Answered but not answering
-
Sometimes I think the government are just replying for the sake of replying.
This isn't the first time they reply but not really replying sincerely, look at what the person wrote Feb 20, and look at the reply below on Feb 25,
SINCE the beginning of the year, the Government has organised various mock terror attacks to gauge and improve Singapore's readiness to cope with such catastrophes.
However, as a senior security supervisor on a worksite in the western part of Singapore, my experience when a bomb was discovered on our worksite makes me wonder if we are ready to face the threat of terrorism.
Last Thursday, at about 4.30pm, a bomb (probably a World War II relic) was discovered on our worksite. The police were notified five minutes later and a corporal from Queenstown Police Station arrived on the scene. It was more than 45 minutes later, at 5.18pm, that an officer from police explosives team confirmed it was a bomb. By then, the area had been cordoned off.
At 6.25pm, a police assistant superintendent, who was the investigating officer, arrived but there was still no sign of the bomb disposal unit. At 7.45pm, a lone second lieutenant from the unit arrived but was unable to remove or dispose of the bomb.
Finally, at about 8pm, a unit from the explosives ordnance department arrived. At 8.18pm, a search dog was brought to locate other possible bombs. Only at 9pm was the bomb safely removed from the scene.
I am disappointed by the slow response time of the bomb disposal unit. Why did it take them nearly three hours to arrive after the bomb was confirmed at 5.18pm? What if the bomb had exploded in those three hours?
I understand the bomb disposal unit needs to follow certain standard operating procedures but does it really need to take three hours?
It is fortunate the bomb was found at the edge of the worksite. Had it been on the worksite itself, it would not only have posed a greater risk to workers but also have resulted in considerable economic loss because of the time the bomb disposal unit took to arrive.
If we are so slow to act on a single bomb threat, how can we cope with a terror attack on even the smallest scale?
I hope this is an isolated incident that does not reflect on the overall operational readiness of the bomb disposal unit.
Neo Poh Goon
WE REFER to Mr Neo Poh Goon's letter 'Bomb squad slow to respond to threat' (ST, Feb 20).
We would like to assure him that the Singapore Armed Forces and the Police treat all cases of explosives and ordnance seriously and we work closely to deal with them.
When the Police receive a call on suspected explosive devices, our officers will be dispatched immediately to the site to ensure public safety by throwing a cordon around the object and order an evacuation, if necessary.
The officers will inform SAF's Explosives and Ordnance Disposal unit to dispose of the item after identifying the object.
There are different levels of responses in such cases depending on the risk level.
In this case, if the threat to public safety was high, the team would have been activated immediately. But the object was a World War II three-inch round which did not contain any high explosives.
The SAF's teams are well-organised to react to contingencies. Such an approach is necessary at a time when there is a heightened threat of terrorist attacks.
We want to assure the public that both the SAF and Police are well-prepared and committed to ensuring their safety at all times.
Col Benedict Lim
Director, Public Affairs
Ministry of Defence
Audrey Ang
Assistant Director, Media Relations
Singapore Police Force -
But they've always been like that one, we're quite used to it already.
-
what were they trying to say?
lia bo -
WWII relic, you think it will explode ma? Unless you went to disturb the bomb, which is very idiotic. So PAP took their own sweet time to come lor. Also won't explode anyway. If explode, blame it on their own citizens' curiosity.
-
PAP???Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:WWII relic, you think it will explode ma? Unless you went to disturb the bomb, which is very idiotic. So PAP took their own sweet time to come lor. Also won't explode anyway. If explode, blame it on their own citizens' curiosity. -
Last time someone complain about the Melvin Tan the pianist, why his punishment so light and SAF let him get away easily.
The reply, "he has been punished".
crap answer. -
aiyah, they always use the same template to answer dat u cannot stop but wonder if its self-generated one
-
I disagree. He was indeed punished. It was the court who had decided on the degree of punishment meted out. The people answerable should be the Ministry of Defence, Minister for Defence and all relevant bodies. not Melvin TanOriginally posted by Ponders:Last time someone complain about the Melvin Tan the pianist, why his punishment so light and SAF let him get away easily.
The reply, "he has been punished".
crap answer. -
Just like sbst275, you ask him one thing, he gives you another.
-
What i mean is, the person was asking the circumstance beyond which Melvin Tan got off quite lightly. As in he wants to find out why he is treated "differently".Originally posted by LinYu:I disagree. He was indeed punished. It was the court who had decided on the degree of punishment meted out. The people answerable should be the Ministry of Defence, Minister for Defence and all relevant bodies. not Melvin Tan
But the answer was, "he was punished".
but the question has so far been answered though, by other sources. -
Same lah. The Police Force under them. Does it matter?Originally posted by LinYu:PAP??? -
The difference lies in the degree of punishment. Most of the guys who tried to evade NS was punished severely, and he pays that "token sum of money". If you say government no bias, you very blind.Originally posted by LinYu:I disagree. He was indeed punished. It was the court who had decided on the degree of punishment meted out. The people answerable should be the Ministry of Defence, Minister for Defence and all relevant bodies. not Melvin Tan
He was indeed punished. Difference is in the above paragraph that some Singaporeans are not happy about. -
haha i thot we are supposed to be talking about bombs
-
Hm.
Typical Singapore ways..
And then we will all DIE and our souls will all be paiseh when others souls from others countries come and say how did they die. -
Oh? So you noticed that?Originally posted by ditzy:Just like sbst275, you ask him one thing, he gives you another. -
yesterday i strike lottery?Originally posted by shade343:Oh? So you noticed that? -
I think they forgot they replied few days ago, they reply again and again not answering the question. haha.
March 1, 2006
SAF and police assure public of bomb disposal safety
WE REFER to Mr Neo Poh Goon's letter 'Bomb squad slow to respond to threat' (ST, Feb 20).
We would like to assure Mr Neo that the SAF and the police treat all cases involving explosives and ordnance seriously and work closely together to handle such cases. When the police receive a call of suspected explosive devices, our officers will be immediately dispatched to the site to ensure public safety by throwing a cordon around the object and if necessary, conduct evacuation. The officers, after identifying the ordnance, will inform SAF's Explosives and Ordnance Disposal (EOD) unit to dispose of the item.
There are different levels of response in such situations depending on the assessed level of risk. In this case, had it been determined that the threat to public safety was high, the EOD team would have been activated immediately. However, it was determined that the object was a World War II three-inch round which did not contain any high explosives. The SAF's EOD teams are organised such that they can react to a range of contingencies, including concurrent threat situations. Such tiered capabilities are necessary in the present climate of a heightened threat of terrorist attacks. We thank Mr Neo for his feedback and want to assure the public that both the SAF and the police are well prepared and committed to ensuring their safety at all times.
Col Benedict Lim,Director Public Affairs,Ministry of Defence, and Ms Audrey Ang, Assistant Director Media Relations,Singapore Police Force -
whoever served NS before, would know the SOP.Originally posted by chunyong:aiyah, they always use the same template to answer dat u cannot stop but wonder if its self-generated one
There's always a template for everything. -
Another answered but not answering case.
Sadly, i was also a victim of their price increase..... $60 to $157.
What i hate most is that there wasn't any warning, i just received a letter mid february telling me the increase from March 1.
Why sharp rise in rent for post boxes?
MY COMPANY has rented a post office box at Serangoon Central for many years. Recently, this post office renovated the PO boxes and informed us the rental would increase from $95 to $210 per year.
Rental increase is a common practice in business but it has to be reasonable.
Those who used the pre-renovated post office boxes were aware that they were still in very good working condition. So why waste money to renovate them? Singapore Post should not use the renovation of their facilities as an excuse to increase the rent.
When my staff asked the post office why the sudden increase in the rent, the reply was that it was to give us better service. What sort of better service?
Anyone who rents a post office box knows that it is just to receive mail. There is no attendant to service us at the mail boxes. Besides, the space at the newly-renovated Serangoon Central Post Office boxes is cramped compared with the pre-renovation facility.
To add insult to injury, the post office stated in its letter that if we did not wish to renew it, just inform it by letter.
Singapore Post should value the fact that it has a monopoly over our mail services, so it should try to give customers value for money in its services and not hold customers hostage by increasing charges arbitrarily.
You can be sure I will switch my mail service to another if there is an alternative. Frankly, I miss the old government-run post office services. Though they were not sophisticated, I was satisfied with their services.
Lin Zen Wen
SingPost boxes' rent based on location
I REFER to 'Why sharp rise in rent for post boxes' by Mr Lin Zen Wen (ST, March 3).
Despite the increasing costs to provide this service, SingPost has not revised the rental rates for the last five years. Before the impending revision, subscribers were charged a flat rate based on two categories, namely CBD/HDB town centres and other areas.
In this revision, we addressed this pricing anomaly to reflect better the cost of offering this service, restructuring the rental rates according to demand and usage (individual or corporate). Corporate subscribers pay an additional $50 per year.
Mr Lin used to pay $126 per year before the revision and not $95 as he stated. To help our subscribers, we have offered those who renew their rentals for longer periods discounts of up to 15 per cent.
Subscribers may review the location of their boxes and consider applying for those in lower demand areas where rentals are lower. They can call SingPost at 68456224/5/6 to seek assistance.
Tay Poh Choo
Vice-President (Corporate Communications & Customer Service)
Singapore Post -
like tt 1 la... they veri slow 1... go army will noe liao...
wait 2 rush, rush 2 wait... -
Getting kinda sick of all these beat-around-the-bush type of replies. They think readers are stupid.
Very insulting.