SINGAPORE : The civil service could be more coordinated and more responsive in the way it deals with queries and requests from the public.

This was the view of two MPs who spoke in Parliament on Monday.

MP for Aljunied GRC Cynthia Phua urged top civil servants to remember the elements of a good and successful civil service - one of which is listening to the needs of the man-in-the-street.

Elaborating, Ms Phua said: "For the older civil servants, many have come from varied and poorer family backgrounds, and many have since retired. They had a greater propensity to empathise with the demands and needs of various sectors in our population.

"Many of our key officers presently are returned scholars, some come from well-to-do backgrounds, and many have benefited from a 'helicopter' career path. The lack of opportunities to mix and interact with the various sectors of the population is also now a concern of our education system."

Recounting her interactions with top civil servants in the course of her work as an MP, she asked if they are too detached from the realities of the frontline.

For example, she said inquiries and correspondences were ignored without the courtesy of an acknowledgement.

Ms Phua added: "I believe my experience may also be the experience of others in this House. One senior member has advised me to be 'thick-skinned'. My personal experience is that I have not only to be 'thick-skinned' but also to be tenacious with the requests that I have made."

This had led to her to wonder about the responses the man-in-the street would receive when writing in to a civil servant.

As for the MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC, he called for better coordination among the various ministries in the interest of greater efficiency. Mr Baey Yam Keng cited a media report where two eagles fought in the air and landed on a resident's balcony.

He said: "The resident, Mr Chris Lau, called the Ministry for National Development and was directed to the Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA). He was advised to call the National Environment Agency, which referred him back to AVA as it concerned wildlife. He was told NEA only collects dead animals.

"Apparently, the resident could not be sure whether the two motionless birds were alive, dying or already dead. He called AVA again, which then arranged for the waste collection contractor to clear the birds. The worker turned up but took off after seeing the eagles.

"The resident decided to call the Singapore Zoological Gardens, but the zoo said they do not deal with birds, and suggested that he call Jurong Bird Park. A bird handler arrived, but after reviewing the situation, he said he needed AVA's approval to deal with the birds. So it was back to the first agency Mr Lau called."

In the end, it took many phone calls and eight hours of anxiety before the birds were finally removed. He said that this merry-go-round was something many people who have called a government body had experienced.

Mr Baey said: "In trying to make sure that no child becomes nobody's child, the situation has become overly stringent, like a father insisting that a child goes for DNA testing before accepting his responsibilities as a parent.

"I think we need to get various ministries and agencies to work quickly and efficiently, especially on matters where the boundaries are not too clear." He said the "No Wrong Door Policy" needs to be better manifested, both in practice and in spirit. - CNA/ms 

---
haha that report was FUNNY.

SINGAPORE - Singapore's annual inflation rate hit a 25-year high of 6.6 percent in January, according to Department of Statistics (DOS) data released on Monday.

The inflation rate, as indicated by the consumer price index (CPI), was the highest since the 7.5 percent hit in March 1982.

From a month earlier, consumer prices in January rose 1.5 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis, the DOS said.

The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) issued a statement along with the DOS data, saying the year-on-year jump in inflation in January was due to one-off factors such as a housing value revision and that it was in line with the official inflation forecast of 4.5-5.5 percent for 2008.

The MTI said inflation would start to ease in the second half of the year. In December, the annual rate was 4.4 percent.

"The 6.6 percent year-on-year increase in the CPI in January 2008 was consistent with the official inflation forecast of 4.5 to 5.5 percent for 2008 as a whole," the MTI said.

The DOS said the jump in inflation was due largely to an 11.1 percent spike in housing costs recorded after a revision to values of public housing.

Housing costs, which account for 21 percent of the consumer price index, have the third-largest weighting after food and transport/communication.

Food prices, which carry the largest weighting in the CPI, rose 5.8 percent in January from a year earlier.

Transport and communication costs rose 6.9 percent between January 2007 and January 2008, driven by soaring global fuel prices and higher taxi fares.

Higher petrol prices also contributed to a rise in transport costs for food. This, coupled with higher global food prices, means more expensive grocery bills.

However, one local supermarket chain has extended a discount scheme to help shoppers cope with rising costs. NTUC FairPrice has given customers 5 per cent off prices of 500 of its housebrand products since mid-December 2007.

The discounts, originally due to finish at the end of February, has now been extended until the end of April. The extension is costing FairPrice S$1 million and is part of the company's "Stretch Your Dollar" programme.

In the heart of Singapore's financial district, many were not surprised to hear the latest inflation figure. Many have already tightened their belts.

"I have a family, so I have to plan our expenses and cut out unnecessary spending and then maybe make some investment to cover the shortfall," said a member of the public.

"Shop around a bit more, do a bit of homework (before buying anything). It's a bit tedious, but at the end of the day it's your pocket," said another. - CNA/ac/ir

Commentary by Andy Mukherjee

Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Stagflation has come to Singapore.

The entire focus of the government's annual budget, announced Feb. 15, was on dealing with the perils of slowing growth and accelerating inflation, a deadly combination as less fiscally robust governments than Singapore's may soon discover.

Of the two, the bigger threat is clearly the 4.4 percent rate at which consumer prices rose from a year earlier in December, the quickest pace in a quarter century.

It's quite natural then that the word ``inflation'' appears 43 times in this year's budget statement.

Last year, it wasn't even mentioned once.

To be sure, the authorities in the city-state are entering the combat zone from a position of strength, and not only because they have accumulated budget surpluses in most years for four decades now.

For two straight years, people in every income bracket have taken home bigger paychecks.

Not just that. If the consumer-price index is any reflection of the true cost of living in the city-state, then even the poorest 10 percent of non-retiree households -- with a per-capita income of just S$180 ($127) a month -- have had real gains in purchasing power.

However, the rich have fared much better. Starting in 2000, inequality has widened a little every year.

Singapore's Gini coefficient, a widely used measure of income concentration, overtook that of the U.S. in 2006 and rose further last year to 0.485, a very high level of disparity for a society with an educated workforce.

Recession Risk

And this inequity may now become a problem because the growth momentum has suddenly collapsed as the much-expected ``decoupling'' from the troubled U.S. economy has -- at least so far -- failed to materialize.

On an annualized basis, gross domestic product contracted almost 5 percent in the final three months of last year compared with the previous quarter.

If there's another fall in GDP in the current quarter, then Singapore would technically be in recession.

It's one thing to have an unequal society where the workforce is, for all practical purposes, at full employment and income growth is outpacing inflation for everyone, albeit more quickly for the rich than for the poor.

A somewhat lopsided income distribution is only to be expected in a city that wants more rich people to come here to live, work and play. It now takes just a week to register a hedge fund from scratch in Singapore, many times faster than in the rival financial center of Hong Kong.

A couple of casinos will open by 2010, and an annual Formula One night race starts this year.

Helping Hand

When it comes to helping the poor, the island-state generally eschews consumption subsidies, except in education, basic health care and for public housing, the biggest source of wealth creation for the average Singaporean.

However, Singapore has mechanisms in place for transferring the government's fiscal surpluses to the poor in bad years and ensuring that they can get by even on monthly wages that wouldn't buy a meal for two at My Humble House, a restaurant that isn't exactly what its name suggests.

What Singapore has resolutely shied away from is giving its citizens any handout that may dissuade them from seeking work. Unemployment insurance, an idea that was discussed following the 2001 recession, remains a no-no.

That may be a prudent strategy, especially in a fast-aging society that's trying hard to retain competitiveness as cheaper locations in China and India become more sophisticated producers of almost everything that Singapore makes.

Prudent Versus Popular

Nonetheless, a prudent course may not be a very popular one in an environment of stagflation. When people start losing their jobs while their electricity bills keep going up, there may be resentment against the rich, many of whom are foreigners.

Singapore is too pragmatic to want to use tax policies to fashion a more egalitarian society. Even this year's budget gave a bonus to the rich by scrapping estate duty.

The move is aimed at getting wealthy individuals around the world to shift their assets to Singapore, where there are no levies on capital gains and the top rate for personal income tax is 20 percent.

To make sure that the poor don't fall further behind, the emphasis of the government's budget this year is on returning S$5.4 billion worth of fiscal surplus to the people, especially low-income households and the elderly.

As a small, open economy of 4.6 million people, Singapore can't do much to escape stagflation. As a prosperous nation -- average household income from work last year was the equivalent of $50,000 a year -- it is going to be under increasing pressure to shield its vulnerable from economic forces over which the city's authorities have no control.

For now, the government has been proactive in responding to the challenge. If the economy slows more than the current official forecast of at least 4 percent expansion this year, or if the cost of living becomes more unbearable, the helping hand may have to extend its generosity further.

believe it or not... 2007 is over~~~
hope everyone had a great year...and an even better year to come!

the economy pls remain as rosy so all of us graduates-to-be out there can find decent jobs!
haha

the HDB interview last friday.
lasted only 10 mins
i tot they din like me
they were snide and a lil sarcastic in some of their answers too
strangely enough,
they offered me the position.
i have a week to decide whether to take it.
after receiving the email, im jus wondering.
how some ppl can get things so easily, and some have to fight so hard and wait so long for replies.
its weird isnt it.
now i know why i haven had alot of real gruelling interview experiences.
since i usually get my first choice.
choice of school, course, internship, even this supposed job.
is that called lucky?
i don't know.
bet no one ever imagined how confused someone can feel after receiving a job offer.
after hearing what ppl have been telling me.
i really duno whether i should take it.
but i know, ultimately, that its my decision.

i wish i live jus by the beach, can jus go sit by the water.
i think the sound of waves and water helps one think clearer.

having a proj on and studying abt crisis management in singapore:

1) govt has been repeatedly successful in pulling the country out of recessions since independence.
2) national wages council's wage policies were definitely important and at this stage, indispensable.
3) CPF is a useful tool.

Implications?

To me:
1) govt is effective, longsighted. good.

2) wage policies were effective at maintaining the country's competitiveness. but what that means is that while they are keeping wages low and flexible, they are trusting that ordinary citizens have the prudence and knowledge to manage their finances correctly (which we already know that they do not)

3) CPF was originally set up as a retirement fund. with contribution alterations during bad times, doesnt that mean that the CPF balance is constantly being altered? is that stable? obviously not.
Altering CPF contributions instead of cutting takehome pay is no doubt an effective short term solution, as they dont feel the brunt of the cut. in the long term, however, people are taught to cling to the idea of job security, when it is obvious that job security is dead. how many ppl in the mid-30s or 40s get retrenched? when the company wants to make cutbacks, who do you think are the ppl who will be the first to go? why is it that the govt is trying so hard to get ppl over 50s or 60s employed? and why is it so difficult for these same people to get employed again?

the CPF retirement balance drawdown (due) date is repeatedly being pushed back. why is that?

the govt is repeatedly pushing back their own deadline. why is that?

the funds in CPF are lent to GIC for investments. and people accept that the returns that GIC gets have nothing to do with them (a Professor and a Dr. in charge of the Singapore Economy Seminar said so). but why is that? the funds in CPF... arent they the people's money? when the money makes money, shouldnt they get some fruits of GIC's work too? or is that that "oh, because the funds were not lent with your knowledge, as in you dont voluntarily put money with this fund manager, thats why the returns they make have nothing to do with you". so if 2-odd% returns from CPF is good enough, no wonder GIC is making so much money.


---
here's a site i found:
http://www.rasyid007.com/cpf.htm 
just for some interesting read, he's making some good pts, although i may not agree with some of his perspectives and opinions.
---
i really wonder what im going to write for exams. -_-

INGREDIENTS:

PREPARATION:

newly set up. combined with dear this time.

http://siongyun.blogspot.com

*loves