Another letter to Straits Times Forum page rejected
-
In today's Straits Times,(22.12.2006) there appears an article in Insight page entitled "People & Politics - 7 highly visible types in Singapore politics"
In this article, the Straits Times claimed that it has published readers' letters to the forum page from writers who have "the knack of raising ssues in a timely and coherent manner."
It cited the writings of people like Mr. Michael Loh, Mr. Leong Sze Hian and Dr. Lim Boon Hee and gives an impression that Straits Times has been objective in publishing letters from its readers with mention that some of its regular forum writers like Mr. Michael Loh has scored some kinds of record in the Guiness Book of record being the most prolific newspaper's forum writers.
May I ask the Straits Times to show that in the same breath, whether it has published well-articulated letters from writers who write on serious social or political issues or problems in the past and how many of such letters have been published as against those which were rejected in order to back up its point that Straits Times has been objective and welcoming enough to publish well-written or coherent letters from its readers.
Let me ask the Straits Times why my various letters to the Straits Times on "High costs of living" or "Proposed Revision of the Constitution" or "Time to review the Conservation Law", were less coherent or worthy of publication or not as coherent as those of Mr. Michael Loh?
I would just reproduce one such rejected "serious letter" written to the Straits Times on 18.12.2006 concerning the problems caused by the unchanging past summary practices of URA in implementing conservation of properties which is now reproduced below:-
{QUOTE}Date:- Dec 18, 2006
From: Mr. Robert Teh Kok Hua
To: The Editor,
The Straits Times,
Dear Editor,
Your article “Historic buildings no bar to progress” (by Kannan Chandran, Straits Times 13.12.2006) raises many issues and challenges confronting the ongoing conservation efforts of the government.
Enough has been said about the need for conservation of buildings of historic and heritage architectural legacy. For example, beside many past articles by various correspondents on this topic, Mr. Kannan has again lent vocal support to conservation by rightly emphasizing that “Heritage buildings should be viewed as assets, not stumbling blocks to progress”. He cited the fact that refurbished colonial villas previously owned by the family of Straits Chinese tycoon Tan Kim Seng and now incorporated in a new condominium development, known as Grand Duchess or Ducess @ St Patricks were instrumental in the sale of 121 units within 36 hours of its soft launch.
Mr. Ler Seng Ann Director (Conservation & Development Services ) of URA in his recent reply (“Many criteria in conservation” ST 24.9.2006) to a forum letter has attributed our conservation success to the public support and he added that “We need to balance that with economics, changing lifestyles and expectations, needs of building owners and other factors.”
However, in my view, the success of our Conservation Exercises was due to the following factors:-
a) Many of the prewar shophouses in China Town, Little India and Kampong Glam were already compulsorily acquired by the government under the Land Acquisition Act with compensations based on market values of the properties as at 30 November 1973;
b) The Rent Control Act, and
c) The private landowners were also given financial incentives to conserve their pre-war rent-controlled properties under the Decontrolled Premises Act.
The Rent Control Act was abolished in 2003 and provision for compensation for compulsorily acquired properties had been amended several times already.
Numerous articles have been published in the Straits Times like “Conservation targets newer buildings” (By Kalpana Rasshiwala, ST 14.7.2006) etc, wherein architects have described the practical difficulty in extending the traditional conservation of monumental sites and buildings to prime commercial properties outside these areas and newer private strata developments like Beverly Mai (The first condo built in 1974) and Futura, (2nd condo built in 1976) etc. as “Uphill Battle”.
With 6,500 buildings in monumental sites like China Town and Little India, Cuppage Road and Kg Glam largely protected, under our conservation programs to date, it may be asked:- (1) Is such a level of conservation for a small country like Singapore enough ? (2) Land being rare and expensive, how do we balance conservation with the loss of redevelopment potential and creation of jobs ? (3) Is there a need to over-conserve by conserving more old buildings of the same type? (4) Is there a case for compensation to property owners who have lost hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars in property values when prevented from redeveloping their properties?.
In conservation areas, there are many old, dilapidated or unsafe buildings. Since there are no incentives for new owners to redevelop the properties to their maximum potential and inject a new lease of life to the locality, there are left in their neglected state.
With the bulk of our national monumental buildings in core conservation areas like China Town, Little India and Cuppage and Kg Glam largely conserved, is there an overriding need to continue to conserve more and more of the same or every old building of certain age or architecture. Prewar buildings are already amply represented. It is post-war iconic buildings which the public want the URA to begin conserving.
Of late, on 8.12.2006, URA has published yet another notice of amendments to the Master Plan. URA is proposing to conserve the peripheral precincts in Syed Alwi Road, Rowell Road, Desker Road, Lembu Road, Jalan Besar as conservation areas.
Millions of dollars of property values will be wiped out upon conservation. Some of the property owners affected have been granted planning approvals previously for more intensive redevelopments. Such a conservation proposal cannot be justified.
From the foregoing, it is timely for URA to revisit our conservation objectives and review all the criteria e.g. economics, social lifestyle and offer a fair and equitable conservation approach or methodology going forward. Unless such issues and problems which may cause great concerns to all are adequately addressed in ongoing conservation processes, it will be unreasonable to expect the public or any owner affected to support, even if a building is highly deserving of protection and well justified by the experts on specifics. {UNQUOTE} -
Buy the Case and Return the Pearl
A man of the State of Chu went to the State of Zheng to sell his pearl. He had made a case for the pearl with finegrained molan wood, fumigated it with guijiao incense, mounted it with white jade, adorned it with rose-coloured stone and sewed green jadeited onto its fringes. The craftsmanship was so exquisite that a Zheng buyer took the case but returned the pearl to the seller. It may be said that the man was good at selling the case, but not the pearl.
Why not start your own forum here? urs' r quite a gem read really... a Robertteh Forum
-
to be accepted by strait times.... first paragraph must carry their balls, if not the letter would not be accepted. I just wonder which other country has ball carrying editors like Singapore?
-
i tink they got 400 word limit in for their forum... you should try to get your article in as a guest columnist, maybe will have a higher chance then.
-
you would do better as a columnist man...
-
Guest appearance by robertteh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Reminds me of the advertisement on tv about Class 95 FM, the tennis coach was telling the kid's father about how his son cannot make it in tennis, but all the negative points got muted and the father heard only the positive stuff about his son.
Hehehehe
They should use this scenario to make an advertisement for the newspaper. -
gold 90.5fm la............Originally posted by maurizio13:Reminds me of the advertisement on tv about Class 95 FM, the tennis coach was telling the kid's father about how his son cannot make it in tennis, but all the negative points got muted and the father heard only the positive stuff about his son.
Hehehehe
They should use this scenario to make an advertisement for the newspaper.
Is it??????????????? -
Aiyo, cannot remember which station, I don't listen to radio, so can't be bothered.Originally posted by bryanseb:gold 90.5fm la............
Is it???????????????
Hehehe -
fuk the ST, roberteh you are better off posting your views here.
cb, edit liao.. happy?
-
u got problem isit?Originally posted by 4getmenot:fuk the ST roberteh, you are better off posting your views here.
-
I think a comma is missing before "robertteh"......Originally posted by asdfzhao:u got problem isit? -
What a beautiful parable on the hypocrisy of men. Many letter writers who wish to get their letters published in the Straits Times are like the man in the state of Chu,elaborately crafting the case to gain acceptance of the case but not the pearl.Originally posted by eyebuzz:Buy the Case and Return the Pearl
A man of the State of Chu went to the State of Zheng to sell his pearl. He had made a case for the pearl with finegrained molan wood, fumigated it with guijiao incense, mounted it with white jade, adorned it with rose-coloured stone and sewed green jadeited onto its fringes. The craftsmanship was so exquisite that a Zheng buyer took the case but returned the pearl to the seller. It may be said that the man was good at selling the case, but not the pearl.
Why not start your own forum here? urs' r quite a gem read really... a Robertteh Forum
A copy of the above-stated article has been forwarded to PM Lee and MM Lee at the same time.
They may not read the letter but if they do they should see what they have done - Hypocrisy in motion and staring at them in their own faces. -
Waa, a missing small comma makes such difference !!!Originally posted by Hogzilla:I think a comma is missing before "robertteh"...... -
Errrrrr..... this should be familiar?!..... "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!"Originally posted by robertteh:Waa, a missing small comma makes such difference !!!
Actually, the way I look at things isn't about hypocrisy as it may appear (although some will still call a spade a spade) but rather it's human nature to always put up nice front or facade however one wants 'appeared in public' (the Asian culture; face... the number of bankrupts due to 'unlimited' credit cards use) but the reality is there are always two sides to a coin in any situation (not necessarily perceived).. the need to show differing views, contrasting, leaving judgement aside to digest the thrust of a message for positive deliberation and necessary win-win action or whatever. But if one only sees one's efforts as the only 'right' way then there bound to be residual resentment, rightly so, on the receiving end even if hushed up, stamped down or floored flatened. One can't just sweep whatever one doesn't want to hear or see under the carpet in a globalised world, one needs informed engagement, one needs positive exchanges, etc.
PS We have today's (human) technology but yesteryear's (human) nature still... Politics, rather good politicians are often seen as 'larger than life' as they are preserving, promoting, enhancing lifes, caring more for people's than their own interests, perservation and in ancient times they are often revered and protected by the very people whom ruled with their lives ... worshipped as gods, are far more than just legacy or for remembance, ... the very essence of life itself.
erk, ideology, bo tua bo suay, ... I'm confused! 
ST Forum
'A heady interlude in a mundane existence' (ST Dec 22) by Terence Chong.
'... perhaps, until Singapore's politics becomes part of the mundane everyday, it will continue to be disconnected from everyday reality.' -
Originally posted by eyebuzz:
The above-stated unpublished letter to the forum page of Straits Times was copied to PM Lee and MM Lee.
Errrrrr..... this should be familiar?!..... [b] "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!"
Actually, the way I look at things isn't about hypocrisy as it may appear (although some will still call a spade a spade) but rather it's human nature to always put up nice front or facade however one wants 'appeared in public' (the Asian culture; face... the number of bankrupts due to 'unlimited' credit cards use) but the reality is there are always two sides to a coin in any situation (not necessarily perceived).. the need to show differing views, contrasting, leaving judgement aside to digest the thrust of a message for positive deliberation and necessary win-win action or whatever. But if one only sees one's efforts as the only 'right' way then there bound to be residual resentment, rightly so, on the receiving end even if hushed up, stamped down or floored flatened. One can't just sweep whatever one doesn't want to hear or see under the carpet in a globalised world, one needs informed engagement, one needs positive exchanges, etc.
PS We have today's (human) technology but yesteryear's (human) nature still... Politics, rather good politicians are often seen as 'larger than life' as they are preserving, promoting, enhancing lifes, caring more for people's than their own interests, perservation and in ancient times they are often revered and protected by the very people whom ruled with their lives ... worshipped as gods, are far more than just legacy or for remembance, ... the very essence of life itself. erk, ideology, bo tua bo suay, ... I'm confused!
ST Forum
'A heady interlude in a mundane existence' (ST Dec 22) by Terence Chong.
'... perhaps, until Singapore's politics becomes part of the mundane everyday, it will continue to be disconnected from everyday reality.'
[/b]
If the leaders continue to ignore such letters pointing out wrong doings or mistakes in their use of summary political powers to deprive people of rights and properties, then it only proves one thing - their lack of leadership abilities and understanding of people's needs and aspirations and there is a big question mark whether they are losing touch with the ground.
Seriously, as leaders do they now have the moral authority to lead and look after our citizens' right and interests for the greatest good of the greatest number.
In my mind, Singapore politics cannot be right if majority of citizens are being sacrificed and are getting poorer year after year with the leaders and politicians becoming more and more power crazed and uncaring and losing sight of their ideals which we were brought up to cherish.
Many of us might still remember what we were taught in earlier education - to serve fellow citizens, to fight and die for the country, to practise fairness and equity, to stand for justice and rights of all.
All these ideals one by one seem to have given way to materialistic well-beings for the elites who came to dominate the political process for their own interest.
The media continue to serve the interest of the government to project their own success irrespective of the lack of attention to all the community values and lack of success of majority of citizens.
This is what we as citizens could contribute - to tell the truths and point out major wrongs in government policies and pin-prick their hypocrisy and cover-up of NKF wrong-doing and demand change even against the mighty government propaganda machinery which continue to spew untruths and hypocrisy.
This is the ultimate test of quality and talents of our elites and scholars who were given opportunities term after term to serve us and fight for people's interests.
If our new MPs and younger ministers lack the courage or intellect to see the bigger goals of life and the need to serve the people then to me they have not proven their real talents to serve us. -
When the 1st generation leaders were leading, governing, they were too busy working for the country and the people to think about themselves, of course, in the current conditions, considering that some were invited to join sacrificing the higher pay and privacy... but ... wonder what happen to the challenges one should overcome serving the country, wonder why too there are still many volunteers working to help the lesser plights... wonder why the rich gets richer claiming high operating costs beyond their controls then have shareholders approving yet their higher pay still... guess in the end who can convince whom... then again, looking at the christmas lights n spree (that is progress in the society, materialism?...) who cares about politics anyway... it's better to sip a cuppa of coffee or tea... go fishing and watch the waves, the seagulls fly by and kpko in the forums, no need to send whatever letters lah at least the country gives you this freedom so treasure it
... peace (no, me not pessimistic, but the belief that principles n pragmatism can coexist n sober minds do live n will prevail,)... still, sounding right may not necessary is right
It's not the hearing nor the not listening, it's the 'dismissive state' of mind...
http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/APSRNov06Dryzek.pdf -
"... received many professionally written letters everyday. They have about 4 staff to pick the letters seem "promisable" to be published.
It's like a HR's receiving resumes. Sometimes, they open up 1 out of 10 to browse for selection, and dump the rest.
Because of the large flow of letters, they tend to look at who's the sender. Yes, this statement is not fair but generally one would assume a Doctor's or Lawyer's or the like 's words to be more responsible, more impartial, more objective. I'm sure most would open their ears more to a lawyer, then to a say, engineer on serious law issues, etc. It's not fair, but this is the behaviour, be it in sg, uk or usa.
Hence name with a prefix of Dr, or creditials, or previous senders with good "track record" are generally better received.
Once the letter got shortlisted into the "promisable" folder, it will be edited (grammatical and clarity), researched (to check all the claims in the letter wherever possible) vetted, re-vetted and again-vetted.
THEN will it only go the the editer's desk. And it's vetted again! All in the short span of a few days.
......
Some say that the probability of being picked to be deem "promisable" in the first place, is almost like winning a mini lucky draw....."
Article from somewhere (heavily shorten...) -
Originally posted by sonic_16:"... Some say that the probability of being picked to be deem "promisable" in the first place, is almost like winning a mini lucky draw....."
Article from somewhere (heavily shortened...) True...hmmm... useful 
-
Two root-causes of people's problems which all citizens have to continuously learn to tackle without any compromise are:Originally posted by sonic_16:"... received many professionally written letters everyday. They have about 4 staff to pick the letters seem "promisable" to be published.
It's like a HR's receiving resumes. Sometimes, they open up 1 out of 10 to browse for selection, and dump the rest.
Because of the large flow of letters, they tend to look at who's the sender. Yes, this statement is not fair but generally one would assume a Doctor's or Lawyer's or the like 's words to be more responsible, more impartial, more objective. I'm sure most would open their ears more to a lawyer, then to a say, engineer on serious law issues, etc. It's not fair, but this is the behaviour, be it in sg, uk or usa.
Hence name with a prefix of Dr, or creditials, or previous senders with good "track record" are generally better received.
Once the letter got shortlisted into the "promisable" folder, it will be edited (grammatical and clarity), researched (to check all the claims in the letter wherever possible) vetted, re-vetted and again-vetted.
THEN will it only go the the editer's desk. And it's vetted again! All in the short span of a few days.
......
Some say that the probability of being picked to be deem "promisable" in the first place, is almost like winning a mini lucky draw....."
Article from somewhere (heavily shorten...)
(1) Legalistic wrangling or gerrymandering of laws and regulations precisely because our founding father has been trained as lawyer by profession. As lawyer, he could only see governance of the nation only from the narrow lawyers' perspective resulting in over-controls to get to what they want. The result is more over-control of people, taxing on major or big ticket items like housing and infrastructure cost recovering on all essential government services. An average family ends up paying S$500,000.00 - S$800,000.00 per family on housing and vehicular taxes to support the whole governmental machinery. Such heavy citizen burden impedes economic competitiveness and progress.
(2) Self-centredness and over-protection of elites and elitist policies in the name of meritocracy.
Even with all the scholars and lawyers and doctors, the society is unable to solve all the above-stated problems causes by legalistic wrangling for the past 40 years which impedes further progress.
Singapore could have progressed much further than it has given people's immense contribution from the past sacrifices if the cost burdens on the citizens are not persistently kept so high through creative accounting and legalistic wrangling of all laws and regulations. Ordinary citizens are so over-controlled by all sorts of devices that they have either given up or are migrating.
It is time to think out of the box and not be brainwashed by the propaganda that everything is well. It is not well and the ordinary people are suffering. -
With meritocacy and transparency... 
-
Dear Forumers,
Just to keep all informed of what transpired leading to publication of my letter to the Forum Page in today's Straits Times (28.12.2006), I reproduce below the emails exchanges with Forum editor Mr. Kong Soon Wah below:-
Date: 26.12.2006
Dear Mr. Kong Soon Wah,
Many thanks for your reply. In compliance with your advice, I have amended to said draft to below 400 words as attached and hope that you will now publish it. Regards,
Date:- Dec 26, 2006
To: The Editor,
The Straits Times,
Dear Editor,
QUOTE"In your article “Historic buildings no bar to progress” (Straits Times 13.12.2006), Mr. Kannan Chandran has correctly pointed out that “Heritage buildings should be viewed as assets, not stumbling blocks to progress” citing refurbished colonial villas previously owned by the family of Straits Chinese tycoon Tan Kim Seng as instrumental to the sale of 121 units within 36 hours of soft launch of Ducess @ St Patricks.
In replying to a recent forum letter, Mr. Ler Seng Ann Director (Conservation & Development Services ) has acknowledged the “need to balance that with economics, changing lifestyles and expectations, needs of building owners and other factors.”
However, in my view, such conservation success is mainly attributable to the Land Acquisition Act allowing government to acquire sites at market values as at 30 November 1973, Rent Control Act, 2003 and Decontrolled Premises Act offering landowners opportunities and financial incentives to conserve previously rent-controlled properties.
As your correspondent Mr. Kalpana Rashiwala has pointed out in his article “Conservation targets newer buildings”, published in the Straits Times on 14.7.2006, architects have described the ongoing conservation of prime commercial sites and iconic post-war strata developments like Beverly Mai (The first condo built in 1974) and Futura, (2nd condo built in 1976) etc. as “Uphill Battle”.
Yet, of late on 8.12.2006, URA has served notices to conserve yet more prime commercial sites like Syed Alwi Road, Rowell Road, Desker Road, Lembu Road, Jalan Besar. Millions of dollars of property values will be wiped out upon conservation with some land owners being unable to proceed with previously approved redevelopment.
With 6,500 buildings already conserved, it may be timely to review our conservation objectives and programs by asking questions e.g. (1) Is this level of conservation enough ? (2) Land being rare and expensive, how do we reconcile conservation with loss of redevelopment potential and creation of jobs ? (3) Is there a need to conserve more of the same type? (4) Compensation to those deprived of approved redevelopment.
In the first phase of our conservation, buildings being conserved were often old, dilapidated or even unsafe. Today, circumstances are different and even if a conservation proposal is justified by experts on specifics, there may be a need to reexamine overall conservation needs and provide fair and equitable compensation to land owners affected."UNQUOTE
Robert Teh Kok Hua
-----Original Message-----
From: Kong Soon Wah [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of STForum
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 4:28 PM
To: teh kok hua
Subject: Re: STRAITS TIMES' CLAIM OF OBJECTIVITY IN PUBLISHING FORUM PAGE LETTERS - IS IT TRUTHFUL
Dear Mr Teh,
I have not rejected your letter of Dec 18. Your letter was way too long. If you could cut it to 400 words, we would consider publishing it.
Yours sincerely,
Kong Soon Wah
Forum Editor -
This is my 1st time here and i must say that Mr Teh is very good with his words.
-
The Straits Times forum does not belong to Robert alone. Long letters will reduce available space for other contributors.
-
Originally posted by kopiosatu:you would do better as a columnist man...
Yup. Self publish columnist.