Yaacob still daydreaming about his “sound” & “robust” system

Yaacob still daydreaming about his “sound” & “robust” system

Despite the fact that Singapore’s worst food poisoning outbreak occurred during his tenure as Minister of Environment, Mr Yaacob Ibrahim was adamant that his “system” was “sound”.

Speaking to reporters at the launch of NEA’s $8 million recycling fund on Wednesday morning, Environment Minister Yaacob Ibrahim said penalising stallowners with a ‘C’ grading or below would be ‘too harsh’.

‘There are about 5,000 hawkers of variant qualities and backgrounds. We must not run away from the fact that the grading system already in place is robust and sound,’ he said. (read article here)

As far as I can remember, the markets and hawker centers 20 years ago are dirtier than the present ones and there was never an incident of somebody dying from food poisoning after consuming food sold there.

There was no grading system and the environment minister then was probably paid only 10% of Minister Yaacob’s present salary.

If the grading system is “robust” and “sound” as alluded by Mr Yaacob, how did this tragedy happen?

Is Mr Yaacob suggesting that there might be external migitating factors contributing to the incident?

Mr Yaacob said a food poisoning outbreak, such as the one which broke out earlier this month at a temporary market in Geylang Serai, could occur as long as there were lapses.

I concur that there were indeed grave lapses in the supervision and maintenance of the temporary market which lies under the purview of the management committee.

No matter how “perfect” the grading system may be, it will not work if the management committee does not perform its duties to ensure regular spring-cleaning and eradication of vermins at the market’s premises.

The verdict is still out on the exact cause of the two victims’ deaths. Though NEA found “lapses of food hygiene” at the Indian rojak stall, they were unable to establish a link to the mass food poisoning.

Could the rats and the chemicals used in to eradicate them a probable cause? So far the the authorities have been surprisingly mute on this possibility.

Assuming that all stalls at the market were graded a “A”, but the premises are poorly maintained and infested with rats, is this acceptable to Mr Yaacob?

What is Mr Yaacob doing to ensure that these management committees do their jobs?

Are there any legislation in place to punish committees which have been negligent and shoddy in their work?

Shouldn’t these temporary markets be graded too so that consumers can make an informed choice whether to patronize them.

The present hygiene grading system is obviously obsolete and ineffective. What exactly does “A”, “B” and “C” mean? Are stalls with a “C” grading of higher risk of food poisoning?

In my humble opinion, Mr Yaacob should replace the grading now with a simple “pass” or “fail”.

Stalls given the “pass” grade by NEA are considered hygienic, clean and safe enough for its food to be consumed.

At the same time, all hawker centers and temporary markets should be graded too to give their respective management committees a greater sense of ownership and responsibility.

They will be held accountable for any lapses in the maintenance of the premises. Fines can be imposed on errant officers and repeated offenders will have their centers closed down.

Everybody has the role to play in ensuring public hygiene to make Singapore a clean, safe and gracious place to live in.

While the public has a duty to practise personal hygiene in public places, the roles supervising and enforcement authorities must not be negated too.

Even after a major crisis of such castastrophic proportion, Mr Yaacob still hasn’t woken up from his deep slumber.

To put it bluntly, if your “system” is so “sound” and “robust”, 2 innocent lives would not be lost!

It’s time to wake up, Mr Yaacob! You have screwed up big time! Stop the “wayang” to pull the wool over Singaporeans, we are not idiots!

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27686.1

NEA CEO’s open letter: Full of empty rhetoric and short of substance

NEA CEO’s open letter: Full of empty rhetoric and short of substance

I refer to the letter sent to the media by NEA Chief Executive Officer Andrew Tan which was published on 18 April 2009 by The Straits Times (read letter here)

While I applaud Mr Tan for his promise to step up NEA’s vigilance and enforce higher standards of public hygiene on all food outlets, there is no way we can move forward unless the mistakes unearthed by the Geylang Serai food poisoning outbreak are acknowledged and addressed.

Mr Tan’s lengthy article is full of empty rhetoric on NEA’s past efforts to maintain public hygiene in Singapore, but stop short of admitting culpability on the part of both the market’s management committee and NEA itself.

According to Mr Tan, the number of food poisoning cases in Singapore is “very low”. Over the last three years, there has been an “average of only four food poisoning incidents” a year.

I have serious doubts about the accuracy of the quoted figure. Food poisoning cases are hardly reported to the authorities by doctors unless there is suspicion of a major outbreak like the Geylang Serai case.

As we have no real figures on the number of actual cases of diarrhoea caused directly by poor food hygiene, it is inappropriate to use it as a measure of NEA’s track record in upholding public health and hygiene.

While Mr Tan has taken conscious efforts to explain NEA’s grading scheme of food hygiene in his letter, he had failed to allay public concerns about its effectiveness and the four month delay in handling out of the updated decals to the Geylang Serai market hawkers.

I am also bemused by Mr Tan’s clumsy attempts to exonerate the Geylang Serai market management committee from blame over its abject failure to maintain the cleanliness and hygiene of the market’s premises.

Mr Tan wrote that “despite the best of efforts put in by the Temporary Market Management Committee in implementing its cleaning regime and in tackling the rat infestation problem, the problem had persisted.”

I hope Mr Tan is not trying to sound sarcastic here. Contrary to Mr Tan’s erroneous belief, the management committee has been sitting on the problem since the market was set up in spite of numerous complaints from the stallholders themselves. What they could have easily done in three years was accomplished by a team of pest controllers in less than a week.

This is a perverse judgement coming from a public official paid by taxpayers. It is perverse because NEA should act in the interest of the public at all times instead of shielding the culpable parties from blame.

As an enforcement authority, NEA has the powers to identify the members of the management committee and prosecute them for lapses in food and environmental hygiene under the same law which they used to bring the Indian rojak stallholder to court.

Though NEA is not directly responsible for the food poisoning outbreak, lapses in its enforcement of public hygiene at the market have contributed to the tragedy.

Mr Tan should be gracious enough to admit the shortcomings of NEA and apologize to the public for failure to prevent the outbreak from occurring.

Singaporeans do not need any more empty words and promises from the authorities. What we want to see most is accountability, justice and transparency - accountabilty in taking responsibility for one’s missteps, justice in ensuring the culprits are punished and transparency in revealing the findings of the internal inquiry to the public.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27419.1

NEA’s CEO reveals that Geylang Serai market is run by PAP Kampong Ubi CCC!!

NEA’s CEO reveals that Geylang Serai market is run by PAP Kampong Ubi CCC!!

After keeping the news under wraps for almost 3 weeks, NEA CEO Andrew Tan has finally let the cat out of the bag over the background of the Geylang Serai Market: it is built and managed by a PAP grassroots organization - Kampong Ubi Citizens Consultative Committee (CCC)!!

In a letter sent to the media, Mr Andrew Tan wrote:

“When markets and hawker centres are being upgraded, grassroot organisations and their advisers can choose to have a temporary market which is not provided for under the Government’s Hawker Centres Upgrading Programme.

If so, they also carry the responsibility of keeping the temporary market clean to meet NEA standards. However, NEA will intervene if it assesses the need to do so in the interest of public health.

In the case of Geylang Serai Market, the Kampong Ubi CCC decided to build and manage the temporary market. Despite the best of efforts put in by the Temporary Market Management Committee in implementing its cleaning regime and in tackling the rat infestation problem, the problem had persisted.”

I believe Mr Tan is trying to be diplomatic here so as not to offend the PAP.

The market management committee has been “managing” the market for 3 years. How can they fail to eradicate the rats which is easily accomplished by pest controllers in less than a week!

If this represents the “best” effort put in by the Kampong CCC, then I really worry about the other temporary markets which are run by these grassroots organizations.

The market management committee is guilty of negligence on at least three counts:

1. Failure to tackle the chronic rat problem.

2. Failure to call for spring-cleaning of the market when it should be done every four months.

3. Failure to maintain general cleanliness and environmental hygiene of the premises.

Why didn’t NEA take action against the management committee earlier since it claimed its officers conduct spot checks on temporary markets pretty often?

Who in the management committee should answer for the lapses of hygiene at the temporary market?

From what know, the management committee reports directly to its advisor PAP MP Dr Ong Seh Hong.

Is Dr Ong aware of the chronic hygiene problems in the Geylang Serai temporary market which is located in this ward? He should have detected the problem himself had he been conducting his walk-abouts in his constituency frequently.

It is most unfair and unjust that MOH and NEA found fit to haul the Indian Rojak stallholder to court on shaky grounds of “lapses in food and environmental hygiene” while they dare not even censure Kampong Ubi CCC and its advisor for failure to maintain the cleanliness and hygiene of the temporary market.

Each individual hawker at the Geylang Serai temporary market is in charge of only the food and environmental hygiene at their respect stalls.

Ultimately, the management committee is in charge of the overall cleanliness of the place. Cleaning of the premises as well as removing offending pests such as rats lies within the purview of the committee.

I sincerely implore NEA to prosecute the management committee of the Geylang Serai temporary market including its advisor PAP MP Dr Ong Seh Hong for dereliction of duties and gross negligence leading to castastrophic lapses in food and environmental hygiene which are of far greater proportion and significance compared to that of the Indian rojak man.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27242.1

Just admit you screwed up, Yaacob!

Just admit you screwed up, Yaacob!

One week after the mass food poisoning at Geylang Serai first broke out, Minister of Environment and Water Resources Dr Yaacob Ibrahim has finally spoken. (interestingly one day after I slammed him for “missing in action“)

‘What has happened is totally unacceptable. As far as I am concerned, it’s outrageous that this has happened, and we must make sure it doesn’t happen again” he thundered. (read article here)

Strong words indeed, Dr Yaacob, but where were you when the tragedy happened?

As the minister in charge of NEA, Dr Yaacob should be on the ground inspecting the premises and visiting the victims in the hospital on the very day itself if not the day after, but he was nowhere to be seen or heard.

Even if he is not available, the next highest official such as his Permanent Secretary Tan Yong Soon should have stepped forward to fill his shoes. Again, he wasn’t around. (or is he in Paris now for another cooking course?)

Such a delayed lacklustre response is completely unacceptable from the highest paid Environment Minister and Permanent Secretary in the world.

As expected, the state media moved in swiftly to do the damage control work for its political master by describing how on the ball the NEA is by beefing up cleanliness checks on all 109 hawker centres it manages and inspecting 3 other temporary markets.

Why put up a “wayang” now to exonerate itself from any responsibility when this preventable disaster would not have occurred if they had been more viligant on the ground? Has NEA been sleeping on its job?

What’s the point of inspecting the markets now only after two lives have been lost? It is obviously a publicity gimmick to restore public confidence in these eating outlets.

Dr Yaacob said the stepping up will ensure there are no hygiene lapses and that a ’sound regime’ was in place but it will continue to be reviewed.

The result of this “sound regime” is for all to see for themselves. Had it been adequate, how could it fail to detect the hygiene problem with the Indian rojak stall?

How can NEA continue to distance itself from the fiasco as if they are not at fault by shifting the blame to the temporary market’s management committee? How do they account the 61 rats which has been caught at the premises? Did they appear suddenly overnight from nowhere?

I concur with Mr Yaacob that what has happened is totally unacceptable and outrageous. It is unacceptable to have even one mortality from gastroenteritis in a developed country like Singapore and it will even be more outrageous if nobody is held responsible for it.

Sorry to be blunt here, but this is a big screw-up and there is no way Dr Yaacob can escape from it. Just admit it, Yaacob, you SCREWED UP! In other Asian democracies like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, the minister in charge will probably issue a public apology before tendering his resignation. (In Japan, he may even commit harakiri in shame)

Fortunately for Dr Yaacob, he is in Singapore where the threshold for accountability is very much lower. He can take consolation from the example of his fellow colleague Wong Kan Seng who screwed up big time too and is allowed to get away pretty much unscathed.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=26535.1

Much needed cleanup finally done by NEA

Much needed cleanup finally done by NEA

Friday, 10 April 2009

Khairulanwar Zaini

The Geylang Serai temporary market was a somber place when I visited it yesterday. Surrounding two foreign workers helping the cleanup efforts were the shuttered food stalls. The cleaners were scrubbing the floors between the empty tables.

Looking grim too were some stall owners who were present. The cleanup, originally slated for next week, had been brought forward by the Geylang Serai temporary market’s management in response to the recent food poisoning incident. Most stall owners were receptive of the cleanup efforts, underlying the much needed confidence of customers who have concerns about the hygiene conditions of the market.

Restoring confidence

After the mass poisoning, the tenants - including those from the wet market and textile shops - were subjected to stringent checks by the NEA officers; the food stalls at the hawker centre were accorded the most attention, with the health officers thoroughly going through the various nooks and crannies. Mr Wahab, a chicken rice seller, said that the NEA officers, whom he claims spend an average time of 10 minutes on each stall, also advised the stall owners to throw away any unnecessary items from their freezers to avoid any potential contamination.

Although it may mean two days of loss income, most of the stall owners present were appreciative of the long-term benefits that this clean-up can bring. “It will restore the confidence of our customers,” said a neighbouring chicken rice seller, Madam Lin, 52. Mr Salim, who was tending to his textile shop, said that even though he does not sell any consumable food items, the clean-up effort was a step in the right direction. It will ensure that customers are “not in uncertainty and are fully confident that not only are the food stalls clean, but the entire Geylang Serai temporary market is clean too!”

Many stall owners took the opportunity to go beyond the recommended NEA guidelines. A couple of them were seen layering a fresh coat of paint to the pipes and walls of their stalls, out of their own expenses and despite being only two months away from a move to the new Geylang Serai market. Madam Hasinah, who sells nasi padang, hopes that with the new paint, her stall is not only clean, but looks presentable as well.

Why was cleanup not done earlier?

However, many raised concerns that the clean-up should have been done with more regular frequency. Madam Hasinah took issue with the “sudden” manner the spring-cleaning was brought forward; she received notice from the management committee about the new cleanup dates only a day before, on Tuesday morning. Her husband criticized the knee-jerk nature of the change of dates, saying that it was undertaken “only after something has happened.”

Pak Wan, a vegetable stall owner from the wet market, recalled that these washings were done once every two months at the previous wet market.

The stallholders all confirmed that this is the “first time [a] 100% check” is done since the temporary market was established, save for minor NEA initiatives such as an anti-cockroach campaign held six months ago which did not entail any stall closure.

While Pak Wan suggested that the cleanliness of this temporary market was better than at the old market, Mr Wahab said that “each stall should be responsible for their own hygiene and cleanliness standard”, particularly with the wet market separated only by a narrow corridor. He said the presence of raw vegetables and food attracted pests, although he was reassured by the new double-storey market which will separate the food stalls and market stalls on two different levels.

Moving forward

The stall owners were not concerned that this incident may adversely affect the collective reputation of the market. Their regular customers do not seem unduly worried, they said. Madam Hasinah said she still “received orders despite the closure.” However, one mee goreng seller, Mr Sadik, expressed his reservations. He said that his business has been affected and that he was finding it hard to “get new customers.”

Madam Lin expressed a desire to move on from this unfortunate episode, although she admitted that it will be difficult given the severe fallout, particularly for the families affected. Mr Wahab expressed sympathy for his fellow stall owner, whom he said was “unlucky” after “40 years of selling” without incident; although he agreed with the need for a punishment, Mr Wahab was also against depriving completely the rojak seller of the only livelihood he has known for four decades.

The question on Singaporeans minds now is: how much of the blame should NEA bear for the market’s filthy conditions? Now that lives have been lost, the knee-jerk cleanup might just be too little too late for the families of the deceased.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=26490.1