Hey We Care! Second Mobilization

The HGCC Welfare Committee (HWC ~ Hey We Care!) organized our 2nd mobilization for ‘后港爱心总动员’. It was brought to the committee’s attention of another home that required some form of cleaning and painting. The team wasted no time in mobilizing a team of 12 volunteers to kick off the 2nd Mobilization.

12 enthusiastic volunteers, including 5 Hougang Women Support Network Volunteers came forward for this mission. It was a 3-room flat. A grim sight and a foul smell greeted us. 2 elderly brothers (The Lims, not their real name) stayed in the flat. Elder brother was 82 years old, had physical disability. He could hardly walk stably, even with a walking stick. He was a grumpy and frail old man. He was unhappy with the volunteers’ work to clean up his house. He was accustomed to his dirty house, having used to living in such dirty conditions, he was unhappy with the disturbance it brought to him.

The younger brother was 70-odd years old. He had agreed to the house-cleaning mission, as he was unable to effect the cleaning on his own efforts. It was not an easy task for him to manage his grumpy brother, and most of the time, he left him alone.

The house was quite bare. The Lims do not have many belongings, except for some clothing and a few old electrical appliances. Even the refrigerator was not working, but was used as a cabinet.

The team started work immediately. We started cleaning up the house, and subsequently repainting the house.

The toilet was in really bad condition. The smell was very bad, and the bowl was literally black. We had to use a bottle of concentrated acid to dissolve the unidentified ‘substance’ inside.

It was a best effort cleaning since none of us had experience in painting a house. At the end of the day, it was a gratifying moment for the team to see the house transformed into a nicely painted house. For once, there was a fragrance from the cleaning detergent coming out from the house instead of a foul smell.

We also found sponsors who bought a mattress for the elder Mr Lim. He had been sleeping on the floor all these while. The paints and equipments were also sponsored by kind donors.

If you are keen to be part of this mission of helping people, please write to us at hgcc.equiry@gmail.com.

HGCC Advance in Manila

Shin Leong, together with HGCC (Hougang Constituency Committee) core members and a couple of Hougang youth constituents had an informal advance (antonym for retreat) in Tagaytay Highlands and Manila for 4 days. It was a short yet enjoyable getaway. The group had a great time of team bonding over horse rides, sight seeing and shopping.

The most memorable part of the trip was the group’s visit to Child Haus, Philippines at Quezon City. The Child Haus, Philippines, is a temporary shelter for patients from different provinces who have cancer or other dreaded diseases and have no place to stay. That afternoon, the group understood the situation of Child Haus, that was in the midst of vacating from the current Quezon Institute compound, after being told to leave the place due to structural safety reasons. Some of the cancer-striken children in the ‘half-way’ house were rescued from the streets. The charitable group is currently still trying to locate another suitable site that is most conducive for healing for the children. The group had an interactive session with the children, who in turn gave a most touching performance of their favourite songs to their visitors.

The group was also privileged to have an informal sharing session over breakfast with officials and activists of PDP (Partido Demokratiko Pilipino, PDP Laban, a ruling coalition political party in Philippines. The Chairman of the Party, Mr Jejomar C. Binay, is the current Vice President of the Philippines). The group had a hearty discussion and exchanged ideas with the Secretary General Jose De Venecia III and his team on grassroots movements in both Singapore and Philippines. They also broached on the possibility of having cross-border youth exchange programmes to broaden the youth’s interaction and experiences between the 2 nations.

To view more photos of the trip, click here.

Media Release on MPs’ Offices at Void Decks

We refer to the announcement by the Ministry of National Development (MND) on 27 May 2011, that the Housing and Development Board (HDB) would henceforth permit void decks to be rented out to elected Members of Parliament for use as MPs’ offices to conduct Meet-the-People sessions (MPS) at the concessionary rates extended to non-profit organisations.

This announcement currently affects only Workers’ Party (WP) elected MPs, as PAP MPs employ PAP Branch Offices and PAP Community Foundation kindergartens for their MPS. While the WP appreciates HDB’s gesture, it is nothing more. In order to properly assess the option, the WP sought further details of the brief announcement from HDB, to which the HDB replied via emails dated 10 June, 16 June and 28 June 2011.

In its replies, the HDB affirmed that it would not bear the construction cost of the office. In addition, the HDB also stated that MPs would have to pay for the reinstatement of the void deck to its original condition in the event the space was no longer required. The tenancies would also be from month to month for the duration of the MPs’ term of office.

The draft tenancy agreement furnished by HDB provides that the premises should be used for the Meet-the-People sessions and administrative tasks associated with an MP’s duties, and not for any other purpose except with the prior written consent of the HDB. While HDB’s email dated 28 June 2011 states that the MP may use the office for “some community activities, bearing in mind the space limitation”, there is uncertainty as to what kind of community activities would require the prior written consent of HDB, which consent can also be withdrawn at any time.

It is noteworthy that prior to 1991, all MPs were designated an office space at HDB void decks, before the HDB changed this policy. In 1981, the HDB built the MP’s office for the WP MP for Anson, J B Jeyaretnam. Mr Jeyaretnam initially conducted his MPS at a HDB void deck, and moved into the MP’s office built by the HDB upon its completion. The WP has carefully considered the latest HDB’s change of policy as announced on 27 May 2011. The Party has concluded that it would be a financial burden to build offices for its MPS sessions at HDB void decks.

The six WP MPs are currently conducting MPS at eight locations (two each for Bedok-Reservoir and Serangoon wards of Aljunied GRC) to be accessible to residents. The construction of eight offices would be a significant expense, not to mention maintenance and other running costs. As WP does not have access to limitless resources, prudence dictates that WP be conservative in spending.

Some individuals have encouraged us to set up kindergartens akin to those under the PAP Community Foundation (PCF), and use these charitable institutions to host our MPS sessions. Singapore has already experienced the politically debilitating effects of kindergartens divided along party lines. This was raised by then Defence Minister Dr Goh Keng Swee on 24 Dec 1965 during the second reading of the People’s Association (Amendment) Bill. It is the WP’s current position that the encouragement of kindergartens and other educational institutions along party lines could inadvertently encourage the political polarisation of Singapore society.

In addition, in view of the constant redrawing of electoral boundaries by the Government, the long-term viability of the construction of offices for WP MPs is open to question. This is a serious consideration in view of the history of re-drawing of wards into and out of Aljunied GRC in 2006 and 2011 by the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee, without any explanation. Offices built by WP MPs today may be rendered obsolete in five years.

We thank the residents of Aljunied GRC and Hougang SMC for their understanding of the situation. We will continue to monitor closely the comfort level of the MPS at the void decks and take appropriate action if needed.

The Workers Party
21 Jul 2011

———
Media Contact:
Pritam Singh
Vice-chair, WP Media Team
Email: media@wp.sg

Employment Plight of Our Seniors

I refer to the ST Forum article ‘Why seniors end up as security guards’ (16th July 2011).

My heart goes to Mrs Joanna Han’s mother. Mrs Joanna Han’s sharing reminded me of a conversation I once had with a Cambodian business associate. He asked me the following, “Singapore is a rich country but why there are so many elderly people working as food centre cleaners”.

He went on “In Cambodia, while we are not a rich country, but we do not see elderly people working as food centre cleaners”. I merely replied him that, “Actually many of our senior folks are working to pass time”. While my assertion should be true to varying extent, still deep within me I know that there are many of them need to struggle hard for livelihood.

The WP’s GE2011’s manifesto (Chapter 10, Labour Policy Preamble, Paragraph 7, page 45) noted the following:

The employment outlook for older workers is a concern. The employment rate for workers aged 55 to 64 was only 59% as at 2010. In 2007, the government pushed back the draw down age for CPF Fund account balances from 62 to 65, while the statutory retirement age remains at 62. Re-employment provisions introduced in January 2011 provide opportunities for re-employment of older workers by the employers after 62, but weak obligations on the part of employers to offer re-employment or reasonable terms for re-employment.

In the case of Mrs Joanna Han’s mother, I believe what that could have done to secure her a probable NTUC Fairprice job as a cashier or packer is to ensure that local companies (in this instance the NTUC as a cooperative) have to lead by example in terms of their employment policy. The WP’s GE2011’s manifesto (Chapter 10, Labour Policy, Our Proposals Part B. Foreign Workforce, page 47) has this to say:

1. The inflow of the foreign workforce at all skill levels should be calibrated for each industry, taking into account the suitability of Singaporeans for those industries, productivity targets and sustainability.

2. The dependency ratio or quota for foreign manpower should be further fine-tuned to the specific industry, rather than broad sectors such as manufacturing or services, to better ascertain and calibrate the need for foreign manpower vis-à-vis employment prospects for Singaporeans.

Eight hours shift for senior Singaporeans in the security industry should be encouraged. This will ensure that our seniors need not stay on their feet for 12 hours daily. At the same time I agree with Mrs Joanna Han that our seniors ought to deserve a less physically demanding work, especially when such jobs are available in other sectors.

Comments on NUS Commencement 2011

Below contains Shin Leong’s full comments to Shin Min Daily News regarding National University of Singapore's (NUS) invitation to him to be part of its traditional academic procession during Commencement 2011 (Batch C15)last Saturday (9th July 2011).

Q: What commencement was that? That was for which faculty? Were you from the same faculty?

A: That commencement was for the class of 2011, NUS Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences, which included political science graduates. I was from the same faculty and the political science department.

Q: May I know why you were invited to the commencement?

A: I was invited to the commencement in my capacity as an alumnus of NUS’s political science department.

Q: What role did you play at the commencement? Did you make a speech? Or did you give our certificates?

A: I played no official role other than in the traditional academic march in/ out procession. I was seated at the centre of the stage, at the front row together with Professor Lai Choy Heng, Vice Provost (Academic Personnel) on my right and Professor Henry Yeung (Economic Geography) on my left.

Q: Is this the first time you were invited by a University, to the commencement other than your own?

A: Being a lecturer who teaches tertiary business modules, I have participated in other commencements (commonly known as convocations) organized by private universities.

Q: How did you feel about the invitation? How was the ambience of the entire commencement?

A: It feels rather good to come back home to the very university you graduated from. The ambience of the entire commencement was great.

Q: Do you have anything to say about to the graduates? Did they approach you to talk to you?

A: I did talk to a couple of them. My message to the class of 2011: Do strive to give your best in your chosen paths ahead. Sometimes your path may get bumpy, but for each bump and potholes you experienced, you will get to experience life more and more. Enjoy your journey!

Q: Understand that Nicole Seah was invited too. Did you get to speak to her?

A: Yes, we exchanged pleasantries.

A Retiree’s Experience with his CPF Monies

Earlier this month, a retired Hougang Constituent (Mr. L) shared with me that in his latest CPF statement of account, there was a transfer item of X dollars from his Ordinary account to his Medisave account. According to him he did not submit this particular request and was hence surprised that such a transfer was made without his prior knowledge and requested that the X dollars to be transferred back to his Ordinary Account.

Mr. L then wrote to CPF and received a reply explaining that it is a requirement for CPF to fully set his Minimum Sum in his Retirement Account and Medisave Required Amount (MRA) in his Medisave Account before he is eligible to withdraw from his CPF saving.

CPF further explained that as this retired Hougang Constituent has a shortfall in his Medisave Account when he applied for withdrawal, CPF will hence transfer X dollars from his Ordinary Account to make up for the MRA shortfall amount. Hence CPF is unable to accede to his request to transfer the X dollars back to his Ordinary account.

Mr L then replied the following to CPF:

Dear CPF,

The MRA was fully complied with on my retirement at 55 years old in July 2008. The amount in my ordinary account is the residual balance which I am entitled to withdraw in full.

We were never told that money kept in the CPF after 55 years old will be
used at your discretion for topping-up. Why do I have to top-up the MRA again when I had already fully complied in 2008?

Please check that there was no new contribution to my account which means
the total balance is my full entitlement plus interest earned. It appears to me that you will decide at your pleasure to use my entitled sum of money without my prior knowledge because I left it in the ordinary account.

You seem to give the signal for members to withdraw all and leave zero balance in their CPF ordinary account contrary to the Government's encouragement for members to continue saving in the CPF ordinary account even after 55 years old.

I urge you to study the merits of this case more thoroughly before you conveniently tell me that you cannot transfer the amount in question back to my ordinary account.

I await your reply

Mr L.

I am awaiting CPF’s reply to Mr L too.

Comments on Fairprice Closure

Below contains Shin Leong’s full comments to TODAY, Shin Min Daily & ZaoBao’s questions on the closure of NTUC Fairprice at Hougang Community Club. The good news is, Hougang residents will continue to have a supermarket (YES Supermarket) after all.

Q: May I know what are the comments that you as the MP of Hougang to the closing of the NTUC Fairprice? Do you think that this is going to affect their shopping? Why?

A: The setting up of NTUC Fairprice at Hougang Community Club in the first place can be viewed as a compromise to the demolishment of the Blk 11 Hougang market and food centre (in Hougang Ave 7) which was much frequented by Hougang residents. Naturally the closure of NTUC Fairprice will certainly affect the shopping of many, especially the elderly living in Hougang Ave 3 & 7.

Q: As a MP are you going to ask their authorities to give a location for a supermarket or a wet market?

A: I would strongly encourage the authorities to make known their urban renewal plans for the Hougang Ave 3/7 precinct soonest possible. This is because if the implementation of the urban renewal plan is to take a few years more, it will only be logical and ideal for a temporally wet market/ food centre to be set up in the said vicinity. This will make life more convenient for Hougang residents living in the vicinity, especially Hougang’s elderly.

Q: Also, any comments on the quotes on The Online Citizen. "The staff from the Member of Parliament’s office who spoke to us said that the closure is because NTUC Fairprice’s lease period had expired. Some shop owners in the vicinity speculated that that a ‘Yes’ supermarket would be taking the place of NTUC FairPrice. But the MP’s office said they have no news of any new amenities that would be set-up in place of the supermarket which vacated the premise today."

A: I cannot comment on this, because the Hougang Community Club does not come under the purview of the MP Office. (Also I do not know who the said staff is, because I do not have any other staff except for my Legislative Assistant who does not speak to the press)

Q: Do you think it is due to political reasons that NTUC Fairprice is closing? Do you have any other comments?

A: Whether or not it is due to political reasons, this you should ask NTUC Fairprice & The People’s Association. More importantly, residents’ convenience is paramount. As such we should not politicize on the issue. Regardless of which political parties we support, we are first-&-foremost Singaporeans.

Discussions With Canine Activists (II)

In an earlier meet up with a group of canine activists on 13th June 2011, Shin Leong expressed interest to put together a ‘Community Dogs Management Programme’ modeled after one of CWS (Cat Welfare Society)’s initiatives.

On 28th June 2011, he met up with another group of canine activists to work on this initiative. A preliminary draft has been kindly put together by Mr Clifford Lum. Please refer to his draft below.

Shin Leong will be calling for another discussion with Canine activists on the 18th July 2011 (7pm, Monday) to further discuss + to fine tune the draft below. Please email shinleong.yaw@wp.sg if you are keen to attend this discussion.

Let's be part of this humane journey. We will start with Hougang & beyond!

COMMUNITY DOGS (STRAYS & PETS) MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME [DRAFT VER 1.0]
By: Clifford Lum

1. Reject culling, instead a sterilization cum rabies vaccination programme can be implemented for strays to prevent the spread of rabies(one of the reasons citied by the authorities for culling although it has been non-existent here since 1953). Stray dog nuisance complain should be verified thoroughly before a stray dog is being culled. These "Singapore Specials" or mongrels are generally scared and wary of humans. Most of them tend to avoid human contact wherever possible. It would be very unfair for the unspoken ones if action is taken against them just because of complains from selfish non-animal lovers. “We have always fought against the culling of dogs, not simply because it is inhumane from an animal welfare perspective, but more importantly, because it has never been shown to have any effect on rabies reduction.” - Janice Girardi, Founder of Bali Animal Welfare Association embarking on the government funded island-wide rabies vaccination programme, with soaring success.

2. Form 'Community Rescue & Adoption Network' (CRAN) whereby all existing animal welfare groups can come together as one and work towards the common objective of saving animals' lives. Animal lovers have seen before how animals have been put down due to the slightest health issues(skin conditions which can be treated with proper medication), mild behaviourial problems(can be worked out with proper behaviourial training) & even old age but still in good health. As the only animal welfare organisation that does not turn away any animals (strays, pets, birds and even terrapin) surrendered to them, it is inevitable that some has to be put down. The SPCA takes in over 600 animals on average every month. If the CRAN can work closely with the SPCA to share the workload, the SPCA would not have to take in a large bulk of unwanted animals. For example, the SPCA can be tasked with handling only house pets while the CRAN can be tasked with handling only stray animals. In such a scenario, the SPCA would not be overloaded with having to manage all the unwanted animals thrown at them. The SPCA would then be able to reduce its manpower and other resources as its core focus will only be on house pets. As the SPCA has been around for a very long time with a regular donors' base firmly established, donations and funds from the public can be used for a more meaningful purpose in saving animals' lives instead of euthanasia.

3. Discourage people importing pet dogs from overseas so as to discourage the operation of puppy mills. The best is to adopt. We can create an awareness programme by educating people about the plight of breeding dogs in puppy mills. Unethical breeding in puppy mills led to unhealthy puppies which in the long term becomes a source of unexpected burden for the owners. This is espcially so for impulsive first time owners who are not well equipped to manage the problems. When the problem becomes too complicated and medical bills starts piling up, these heartless and irresponsible owners just simply choose to either abandon them or dump them at SPCA. Other reasons from impulsive owners include puppies outgrowing their cuteness, puppies pee and poo everywhere in the house, excessive barking, family members are allergic, maid has left etc. One of the most common excuse is when couples use a newborn baby as an excuse and simply choose to dump their pet at SPCA instead of re-homing it even before they start making a baby. Ample preparations before a baby arrives can help pets adapt to the new family member more easily.

4. Monitor the sales of puppies in local pet shops more strictly and to enforce the ruling of compulsory microchipping, AVA can do a monthly check in pet shops which sells puppies and ensure that they are licensed and registered with them. Having worked in a petshop before, I am aware that one of the procedures required when purchasing a pup is the personal particulars of the buyer. This information can be used by the AVA to take legal action against the person who abandoned or fail to microchip their pets.

Revisiting Profiteering From Public Housing

I refer to the ST news reports ‘Government halts DBSS land sales as it reviews scheme’ (05 July 2011) & ‘HDB helping in DBSS buyer’s pull-out appeal’ (09 July 2011).

It was explained that DBSS (Design, Build and Sell Scheme) was rolled out six years ago to give private developers a chance to participate in the public housing market and to introduce more building and design innovations in such housing. This also means that private developers are allowed to freely price the public housing units they build and attach their own conditions to their sales.

While the intention to allow private developers to participate in public housing construction could result in better designed and more upmarket feel to public housing, it has increasingly been evident that developers have different intentions.

According to Propnex Chief Executive Mohamed Ismail, “The disparity lies in the fact developers treat this (DBSS) as a purely private development rather than one that is subjected to HDB criteria” (ST 9 July, Prime News)

Private developers had inevitably been allowed opportunities to profiteer from Singapore’s public housing market.

In an ideal environment, this could possibly be gearing towards a positive result where the overall Singaporean housing needs had been met and there were no shortage of affordable housing for needy Singaporeans. Our higher middle-income group would be able to afford such better-designed public housing whilst the lower income group would lean towards the standard public housing. However we must bear in mind that there are still Singaporeans who are unable to afford basic public housing, and many unable to afford the loan payments and high cash over valuation for purchase of normal resale flats.

Some 9,100 first-timer [1] Singaporeans applied for BTO flat during May 2011 BTO exercise, forming 65% of 14,000 Singaporeans who are trying to own a flat through direct purchase from HDB [2] . We note that there were only 4,000 units available for sale for this May 2011’s BTO exercise. These sizable figures suggest that there are indeed many Singaporeans who are waiting to own their first flat, and may possibly been unable to afford to purchase one in the resale market.

It was reported that so far 13 DBSS sites had been awarded and 5,500 flats had been built and sold by private developers. We also noticed that over the years, there had been significant hike in the DBSS flats on sale. It was $278,000 - $410,000 for a 92 – 95 square metres 4-room flat for The Premiere in Tampines (launched in 2006) to a similar sized 4-room flat at $511,000 - $592,000 for Centrale 8 at Tampines Central [3]. The flat cost had increased $182,000 over the last 5 years for the highest value 4-room flat category, which is an estimated 44% increase over the 5 years.

However has the median income of Singaporeans improved that much over the years? From MOM’s 2010 report on wages, the median wage for lowest 10% was $600 to $1,500 [4]. MOM’s 2008 report on the Singapore workforce, the median income of cleaners, laborers & related workers in June 2008 was $900 [5] . This suggests that the income of lower income group of Singaporeans have not significantly increased to allow them to cope with the cost of increase in Housing.

As flats were being sold under DBSS schemes, are we gearing towards a higher end HDB flats without consideration for the needs of Singaporeans who are on the other spectrum of the equation?

MND’s latest move to halt DBSS land sales is THE LEAST our government can do now to bring us back to our rationale & motivation behind public housing, which is to provide for the housing needs of Singaporeans.

At this juncture, I believe it is also timely for the government to re-visit the issue of HDB running a commercial arm (EM Services), a joint venture between the HDB and Keppel Land Limited, with the commercial interest of renting out HDB flats for profit.

Three weeks ago a Hougang constituent shared with me that he is paying $1,600 for renting a flat from EM Services. Another constituent shared with me that her family is paying EM Services $2,450 a month for her rental flat.

According to the second constituent, the $2,450 amount was imposed by EM Services being penalty for rental arrears. She added that her family is currently in the midst of being evicted by EM Services from her rental flat and wondered would her family be homeless as a result.

The HDB, on its own as a public housing provider will never be in a position to charge such exorbitant market rates for rental flats. We know that rental rates for similar flats under subsidized HDB rental schemes cost a mere fraction to the mentioned amounts above.

As such why should we permit the HDB to own a commercial arm to shield it from its public responsibility of providing rental flats to needy Singaporeans? I quote Mr Leong Sze Hian from an earlier article, ‘The HDB should not on the one hand be the sole provider of rental flats to needy Singaporeans, and yet also at the same time have an interest in a company that rents HDB flats to *foreigners for a profit.’ (TOC article, January 15, 2010) [* & locals too]

I echo Mr Leong’s sentiments. The ministry needs to review the rental housing policies. Each week, at least 10% if not more residents visit me at the Meet-The People Session to discuss on their housing problems. Many of them are seeking for HDB rental flat from HDB and most had been waiting for at least 2-3 months and still counting. The social issues that implicate as a result of lack of a housing cannot be underestimated.

A full review of profiteering from public housing policy is long overdue.

[1] A “first-timer” refers to an applicant who has never bought an HDB flat directly from HDB, nor taken a CPF Housing Grant.

[2] Statistics taken from http://mndsingapore.wordpress.com/, Minister Khaw Boon Wan’s blogsite on ‘Know Our Customers’.

[3] Figures from Sim Lian Group’s website

[4] http://www.mom.gov.sg/Documents/statistics-publications/wages2010/mrsd_2010Wages_OWS_Findings.pdf, 2.9 High and Low paying occupations

[5] http://www.mom.gov.sg/Publications/mrsd_singapore_workforce_2008.pdf, Chart 7: Share of Resident Employment Change by Occupation, 1998 to 2008 and 2006 to 2008 (As at June)

Help Needed For Hougang Resident Mr. J

BRIEF INFO

This Hougang Ave 5 resident (Mr. J) was discharged from AMK Community Hospital last Friday. Mr. J is a dialysis patient and is suffering from acute back pains which led him to his most recent hospitalization. Mr. J and his wife stay with their only daughter and son in law who are working full time. Presently, Mr. J relies on a walking stick/ device to move about while Mrs. J has quit her job to ensure the safety and well being of her husband.

PRESENT DIFFICULTIES

Mr. J needs to go for dialysis 3 times a week (1130am to 430pm) but faces a practical difficulty of reaching his dialysis centre for the following reasons:

(i) No lift landing at his residential unit, which implies he has to climb either up or down the stairs just to get to a lift. (Mr. J is quite unstable when walking with his walking aid and would end up breathless by the time he reaches the bottom of his flat. It is especially precarious when he navigates his way down the stairs.)

(ii) Mrs. J is very frail, thin and small in built and cannot fully support the weight of her husband

(iii) All available medical escort services range from $850 to $1000+ (even with substantial subsidies given, it is still a huge financial burden for the family)

(iv) Both daughter and son in law are working full time to ensure ends meet for the family

HELP NEEDED

In view of the practical difficulties and current gaps in medical escort services, we are hoping that there will be a kind hearted Hougang resident/ resources available to assist this couple in getting to the dialysis centre, offering both practical and emotional support to Mr. J and wife.

Please contact me at yawsl@wp.sg if you are willing to lend a hand. Thank you.

HGCC Lantern Parade 2011 Project Team

Hougang Constituency Committee (HGCC)’s Cultural Committee’s Lantern Parade 2011 Project Team met last Sunday evening at McDonalds over fries, lots of fun and tons of planning!

Are you keen to be part of the action? HGCC Cultural Committee welcomes you :)

Please email Pam at pam_chae@live.com today.

HGCC Hari Raya Aidilfitri Nite 2011 Project Team

Hougang Constituency Committee (HGCC)’s Cultural Committee’s Hari Raya Aidilfitri Nite 2011 Project Team met last Saturday night over coffee, lots of laughter and tons of planning!

Are you keen to be part of the action? HGCC Cultural Committee welcomes you :)

Please email Md Fairoz at mdfairoz@hotmail.com today.

Hougang Memories, Our Singapore Story (III)

Project Overview By: Lim Jia Liang

This is written on behalf of Hougang Memories, Our Singapore Story's Steering Committee. Our Objective: The Localisation of Singaporean History in the context of Hougang.

Originally, the project involved only a record of oral histories of the elderly in Hougang. However, as the project committee discussed this, we have decided that this project needed to go beyond merely noting down the stories of our forefathers. Although these stories contain the many facades of human life in Singapore, it is rendered pointless if we are unable to provide the contexts to these facades.

As a result, the team has decided to expand the project into one that is more comprehensive, but will inevitably take more time. However, this does not mean that the book will lose the tenderness and the warmth that come from oral histories. Far from that, this book strives to capture the beauty and fragility of local histories.

Hougang is a good first step to take as it is a region with much history. Traditionally a Chinese enclave, it had pockets of catholic religious schools and 2 of the older mosques in Singapore. There is a need for us to honour the past and to show the current generation of Singaporeans how much history is lost due to time.

It is the project team's steering committee's hope that this project will spark off more such volunteer initiatives that will chart local history in different regions of Singapore. It might seem like a lofty goal, but we must not be timid in trying to do something that contributes to the culture and history of Singapore.

What do we want to achieve from the project and the book?

- Defining the identity of Hougang.

- Tracing Hougang through memory lane and reconstructing Hougang in history.

- What are the major changes that have happened in Hougang, and how have National Events and policies shaped Hougang then and now?

- Cross referencing: How does Hougang’s local history mirror upon Singapore's historical development?

- Cross references: How do Singaporean historical events shape the recollections of Hougang?

Operational Workflow:

- Project Paper (2 weeks)

- Planning Stage (1 month): Steering Committee to be firmed up, delegation of tasks, setting up criteria and identifying the strengths and experiences of interviewers, setting up criteria and identifying interviewees, preparation of working kit etc

- Execution: preliminary research > preliminary interviews with potential interviewees > conducting interviews > transcribing > etc (6 months)

- Writing and editorial (6 months)

- Printing (3 months)

NOTE: The above workflow is highly subject to changes and is taking a very optimistic view. The Time Frame is expected to be approximately 2 years from June 2011 (to be revised as and when). Are you keen to be part of this purposeful project? Please email yawsl@wp.sg today!