology in the rapidly developing world that reducing global emissions will be much more difficult.
The author is Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University. He is director of the institution's Laboratory for Geochemical Oceanography. He uses geochemistry techniques to work out what the Earth's climate was like thousands, or even millions, of years ago.
Monday, December 13, 2004
Monday, December 06, 2004
TODAYonline - NO-NONSENSE MAN
TODAYonline
A rare interview of an opposition MP in the press.
----------------------------
NO-NONSENSE MAN
Low Thia Khiang
Weekend • December 4, 2004
Teo Hwee Nak, Deputy News Editor
hweenak@newstoday.com.sg
THE first thing that greets you when you enter his air-conditioned office is the lingering whiff of smoke from the freshly-stubbed cigarette.
And you can't help but notice that the warm water the amiable auntie puts down before you is served in a Tsing Tao Beer glass. Then, Mr Low Thia Khiang, the Workers' Party chief and opposition MP — who replies to emails in crisp and formal English, polite but sometimes bordering on aloofness — takes you by surprise when he leans forward and asks: "That round thing, is it stone or what?"
I was wearing a necklace made of two round pieces of shell in pink and red, and told him so.
"Very attractive," the Hougang MP said, nodding his approval.
With that, the 48-year-old, who runs a signage business, leans back in his chair, his body language signalling that he is ready for the interview.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He's the kind of politician most Singaporeans have come to expect. Not always politically correct; doesn't care if he isn't. No attempt to hide that stubbed out cigarette in the ashtray, no apologies for serving water in whatever glass is available in his pantry.
With Mr Low Thia Khiang, what you see is what you get.
He tackles questions in much the same way: straight talking, no-nonsense, but always considered, his replies punctuated by long, thoughtful pauses.
This is the man, who, a few months ago, launched a stinging criticism of SingPower for the way it distributed its $30 utility vouchers aimed at helping needy families.
SingPower gave the vouchers to grassroots organisations listed under the People's Association, and incurred the ire of Mr Low and Mr Chiam See Tong, the other opposition MP, when the media reported that only 30 per cent of the vouchers were used.
Grassroots organisations in opposition wards are run by advisers appointed by the People's Action Party (PAP), not by the elected MP as in other wards.
In a press statement, Mr Low asked if the move was "a new strategy to help the PAP MPs and grassroots advisers in opposition wards win votes for future elections".
While the coffee shop speculation is that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will call an election soon, Mr Low does not think so. But his party is nonetheless prepared, with its officials and volunteers already actively working the ground in various wards. He says he aims to get more WP members into Parliament, but he is tight-lipped on the details.
What he does speak readily about is the increasingly challenging climate for the opposition.
The biggest challenge, says Mr Low, is in reaching out to an apolitical younger generation that has grown up equating PAP with Government – "even the kindergarten they go through is PCF" (PAP Community Foundation).
"A political set-up, the soul of any political party, is the people. The state of opposition today in Singapore reflects the state of Singapore as it is," he says.
"In the past, though Singaporeans may not be as highly educated as Singaporeans today, they went through the political process of independence and the political vibrancy of that era. They understand the importance of political competition, of having their say through their votes. The younger generation hasn't gone through that era. And because the level of participation in elections has gone down, people don't care."
In the last GE in 2001, only 33 per cent of eligible voters actually voted, with just 29 of 84 seats contested – the lowest number ever.
When asked if he thought the new Prime Minister would call an early election in order to get the people's mandate, he retorted: "Mandate? I think the PAP has got a walkover mandate. And when you go for elections, you elect the party, you don't elect the Prime Minister. So logically speaking, it's not so much a mandate for the Prime Minister, but of the PAP as a ruling party. And if you're talking about individual mandate, what mandate are you talking about when you hold elections and you walk over in Ang Mo Kio?"
Describing being an opposition politician as being "like a sampan in a treacherous sea", Mr Low points - as opposition politicians around the world tend to do - to the electoral rules as a factor that serves to "deplete slowly the strength of the opposition".
He has done a study of the redrawing of the electoral boundaries over the years, and he says this has ensured that opposition supporters are always the minority in elections.
"In many other countries, you have election commission. Here, the party, being the government, decides. And this is fair? No."
The PAP has always maintained that the Elections Department, as part of the civil service, is free from party political interference, and that the electoral map is redrawn based on changes in population distributions.
While he cannot change electoral rules, Mr Low believes that as long as elections are held, Singaporeans will understand the practical use of the vote – even if they have no idea what democracy is about.
"Singaporeans may not understand the role of opposition, but they do understand that when elections come, there will be a lot of goodies, that when you vote for the PAP, there'll be upgrading. They understand that when elections come, then the government will become gentler, and their complaints get attended to very efficiently.
"These make up a practical education process that helps them understand the reality of politics, the usefulness and function of opposition, and how they can bargain with the government through the opposition with their vote. But the next question is, how do they vote? They want opposition, but they also want the goodies. They know when to use you, they also know when to discard you."
He paused, then said with a resigned laugh: "We're suckers, aren't we?"
So why serve a bunch of suckers, Mr Low?
"That's the challenge, my friend. That's the challenge. To do something different, but worthwhile. And the experience of involvement and participation in the election process as an opposition member is a tremendous life experience."
But getting enough people ready to take the road he has taken for the last 20 years is a challenge.
Time is just one factor.
"The other factor is, people do not see opposition as being able to further their personal development, their career. They see it as a losing cause. These are people who have high calibre and are ambitious in life, and there's nothing wrong with that.
"Joining opposition, there's no reward. Joining PAP, there are some rewards, I suppose. But joining opposition, you lose your time, your money. You contribute, but I can't see any rewards."
Which is why the opposition calls for "a different breed of people".
"People who are prepared to say, okay, I'm prepared to take a challenge in life, I think that this is a cause for me, and democracy is important. People who have the guts to say, OK, let's do it. And what's most important: We're prepared to lose."
But most Singaporeans aren't. They go for the tried-and-tested and established, whether it is choosing the university (Mr Low cited a recent survey that showed students prefer the near century-old NUS to the two younger universities), or a career path – or joining a political party.
"There's a false sense of security that if the PAP is around, we'll be alright. It may be so now, but are we sure 50 years down the road? Because of the management and style of government in the past –top-down, and directing people as to what they should do rather than allow genuine response from the ground whether in terms of civic organisation, civil society development - our society has lost the initiative by itself," said Mr Low.
Years of reliance on guidance from the government have created a breed of Singaporeans that is always looking for help, he said. Hence, the resilience and vibrancy, which is necessary for the long-term survival of Singapore in the face of globalisation, is not there.
Singaporeans, however, don't understand this.
"All people are concerned is whether they're going against the law…(Rules) have to be something explicit, then people know what to do. When it's not, people say, I'd better not do. It becomes a culture."
The response to the rule that old windows be retrofitted shows Singaporeans' immaturity, he said, referring to reports that many homeowners were misled by contractors into making unnecessary changes.
"All you have to do is say, I'm from HDB, then gao dim (Cantonese for "settled") already lor. Why? Why are people so afraid of the government? People forget that what is important is to make sure your windows are safe.
"They think: OK, since you say I have to rivet, I rivet already ah, so window fall, fall lah. I've already done what you told me to do. I rivet, I've done my part. But they miss the point, that it's their responsibility to make sure that the window doesn't fall and hit somebody.
"We may be a first world economy, but in terms of society and how we behave, we have not reached first world."
A rare interview of an opposition MP in the press.
----------------------------
NO-NONSENSE MAN
Low Thia Khiang
Weekend • December 4, 2004
Teo Hwee Nak, Deputy News Editor
hweenak@newstoday.com.sg
THE first thing that greets you when you enter his air-conditioned office is the lingering whiff of smoke from the freshly-stubbed cigarette.
And you can't help but notice that the warm water the amiable auntie puts down before you is served in a Tsing Tao Beer glass. Then, Mr Low Thia Khiang, the Workers' Party chief and opposition MP — who replies to emails in crisp and formal English, polite but sometimes bordering on aloofness — takes you by surprise when he leans forward and asks: "That round thing, is it stone or what?"
I was wearing a necklace made of two round pieces of shell in pink and red, and told him so.
"Very attractive," the Hougang MP said, nodding his approval.
With that, the 48-year-old, who runs a signage business, leans back in his chair, his body language signalling that he is ready for the interview.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He's the kind of politician most Singaporeans have come to expect. Not always politically correct; doesn't care if he isn't. No attempt to hide that stubbed out cigarette in the ashtray, no apologies for serving water in whatever glass is available in his pantry.
With Mr Low Thia Khiang, what you see is what you get.
He tackles questions in much the same way: straight talking, no-nonsense, but always considered, his replies punctuated by long, thoughtful pauses.
This is the man, who, a few months ago, launched a stinging criticism of SingPower for the way it distributed its $30 utility vouchers aimed at helping needy families.
SingPower gave the vouchers to grassroots organisations listed under the People's Association, and incurred the ire of Mr Low and Mr Chiam See Tong, the other opposition MP, when the media reported that only 30 per cent of the vouchers were used.
Grassroots organisations in opposition wards are run by advisers appointed by the People's Action Party (PAP), not by the elected MP as in other wards.
In a press statement, Mr Low asked if the move was "a new strategy to help the PAP MPs and grassroots advisers in opposition wards win votes for future elections".
While the coffee shop speculation is that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will call an election soon, Mr Low does not think so. But his party is nonetheless prepared, with its officials and volunteers already actively working the ground in various wards. He says he aims to get more WP members into Parliament, but he is tight-lipped on the details.
What he does speak readily about is the increasingly challenging climate for the opposition.
The biggest challenge, says Mr Low, is in reaching out to an apolitical younger generation that has grown up equating PAP with Government – "even the kindergarten they go through is PCF" (PAP Community Foundation).
"A political set-up, the soul of any political party, is the people. The state of opposition today in Singapore reflects the state of Singapore as it is," he says.
"In the past, though Singaporeans may not be as highly educated as Singaporeans today, they went through the political process of independence and the political vibrancy of that era. They understand the importance of political competition, of having their say through their votes. The younger generation hasn't gone through that era. And because the level of participation in elections has gone down, people don't care."
In the last GE in 2001, only 33 per cent of eligible voters actually voted, with just 29 of 84 seats contested – the lowest number ever.
When asked if he thought the new Prime Minister would call an early election in order to get the people's mandate, he retorted: "Mandate? I think the PAP has got a walkover mandate. And when you go for elections, you elect the party, you don't elect the Prime Minister. So logically speaking, it's not so much a mandate for the Prime Minister, but of the PAP as a ruling party. And if you're talking about individual mandate, what mandate are you talking about when you hold elections and you walk over in Ang Mo Kio?"
Describing being an opposition politician as being "like a sampan in a treacherous sea", Mr Low points - as opposition politicians around the world tend to do - to the electoral rules as a factor that serves to "deplete slowly the strength of the opposition".
He has done a study of the redrawing of the electoral boundaries over the years, and he says this has ensured that opposition supporters are always the minority in elections.
"In many other countries, you have election commission. Here, the party, being the government, decides. And this is fair? No."
The PAP has always maintained that the Elections Department, as part of the civil service, is free from party political interference, and that the electoral map is redrawn based on changes in population distributions.
While he cannot change electoral rules, Mr Low believes that as long as elections are held, Singaporeans will understand the practical use of the vote – even if they have no idea what democracy is about.
"Singaporeans may not understand the role of opposition, but they do understand that when elections come, there will be a lot of goodies, that when you vote for the PAP, there'll be upgrading. They understand that when elections come, then the government will become gentler, and their complaints get attended to very efficiently.
"These make up a practical education process that helps them understand the reality of politics, the usefulness and function of opposition, and how they can bargain with the government through the opposition with their vote. But the next question is, how do they vote? They want opposition, but they also want the goodies. They know when to use you, they also know when to discard you."
He paused, then said with a resigned laugh: "We're suckers, aren't we?"
So why serve a bunch of suckers, Mr Low?
"That's the challenge, my friend. That's the challenge. To do something different, but worthwhile. And the experience of involvement and participation in the election process as an opposition member is a tremendous life experience."
But getting enough people ready to take the road he has taken for the last 20 years is a challenge.
Time is just one factor.
"The other factor is, people do not see opposition as being able to further their personal development, their career. They see it as a losing cause. These are people who have high calibre and are ambitious in life, and there's nothing wrong with that.
"Joining opposition, there's no reward. Joining PAP, there are some rewards, I suppose. But joining opposition, you lose your time, your money. You contribute, but I can't see any rewards."
Which is why the opposition calls for "a different breed of people".
"People who are prepared to say, okay, I'm prepared to take a challenge in life, I think that this is a cause for me, and democracy is important. People who have the guts to say, OK, let's do it. And what's most important: We're prepared to lose."
But most Singaporeans aren't. They go for the tried-and-tested and established, whether it is choosing the university (Mr Low cited a recent survey that showed students prefer the near century-old NUS to the two younger universities), or a career path – or joining a political party.
"There's a false sense of security that if the PAP is around, we'll be alright. It may be so now, but are we sure 50 years down the road? Because of the management and style of government in the past –top-down, and directing people as to what they should do rather than allow genuine response from the ground whether in terms of civic organisation, civil society development - our society has lost the initiative by itself," said Mr Low.
Years of reliance on guidance from the government have created a breed of Singaporeans that is always looking for help, he said. Hence, the resilience and vibrancy, which is necessary for the long-term survival of Singapore in the face of globalisation, is not there.
Singaporeans, however, don't understand this.
"All people are concerned is whether they're going against the law…(Rules) have to be something explicit, then people know what to do. When it's not, people say, I'd better not do. It becomes a culture."
The response to the rule that old windows be retrofitted shows Singaporeans' immaturity, he said, referring to reports that many homeowners were misled by contractors into making unnecessary changes.
"All you have to do is say, I'm from HDB, then gao dim (Cantonese for "settled") already lor. Why? Why are people so afraid of the government? People forget that what is important is to make sure your windows are safe.
"They think: OK, since you say I have to rivet, I rivet already ah, so window fall, fall lah. I've already done what you told me to do. I rivet, I've done my part. But they miss the point, that it's their responsibility to make sure that the window doesn't fall and hit somebody.
"We may be a first world economy, but in terms of society and how we behave, we have not reached first world."
Selection - From Opposition to Power: Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party
Selection - From Opposition to Power: Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party
Should be an interesting read; NLB has it listed, but not ready for loan yet. Below is a selection from the book.
----------------------------------------------
In Taiwan, the ruling party is called the governing party (zhizheng dang), but the opposition is called the party in the wildness (zaiye dang). The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has thus come out of the wildness in the general elections in March 2000 to become the governing party, an unprecedented upset in Taiwan's democratic system that saw the overthrown of the Kuomintang's (KMT) more than 50-year-rule over the nation island. After winning the presidency on March 18, 2000, DPP membership enrollment shot up to more than 400,000 by the end of the year, a feat that worries the party more than it has brought celebrations. How the DPP achieved the ultimate pursuit of the presidency, how the party is organized and how politics work in Taiwan is explained in a scholarly fashion by Shelley Rigger, an associate professor of East Asian Politics at Davidson College, who has lived in Taiwan for long periods.
The book's 10 chapters deal nearly on all aspects of Taiwanese politics, focusing on the DPP from its history, its path to power and the decision-making machinery to its role in the 21st century. Readers will learn that the development of political parties in Taiwan is not based on socio-economic classes, which is the case in some Western countries like Britain's Labor and Conservative parties which are vying for the interests of their own classes. The absence of class-based politics has been a problem for DPP, and to a certain extent to other political parties as well. Taiwanese join the DPP and Dangwai Movement with the aim of toppling the KMT, its autocratic and martial law rules and for a host of other reasons. Some are pushed by personal animosity or by ideological conviction. Some want independence for Taiwan, which is a main platform for the DPP. Some resent the KMT's policy of favoring supporters by granting them business contracts. Thus the KMT is regarded as pro-business and pro heavy industry, and the DPP anti-business. The perception of an anti-business DPP continues until the present time. Take the example of Bayer's decision to cancel project to build a pharmaceutical company in Taiwan. The DPP has to rely on non-economic issues in its campaign, but it has also won the support for its defense of the environment.
Readers will learn that Taiwan's political parties are strongly influenced by mainland China's ties with the Soviet Union decades ago when the KMT was beginning to take form. Both the KMT and DPP are organized under a Leninist model, both are headed by strong chairmen, who hold the decision-making authority.
Corruption in Taiwanese politics is another topic fully analyzed by the author and efforts made to abolish the National Assembly. The DPP in power now is facing the 21st century. But the most immediate challenge to its authority as it holds the rein of government is the December legislative elections.
It has survived an ideological fight by shifting away from its platform that called for a strong independence stance. The upcoming election is a crucial test for "its popularity, unity and competence," says the author. "Without the cooperation of the legislature and the professional bureaucracy, Chen Shui-bian will be hard-pressed to carry out the campaign promises on which he was elected," she says. Other challenge Chen is facing is explained by Rigger, including cross-strait relations under a DPP administration and issues of governance.
If the DPP succeeds in maintaining power, will Taiwan become a principally two-party political system? she asks. "Despite its imperfections, the Republic of China on Taiwan has made enormous progress over the past 20 years," Rigger says.
Should be an interesting read; NLB has it listed, but not ready for loan yet. Below is a selection from the book.
----------------------------------------------
In Taiwan, the ruling party is called the governing party (zhizheng dang), but the opposition is called the party in the wildness (zaiye dang). The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has thus come out of the wildness in the general elections in March 2000 to become the governing party, an unprecedented upset in Taiwan's democratic system that saw the overthrown of the Kuomintang's (KMT) more than 50-year-rule over the nation island. After winning the presidency on March 18, 2000, DPP membership enrollment shot up to more than 400,000 by the end of the year, a feat that worries the party more than it has brought celebrations. How the DPP achieved the ultimate pursuit of the presidency, how the party is organized and how politics work in Taiwan is explained in a scholarly fashion by Shelley Rigger, an associate professor of East Asian Politics at Davidson College, who has lived in Taiwan for long periods.
The book's 10 chapters deal nearly on all aspects of Taiwanese politics, focusing on the DPP from its history, its path to power and the decision-making machinery to its role in the 21st century. Readers will learn that the development of political parties in Taiwan is not based on socio-economic classes, which is the case in some Western countries like Britain's Labor and Conservative parties which are vying for the interests of their own classes. The absence of class-based politics has been a problem for DPP, and to a certain extent to other political parties as well. Taiwanese join the DPP and Dangwai Movement with the aim of toppling the KMT, its autocratic and martial law rules and for a host of other reasons. Some are pushed by personal animosity or by ideological conviction. Some want independence for Taiwan, which is a main platform for the DPP. Some resent the KMT's policy of favoring supporters by granting them business contracts. Thus the KMT is regarded as pro-business and pro heavy industry, and the DPP anti-business. The perception of an anti-business DPP continues until the present time. Take the example of Bayer's decision to cancel project to build a pharmaceutical company in Taiwan. The DPP has to rely on non-economic issues in its campaign, but it has also won the support for its defense of the environment.
Readers will learn that Taiwan's political parties are strongly influenced by mainland China's ties with the Soviet Union decades ago when the KMT was beginning to take form. Both the KMT and DPP are organized under a Leninist model, both are headed by strong chairmen, who hold the decision-making authority.
Corruption in Taiwanese politics is another topic fully analyzed by the author and efforts made to abolish the National Assembly. The DPP in power now is facing the 21st century. But the most immediate challenge to its authority as it holds the rein of government is the December legislative elections.
It has survived an ideological fight by shifting away from its platform that called for a strong independence stance. The upcoming election is a crucial test for "its popularity, unity and competence," says the author. "Without the cooperation of the legislature and the professional bureaucracy, Chen Shui-bian will be hard-pressed to carry out the campaign promises on which he was elected," she says. Other challenge Chen is facing is explained by Rigger, including cross-strait relations under a DPP administration and issues of governance.
If the DPP succeeds in maintaining power, will Taiwan become a principally two-party political system? she asks. "Despite its imperfections, the Republic of China on Taiwan has made enormous progress over the past 20 years," Rigger says.
Thursday, December 02, 2004
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
NDM Article - U.S. Central Command Naval Chief Foresees More Volatility in the Region
NDM Article - U.S. Central Command Naval Chief Foresees More Volatility in the Region
Seems like Iran may be the next Iraq, i.e. Gulf War III. Bush has 4 years to decide.
Seems like Iran may be the next Iraq, i.e. Gulf War III. Bush has 4 years to decide.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
why i don't read the ST
a double shot. now this is why i don't like to read ST. It reeks of the control by PAP over our media
Nov 18, 2004
No independent media? S'pore model is different
By Asad Latif
SINGAPORE'S reputation as a global city will not be affected by international media organisation Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) ranking the Republic as the lowest developed country in terms of press freedom.
Making this point in a written reply to Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia, Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Lee Boon Yang said two recent surveys had underscored Singapore's standing as a progressive and successful country.
Singapore was ranked the second most global country in the 2004 A.T. Kearney Globalisation Index, which ranks countries on economic integration, technological connectivity, personal contact and political engagement.
Ireland was placed first in the survey by the global management consulting firm.
Singapore also emerged as the best governed city in another survey of 33 major cities, by Jones Lang LaSalle, based on aspects of governance such as integrity, stability and efficiency, he added.
'These two surveys reflect high international regard for Singapore as a cosmopolitan city on the global stage,' Dr Lee said.
Singapore is also one of the most connected countries in the region, with more than 1.7 million Singaporeans having access to the Internet, he noted.
By contrast, the Press Freedom Index drawn up by RSF, which has its international secretariat in Paris, France, places Singapore 147th in a survey in which North Korea came in last at 167th. Denmark was first.
The RSF 2004 annual report said there are no independent media in Singapore, but that Singaporeans have wide access to foreign media.
On the RSF index, Dr Lee said it was based largely on a different media model 'which favours the advocacy and adversarial role of the press'.
Singapore's media model was different, he said.
'Our model is that of a free and responsible press whose role is to report news accurately and objectively to Singaporeans.'
The media here also served as a platform for diverse views and to reflect the debate on national issues. At the same time, it has to be sensitive to national interests, such as protecting racial and religious harmony and the shared values of society.
The model had evolved out of Singapore's special circumstances, he said. It had enabled the media here to strengthen the resilience of Singaporeans in the face of intense economic competition, terrorism threats, infectious diseases and social ills.
'We will continue to encourage diversity of views and ideas from Singaporeans, while at the same time, engage our people to work together to safeguard our social norms and values,' he said.
'Our media has a tremendously important role in this national effort by rallying Singaporeans to do the things which matter most to Singapore. This is certainly more important than... to gain the favours of international ranking associations.'
Nov 18, 2004
No independent media? S'pore model is different
By Asad Latif
SINGAPORE'S reputation as a global city will not be affected by international media organisation Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) ranking the Republic as the lowest developed country in terms of press freedom.
Making this point in a written reply to Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia, Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Lee Boon Yang said two recent surveys had underscored Singapore's standing as a progressive and successful country.
Singapore was ranked the second most global country in the 2004 A.T. Kearney Globalisation Index, which ranks countries on economic integration, technological connectivity, personal contact and political engagement.
Ireland was placed first in the survey by the global management consulting firm.
Singapore also emerged as the best governed city in another survey of 33 major cities, by Jones Lang LaSalle, based on aspects of governance such as integrity, stability and efficiency, he added.
'These two surveys reflect high international regard for Singapore as a cosmopolitan city on the global stage,' Dr Lee said.
Singapore is also one of the most connected countries in the region, with more than 1.7 million Singaporeans having access to the Internet, he noted.
By contrast, the Press Freedom Index drawn up by RSF, which has its international secretariat in Paris, France, places Singapore 147th in a survey in which North Korea came in last at 167th. Denmark was first.
The RSF 2004 annual report said there are no independent media in Singapore, but that Singaporeans have wide access to foreign media.
On the RSF index, Dr Lee said it was based largely on a different media model 'which favours the advocacy and adversarial role of the press'.
Singapore's media model was different, he said.
'Our model is that of a free and responsible press whose role is to report news accurately and objectively to Singaporeans.'
The media here also served as a platform for diverse views and to reflect the debate on national issues. At the same time, it has to be sensitive to national interests, such as protecting racial and religious harmony and the shared values of society.
The model had evolved out of Singapore's special circumstances, he said. It had enabled the media here to strengthen the resilience of Singaporeans in the face of intense economic competition, terrorism threats, infectious diseases and social ills.
'We will continue to encourage diversity of views and ideas from Singaporeans, while at the same time, engage our people to work together to safeguard our social norms and values,' he said.
'Our media has a tremendously important role in this national effort by rallying Singaporeans to do the things which matter most to Singapore. This is certainly more important than... to gain the favours of international ranking associations.'
Saturday, November 20, 2004
"tripod" article
now, i don't like to be negative, but this ST article is what i would term a "tripod" article. Yes, there are references to whether the 5-day work week was delayed so that he could announced it, plus other points, but the main crux is one of praising. left out were issues like leaving out all the present NMPs in the new list. plus, the number of questions that can be asked in parliament have been reduced.
Nov 20, 2004
INSIGHT: PM LEE'S FIRST 100 DAYS
'Don't call me PM, just Mr Lee will do'
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong marked his 100th day in office yesterday. Lydia Lim looks at his first three months on the job.
A WEEK after he delivered his maiden National Day Rally speech, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong went on his first walkabout as PM.
During a dialogue that capped his five-hour visit to Boon Lay, the residents were effusive in their congratulations and praise for his Rally speech.
He held them back.
There was no need for all this, he said, eager instead to hear what questions they had for him.
He also urged them not to address him as PM Lee. He preferred plain Mr Lee.
It was an insight into the man and the kind of prime minister he wants to be.
He has little use for the formalities of his new office and prefers to get straight to the nub of issues.
In an interview with Fortune magazine published in September, he said: 'When you become prime minister, people bow and scrape even more, you have to make a conscious effort not to allow that to become the norm.'
Wary of the attention - even adulation - accorded most prime ministers, he has done his best in these first 100 days to ensure that the spotlight is trained not on him but on his policies.
His Aug 22 Rally speech set the tone: it brimmed with substantive changes that he had reportedly been mulling over for two years.
That he delivered it with warmth and unexpected humour was a bonus.
Since then, he has guarded his profile closely, granting no interviews and eschewing media coverage at functions unless there are policies to announce.
The focus, says political scientist Kenneth Paul Tan, seems to be on 'walking the talk'.
'There has been a concerted effort to make sure there was practical follow-up to his Rally speech, that what he said would be more than rhetoric,' Dr Tan says.
The walls come down
POLICY equivalents of the Berlin wall have come tumbling down in these 100 days.
Just to name a few: a new five-day work week for the civil service; singles allowed to buy Housing Board flats larger than three-room ones; and more funding and resources to educate children with special needs.
These are changes that the Government has resisted for years because it worried about sending the wrong signal about government efficiency and resources.
Sceptics may wonder if these changes were in fact held back so Mr Lee could announce them and launch his term with a big bang.
After all, the five-day work week was proposed by the Remaking Singapore Committee and rejected just in April.
But other reasons could account for the change of heart between then and August.
Bukit Timah MP Wang Kai Yuen says the changes are significant as they reflect 'a shift from the uncompromising stance in the past'.
In his 14 years as deputy prime minister, Mr Lee gained a reputation for being a reformer in areas directly under his charge - the economy, the finance sector and the civil service.
Now that he is responsible for the whole of government, he seems keen to extend his reformist instincts into the social and political spheres as well. He surprised and moved many with his vision of an inclusive society which embraces even those at the margins.
Many said they had never heard a minister describe the disabled as 'who are our brothers and sisters too'. But Mr Lee did when he urged Singaporeans to have a place for them in their hearts and lives.
Society should give second chances to those who had failed as they 'may be the wiser and stronger ones among us', he said.
Miss Chau Yeng, 22, a therapist who works with autistic children, believes Mr Lee's speech has set in motion changes to the social ethos.
'It will take time but I believe something is happening. It's what I want to see, people being more tolerant of those who are different,' she says.
Tanjong Pagar GRC MP Indranee Rajah says his words dispelled the notion that Singapore is only for the elites, 'and reiterated that Singapore is for all Singaporeans'.
In education, Mr Lee also turned accepted practices on their head. In doing so, he brought into currency a new catch phrase to encapsulate the spirit of many of the changes being introduced in schools.
'We've got to teach less so our students can learn more,' Mr Lee said, even as he announced that 3,000 more teachers would be deployed to schools and junior colleges by 2010.
His words generated both excitement and confusion, with some seeing them as the enlightened way forward while others questioned if they were realistic.
Regardless of the tide of public opinion, education reform is one area where Mr Lee and his Cabinet are moving ahead with speed and confidence.
On the political front, however, the pace has been far more cautious. The initial excitement he generated when he spoke of relaxing rules on indoor public talks and performances at the Speakers' Corner petered out when the actual details were released a few days later.
Although performances are now allowed at the Speakers' Corner, banners, placards and microphones are still banned. And indoor talks featuring foreign speakers still need to be licensed.
Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia says: 'He has promised a quite a lot...about opening up society. But I have not seen concrete initiatives in that direction, just talk. I'm keeping my eyes open to see when it will happen.'
Given the mixed signals, some observers expect the real test to come at the next General Election, when Singaporeans will be able to gauge for themselves the new Government's tolerance for dissent in the heat of battle.
Wins over the youth
THREE young Singaporeans walked into Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Inderjit Singh's PAP branch office recently, after hearing Mr Lee's call to post-'65ers to come forward to play their part for the country.
For the last three months, they have spent 'long hours' helping out at his meet-the-people session each Thursday, he tells Insight.
Mr Singh thinks Mr Lee's most visible success has been in connecting with younger Singaporeans like them, and making them see they can play a significant role in shaping the country's future.
'In the past, it was very difficult to get younger Singaporeans to believe and to come forward to play their part,' he says.
The PM's message to younger Singaporeans was a simple one: Don't wait to be invited to tea.
'Step forward to make a difference to yourselves, to your fellow citizens and to Singapore,' he urged them in his inauguration speech.
Where some political speeches of the past focused on areas where young Singaporeans were found lacking - painting them as soft, spoilt and eager to emigrate - he tapped into their energy and enthusiasm.
Hundreds wrote to him to volunteer their services or recommend people they thought would make good future leaders.
About 2,100 young people responded through forums, SMS and e-mail when the Government embarked on a massive exercise to gather young people's ideas on how to build a better Singapore.
Some have been encouraged to join work groups to push their ideas forward.
It remains to be seen how many of their suggestions will eventually be accepted.
But the focus on youth has not been an unqualified success.
Some say it has been more form than substance to date.
The recent selection of a 27-year-old former beauty queen and game show host, Ms Eunice Olsen, as one of nine Nominated Members of Parliament, has also sparked debate on whether the Government is going overboard in its new obsession with younger Singaporeans.
A fresh start
IN THE lead-up to the handover, Mr Lee's controversial visit to Taiwan and the strident response it provoked from China caused some to question if he had as good a grasp of foreign affairs as he had of domestic policy.
But those concerns were allayed when he addressed the issue with both firmness and flair during his Rally speech, making clear Singapore's commitment to the 'One China' policy.
His speech was even described as a 'diplomatic masterstroke' by the Observer Star, a small Hong Kong daily.
Since taking over, Mr Lee has spent a large share of his time on diplomacy.
There are stories of how he is still adapting to the finer points of inspecting a guard of honour and posing for pictures with a foreign counterpart. But there has been movement on some fronts.
While in Kuala Lumpur last month, he and Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi pledged to seek new areas of cooperation, signalling a mutual desire to take relations in fresh directions despite unresolved bilateral issues.
No image problem
IN JAKARTA earlier this month, he and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono agreed to move bilateral ties forward, with economic issues as the glue to cement links further.
Dr Yudhoyono also said that he found Mr Lee 'as bright and vibrant as the city state you lead'.
Mr Lee is currently in Chile attending the Apec leaders' meeting.
So real was the concern over Mr Lee's image that a committee led by a Cabinet minister was reportedly formed to take charge of this in his first few months in office.
If so, they may have found themselves with surprisingly little to do after Mr Lee's stellar performance at his first Rally address. The image question has since faded away.
Few could have predicted such a turn of events, especially when just over a year ago, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong felt the need to address, during his Rally speech, the issue of his successor's 'no-nonsense, uncompromising and tough' public persona.
But in his first two speeches as PM, Mr Lee skilfully showed a different side of his personality.
In both, he came across as warm, open and down-to-earth, notes veteran MP Dr Wang. 'There is a major shift in the ground regarding his public persona. The outcome is very positive,' he says.
A prime minister's first 100 days in office provides but a glimpse of the leader he will be. It provides scant indication of what his legacy will look like. It does however set the tone for a new government's relationship with the people.
What Mr Lee has managed to do in these three months is give Singaporeans reasons to view the future with fresh optimism.
In the Fortune interview, he described the work of leadership thus:
'To build a nation, you have to do it every generation. You have to rekindle the excitement. That's what we're trying to do.'
He has lit a fire. It remains to be seen how well he stokes the flames.
Nov 20, 2004
INSIGHT: PM LEE'S FIRST 100 DAYS
'Don't call me PM, just Mr Lee will do'
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong marked his 100th day in office yesterday. Lydia Lim looks at his first three months on the job.
A WEEK after he delivered his maiden National Day Rally speech, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong went on his first walkabout as PM.
During a dialogue that capped his five-hour visit to Boon Lay, the residents were effusive in their congratulations and praise for his Rally speech.
He held them back.
There was no need for all this, he said, eager instead to hear what questions they had for him.
He also urged them not to address him as PM Lee. He preferred plain Mr Lee.
It was an insight into the man and the kind of prime minister he wants to be.
He has little use for the formalities of his new office and prefers to get straight to the nub of issues.
In an interview with Fortune magazine published in September, he said: 'When you become prime minister, people bow and scrape even more, you have to make a conscious effort not to allow that to become the norm.'
Wary of the attention - even adulation - accorded most prime ministers, he has done his best in these first 100 days to ensure that the spotlight is trained not on him but on his policies.
His Aug 22 Rally speech set the tone: it brimmed with substantive changes that he had reportedly been mulling over for two years.
That he delivered it with warmth and unexpected humour was a bonus.
Since then, he has guarded his profile closely, granting no interviews and eschewing media coverage at functions unless there are policies to announce.
The focus, says political scientist Kenneth Paul Tan, seems to be on 'walking the talk'.
'There has been a concerted effort to make sure there was practical follow-up to his Rally speech, that what he said would be more than rhetoric,' Dr Tan says.
The walls come down
POLICY equivalents of the Berlin wall have come tumbling down in these 100 days.
Just to name a few: a new five-day work week for the civil service; singles allowed to buy Housing Board flats larger than three-room ones; and more funding and resources to educate children with special needs.
These are changes that the Government has resisted for years because it worried about sending the wrong signal about government efficiency and resources.
Sceptics may wonder if these changes were in fact held back so Mr Lee could announce them and launch his term with a big bang.
After all, the five-day work week was proposed by the Remaking Singapore Committee and rejected just in April.
But other reasons could account for the change of heart between then and August.
Bukit Timah MP Wang Kai Yuen says the changes are significant as they reflect 'a shift from the uncompromising stance in the past'.
In his 14 years as deputy prime minister, Mr Lee gained a reputation for being a reformer in areas directly under his charge - the economy, the finance sector and the civil service.
Now that he is responsible for the whole of government, he seems keen to extend his reformist instincts into the social and political spheres as well. He surprised and moved many with his vision of an inclusive society which embraces even those at the margins.
Many said they had never heard a minister describe the disabled as 'who are our brothers and sisters too'. But Mr Lee did when he urged Singaporeans to have a place for them in their hearts and lives.
Society should give second chances to those who had failed as they 'may be the wiser and stronger ones among us', he said.
Miss Chau Yeng, 22, a therapist who works with autistic children, believes Mr Lee's speech has set in motion changes to the social ethos.
'It will take time but I believe something is happening. It's what I want to see, people being more tolerant of those who are different,' she says.
Tanjong Pagar GRC MP Indranee Rajah says his words dispelled the notion that Singapore is only for the elites, 'and reiterated that Singapore is for all Singaporeans'.
In education, Mr Lee also turned accepted practices on their head. In doing so, he brought into currency a new catch phrase to encapsulate the spirit of many of the changes being introduced in schools.
'We've got to teach less so our students can learn more,' Mr Lee said, even as he announced that 3,000 more teachers would be deployed to schools and junior colleges by 2010.
His words generated both excitement and confusion, with some seeing them as the enlightened way forward while others questioned if they were realistic.
Regardless of the tide of public opinion, education reform is one area where Mr Lee and his Cabinet are moving ahead with speed and confidence.
On the political front, however, the pace has been far more cautious. The initial excitement he generated when he spoke of relaxing rules on indoor public talks and performances at the Speakers' Corner petered out when the actual details were released a few days later.
Although performances are now allowed at the Speakers' Corner, banners, placards and microphones are still banned. And indoor talks featuring foreign speakers still need to be licensed.
Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia says: 'He has promised a quite a lot...about opening up society. But I have not seen concrete initiatives in that direction, just talk. I'm keeping my eyes open to see when it will happen.'
Given the mixed signals, some observers expect the real test to come at the next General Election, when Singaporeans will be able to gauge for themselves the new Government's tolerance for dissent in the heat of battle.
Wins over the youth
THREE young Singaporeans walked into Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Inderjit Singh's PAP branch office recently, after hearing Mr Lee's call to post-'65ers to come forward to play their part for the country.
For the last three months, they have spent 'long hours' helping out at his meet-the-people session each Thursday, he tells Insight.
Mr Singh thinks Mr Lee's most visible success has been in connecting with younger Singaporeans like them, and making them see they can play a significant role in shaping the country's future.
'In the past, it was very difficult to get younger Singaporeans to believe and to come forward to play their part,' he says.
The PM's message to younger Singaporeans was a simple one: Don't wait to be invited to tea.
'Step forward to make a difference to yourselves, to your fellow citizens and to Singapore,' he urged them in his inauguration speech.
Where some political speeches of the past focused on areas where young Singaporeans were found lacking - painting them as soft, spoilt and eager to emigrate - he tapped into their energy and enthusiasm.
Hundreds wrote to him to volunteer their services or recommend people they thought would make good future leaders.
About 2,100 young people responded through forums, SMS and e-mail when the Government embarked on a massive exercise to gather young people's ideas on how to build a better Singapore.
Some have been encouraged to join work groups to push their ideas forward.
It remains to be seen how many of their suggestions will eventually be accepted.
But the focus on youth has not been an unqualified success.
Some say it has been more form than substance to date.
The recent selection of a 27-year-old former beauty queen and game show host, Ms Eunice Olsen, as one of nine Nominated Members of Parliament, has also sparked debate on whether the Government is going overboard in its new obsession with younger Singaporeans.
A fresh start
IN THE lead-up to the handover, Mr Lee's controversial visit to Taiwan and the strident response it provoked from China caused some to question if he had as good a grasp of foreign affairs as he had of domestic policy.
But those concerns were allayed when he addressed the issue with both firmness and flair during his Rally speech, making clear Singapore's commitment to the 'One China' policy.
His speech was even described as a 'diplomatic masterstroke' by the Observer Star, a small Hong Kong daily.
Since taking over, Mr Lee has spent a large share of his time on diplomacy.
There are stories of how he is still adapting to the finer points of inspecting a guard of honour and posing for pictures with a foreign counterpart. But there has been movement on some fronts.
While in Kuala Lumpur last month, he and Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi pledged to seek new areas of cooperation, signalling a mutual desire to take relations in fresh directions despite unresolved bilateral issues.
No image problem
IN JAKARTA earlier this month, he and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono agreed to move bilateral ties forward, with economic issues as the glue to cement links further.
Dr Yudhoyono also said that he found Mr Lee 'as bright and vibrant as the city state you lead'.
Mr Lee is currently in Chile attending the Apec leaders' meeting.
So real was the concern over Mr Lee's image that a committee led by a Cabinet minister was reportedly formed to take charge of this in his first few months in office.
If so, they may have found themselves with surprisingly little to do after Mr Lee's stellar performance at his first Rally address. The image question has since faded away.
Few could have predicted such a turn of events, especially when just over a year ago, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong felt the need to address, during his Rally speech, the issue of his successor's 'no-nonsense, uncompromising and tough' public persona.
But in his first two speeches as PM, Mr Lee skilfully showed a different side of his personality.
In both, he came across as warm, open and down-to-earth, notes veteran MP Dr Wang. 'There is a major shift in the ground regarding his public persona. The outcome is very positive,' he says.
A prime minister's first 100 days in office provides but a glimpse of the leader he will be. It provides scant indication of what his legacy will look like. It does however set the tone for a new government's relationship with the people.
What Mr Lee has managed to do in these three months is give Singaporeans reasons to view the future with fresh optimism.
In the Fortune interview, he described the work of leadership thus:
'To build a nation, you have to do it every generation. You have to rekindle the excitement. That's what we're trying to do.'
He has lit a fire. It remains to be seen how well he stokes the flames.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Greens growing force in Australia
BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Greens growing force in Australia
Green parties seem to have quite a growth potential, and not only in Australia. The world could do with a movement that is more attuned to sustainable development. That said, the report indicates that the Australian Green party seems to be a bit more concerned with homosexual and drug use issues. This topic of green parties could well be the first big issue evozero will write about. More to come...
Green parties seem to have quite a growth potential, and not only in Australia. The world could do with a movement that is more attuned to sustainable development. That said, the report indicates that the Australian Green party seems to be a bit more concerned with homosexual and drug use issues. This topic of green parties could well be the first big issue evozero will write about. More to come...
Friday, October 01, 2004
United Nations Millennium Development Goals
United Nations Millennium Development Goals
This is a good place to start
This is a good place to start
- Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day
Reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
- Achieve universal primary education
Ensure that all boys and girls complete a full course of primary schooling
- Promote gender equality and empower women
Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and at all levels by 2015
- Reduce child mortality
Reduce by two thirds the mortality rate among children under five
- Improve maternal health
Reduce by three quarters the maternal mortality ratio
- Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
Halt and begin to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS
Halt and begin to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases
- Ensure environmental sustainability
Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources
Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water
Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020
- Develop a global partnership for development
Develop further an open trading and financial system that is rule-based, predictable and non-discriminatory. Includes a commitment to good governance, development and poverty reduction—nationally and internationally
Address the least developed countries’ special needs. This includes tariff- and quota-free access for their exports; enhanced debt relief for heavily indebted poor countries; cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more generous official development assistance for countries committed to poverty reduction
Address the special needs of landlocked and small island developing States
Deal comprehensively with developing countries’ debt problems through national and international measures to make debt sustainable in the long term
In cooperation with the developing countries, develop decent and productive work for youth
In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable essential drugs in developing countries
In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies—especially information and communications technologies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)