DBS rebukes Aware president

April 17, 2009

DBS rebukes Aware president

Disregarded code twice

DBS holding an internal review over Josie Lau's conduct

By Wong Kim Hoh

A DAY after becoming president of Singapore's leading women's group, Ms Josie Lau found herself in hot water at work.

OCBC backs DBS stand OCBC Bank backs the position taken by DBS Bank on the need for staff to seek approval before holding office in other organisations. A key concern for financial institutions is possible conflict of interest, especially when someone senior takes on a role in an outside organisation, said OCBC spokesman Koh Ching Ching. ... more 'She breached staff code of conduct' DBS Bank yesterday elaborated on the reasons it was unhappy that Ms Josie Lau (above) disregarded the advice not to take on the role of Aware president. Its spokesman issued this statement: 'THE bank takes pride in the fact that many DBS employees pursue their interests and passion outside work, and are involved with various community/ charity/volunteer organisations in their personal capacity. ... more

DBS Bank, where she is a vice-president, is conducting an internal review over how she disregarded its advice against taking on the top post at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).

On Wednesday night, shortly after Ms Lau, 48, announced that she was the new president, the bank issued a statement making clear that it had told her not to take that position.

The public rebuke shocked not only Aware members who have been dealing with a string of dramatic events recently, but also others who thought it unfair for the bank to say Ms Lau had too much on her plate at work to take on a voluntary position.

Yesterday, DBS Bank revealed that Ms Lau - its vice-president for consumer banking group cards and unsecured loans - had breached its staff code of conduct twice in recent weeks.

She did not tell the bank before running for a spot on the Aware executive committee, revealing that only two weeks after the March 28 annual general meeting (AGM). Yet, the bank decided to support her carrying on as an Aware exco member.

That AGM saw Aware's leadership change unexpectedly when a group of new members showed up and defeated veterans. Then new president Claire Nazar quit suddenly.

Ms Lau did not tell DBS that she was keen to assume the post. DBS said it was only on Wednesday afternoon - just hours before the exco was due to pick the new president - that she made known her intentions.

'We reviewed her request and subsequently informed her that while the bank continued to support her involvement in Aware, we could not support her intention to run for president, given the demands associated with the top post of a leading advocacy group in Singapore,' a spokesman said.

'We are disappointed that Josie knowingly disregarded DBS' staff code of conduct twice. Such an attitude is not one that DBS, or any other organisation, can condone in a leader,' the spokesman said.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27147.3

DBS "reviewing" employee's appointment as AWARE president

DBS "reviewing" employee's appointment as AWARE president
Posted: 17 April 2009 1048 hrs

	Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15"> Josie Lau (seated, front) helms AWARE's new executive committee, partly seen here
	Related News • Women's advocacy group AWARE picks new president • 160 AWARE members call for meeting to question new ExCo • 150 AWARE members seek vote of no confidence in new executive committee

SINGAPORE: As observers reacted with surprise to DBS Bank’s declaration that it did not support employee Josie Lau’s appointment as president of a local women’s advocacy group, the bank on Thursday further revealed that it was “reviewing the matter internally” - after she had "knowingly disregarded" its staff code of conduct twice.

Said a bank spokesperson: “Such attitude is not one that DBS, or any other organisation, can condone in a leader.”

Ms Lau, who is the bank’s vice-president of consumer banking group cards and unsecured loans, was on Wednesday night named the new Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) chief.

Shortly after, DBS issued a statement implying that Ms Lau had gone against its wishes in taking up the post.

Shedding more light on this on Thursday, DBS revealed that Ms Lau had informed the bank on April 13 that she had been appointed to the AWARE executive committee - more than two weeks after the deed was done on March 28.

“She had not sought prior approval for this appointment and thereby breached the staff code of conduct. Nevertheless, DBS made a concession and agreed to support her involvement as exco member,” said the bank spokesperson.

Then, early this week, she told the bank she was aiming for the top post.

The bank reviewed this request and informed her that while it continued to support her involvement in AWARE, “we could not support her intent to run for president, given the demands associated with the top post of a leading advocacy group in Singapore”.

“Banks worldwide are facing very challenging times and her role as VP in the credit card space today is even more challenging, given the environment we are in,” added the spokesperson. “We are disappointed that Josie knowingly disregarded DBS’ staff code of conduct twice.”

Ms Lau declined to comment, with an AWARE spokesperson saying she would speak to the media once things settled down.

The bank’s public rebuke has puzzled some. It was one thing for firms to express concern in private over employees’ involvement in external activities, and quite another to do so publicly, particularly for a senior staff, they felt.

“At the very senior management level, there should be adequate communication about such involvements... In this case, there may be some other issues of which we may be unaware,” said Singapore Human Resource Institute executive director David Ang.

“For DBS to issue such a statement, (the situation) must be of some gravity.”

TODAY understands that under the Banking Act, all bank employees must declare their involvement with external organisations, such as NGOs, to avoid a potential clash of interest.

Banks contacted confirmed the industry practice. Said OCBC spokesperson Koh Ching Ching: “Financial institutions also need to know of potential conflicts for any possible supplier-buyer situations, even for accounts held by non-profit organisations or charities with us.”

The bank respects staff’s “own assessment of their own abilities to balance work, family and community service activities”; still, they are encouraged to discuss their external commitments “if they need advice”.

Within the NGO sector, Ms Lau – who joined DBS in 2004 after 15 years of developing and marketing events with the Singapore Tourism Board – is not alone in incurring employers’ dissatisfaction.

One NGO veteran who declined to be named told TODAY, his employers have from time to time “pressured” him to give up his commitments.

Dr Geh Min, who stepped down last year as Nature Society president, said it ultimately boils down to the trust between employer and staff.

“It’s right for a company to expect commitment and loyalty... it’s up to the employee to convince the company he can juggle (the demands),” said the ophthalmologist who runs her own clinic.

Mr Ang said that even among companies with a policy against staff holding external appointments, most are flexible on the matter.

Citing his own experience as president of the Singapore Manufacturers’ Federation, Singapore Cable Manufacturer chairman Renny Yeo feels such involvement would further hone a person’s leadership and organisational skills, which would in turn benefit the company.

But the bottomline, said Mr Yeo, is whether the company feels the staff is up to the balancing act.

The mantra at DBS, it seems, is no different.

Stressing that the bank “takes pride in” the many DBS employees who are involved in community, charity or volunteer groups in their personal capacity, the spokesperson reiterated that these staff “had sought and obtained prior approval to do so”.

Approval is granted on a case-by-case basis, “depending on the demands of the proposed external appointment and the job responsibilities the individual holds in the bank”.
- TODAY/yb

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27147.2

DBS tells why it rebuked Josie Lau

DBS tells why it rebuked Josie Lau
Fri, Apr 17, 2009
The Straits Times
By Wong Kim Hoh

A DAY after becoming president of Singapore's leading women's group, Ms Josie Lau found herself in hot water at work.

DBS Bank, where she is a vice-president, is conducting an internal review over how she disregarded its advice against taking on the top post at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).

On Wednesday night, shortly after Ms Lau, 48, announced that she was the new president, the bank issued a statement making clear that it had told her not to take that position.

'She breached staff code of conduct'

'THE bank takes pride in the fact that many DBS employees pursue their interests and passion outside work, and are involved with various community/ charity/volunteer organisations in their personal capacity.

These employees had sought and obtained prior approval to do so, in accordance with the bank's staff code of conduct. Approval is granted on a case-by-case basis, depending on the demands of the proposed external appointment as well as the job responsibilities that the individual holds in the bank.

Josie informed the bank of her appointment as Aware Exco member on April 13, over two weeks after she was appointed on March 28. She had not sought prior approval for this appointment and thereby breached the staff code of conduct.

OCBC backs DBS stand

OCBC Bank backs the position taken by DBS Bank on the need for staff to seek approval before holding office in other organisations.

A key concern for financial institutions is possible conflict of interest, especially when someone senior takes on a role in an outside organisation, said OCBC spokesman Koh Ching Ching.

'It is important that financial institutions know of potential conflict of interest for their bank employees as we are required to regularly report to the regulators and our respective boards on any credit facilities to entities where our employees are directors, executive officers, guarantors or sureties,' she said. 'Financial institutions also need to know of potential conflicts for any possible supplier-buyer situations, even for accounts held by non-profit organisations or charities with us.'


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27147.1

The Myth of the Violent Singaporean Protestor

The Myth of the Violent Singaporean Protestor

In the ISD Intelligence Service Promotion Ceremony on 15 April 2009, Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister, Mr. Wong Kan Seng said that they would implement the recently passed Public Order Act "firmly" to deal with those "intent on disrupting public order".

But what does he mean by disruption of "public order"? Prior to asserting that they will deal firmly, Mr. Wong paints a picture of public disruption when he said, "We have just seen the G20 protests in London. Thousands of protestors had taken to the streets, with the more violent among them damaging public property and business premises. In Thailand over the last one year, thousands of protestors have caused grave damage not just to physical property, but to livelihoods and the economy of the country as tourists are staying away. We have also seen on television street battles between protestors and authorities, causing injuries to many people and some have died as a result. I do not believe that Singaporeans would want such violence to happen here, and with what we have seen time and again in other countries, it would be naive of us to believe that nothing untoward will happen during street demonstrations".

There has been no such incidences of violence in the acts of civil disobedience in Singapore. In fact, it is the authorities who had upped their notch of violence in countering the these acts of civil disobedience in recent days.

When the Minister said, "In Singapore, it is only a tiny group of irresponsible and selfish individuals who have been pushing this line of civil disobedience. They do not care for the interests and safety of other Singaporeans; they are only interested in themselves", he tried to draw a parallel between the violent protestors of the United Kingdom and Thailand, to the peaceful protestors in Singapore like Seelan Palay, Shafiie Syahmi and the likes. This is highly misleading and regrettable.

Would the Singapore Police Force now acquire (or have they already acquired) 'non-lethal' devices like the stun shield to counter such protestors of civil disobedience? At the Trussco's exhibition of 'restraining devices' held on the same day as the ISD Intelligence Service Promotion Ceremony, Trussco's CEO, Mrs. Tina Wong said that the Singapore Police Force were "a major end user" of the Taser technology.

Amnesty International in providing a sample of manufacturers of exporters of 'non-lethal' devices, which could be used for torture as well, notes that Defenders Network a company based in Alabama, USA, had sold restraining devices such as Electrified High-Voltage Anti-Riot Shields which could emit up to up to 150,000 volts, to Singapore (among other coutries), because as Defenders Network claims, it can "maintain peace and order without drawing blood or endangering lives".

But are such devices really 'non-lethal' and do they not 'endanger lives'? The use of stun shield has resulted in at least one "unnecessary use of force" death in the USA prison systems. And also, there is the tragedy of Harry Landis, the Texas Corrections Officer. On December 1 1995, as part of the training to use such an electric shield, Landis was required to endure two 45,000-volt shocks. Shortly after the second shock, Landis collapsed and died. An inquiry later revealed that "the electric shock threw his heart into a different rhythmic beat, causing him to pass away".

The ability to burst the trigger and send at least 50,000 volts of electricity, which stuns or causes the death of a protestor, even in the pretext of maintaining "public order", is too much of a responsibility to be given to the police; especially based on a mere hypothesis, when there is no recent history of violent protestors in Singapore.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27146.1

“Zahari 17 Years” continues to be banned in S’pore - BFC

“Zahari 17 Years” continues to be banned in S’pore - BFC

Friday, 17 April 2009

Film maker, Mr Martyn See, submitted six films to the Board of Film Censors on 31 March 2009. The following is the BFC’s letter which was received by Mr See on April 17.

Dear Mr See,

1. I refer to your letter dated 31 March 2009 regarding your submission of six films to the Board of Film Censors (BFC) for classification.

2. Please note that the 2009 amendments to the Films Act are not yet in force. As such, if you would like the BFC to consider the film based on the criteria in the amended Films Act, we would suggest that you collect the films and re-submit them after the amendments come into force.

3. We note that two of the films, “Speakers Cornered” and “Success Stories: Lee Kuan Yew”, were previously submitted and approved by the BFC. “Speakers Cornered” was approved and rated NC16 in April 2008 and “Success Stories: Lee Kuan Yew” was approved and rated PG in May 2007. If the content of the forestate two films has not changed since they were rated, the same ratings will continue to apply. “Riding The Tiger” is a documentary series commissioned by Mica (then Ministry of Information and the Arts) and subsequently aired over Channel NewsAsia in 2000. You may wish to note that Section 40 of the Films Act exempts any film sponsored by the Government from the requirements of the Act. As for the films “Singapore Rebel” and “One Nation Under Lee” we reiterate our suggestion that you collect the films and re-submit them after the 2009 amendments come into force. Should you need more details regarding the films (Amendment Bill), please refer to Second Reading speech on the Films Amendment Bill on Mica’s website.

4. Please be informed that the film “Zahari 17 Years” was previously gazetted by the Minister as a prohibited film under Section 35 (1) of the Films Act as the Minister was of the view that it’s possession or distribution would be contrary to the public interest. As the upcoming amendments to the Films Act do not relate to Section 35 (1), and the Minister has not changed his opinion, “Zahari 17 Years” continues to be a prohibited film. Please note that we will not be releasing this film for your collection as it is an offence for any person to be in possession of a prohibited film under Section 35 (2).

5. Please get in touch with the Customer Services and Operations Division with regards to collecting the rest of the films.

Yours sincerely,

Wang Chee Yann

Head (Films Standards, English)

Board of Film Censors

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27142.1

Former Ren Ci CEO Ming Yi approved several loans to staff (2nd version)

Former Ren Ci CEO Ming Yi approved several loans to staff (2nd version)
By Liang Kaixin, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 17 April 2009 0826 hrs

	Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15"> Ming Yi

SINGAPORE: The sixth day of the trial against former Ren Ci CEO, Shi Ming Yi, threw light on the way staff loans were granted, even though the hospital did not have a formal policy on them in place.

The court on Thursday heard that Ming Yi had approved several loans to various staff.

Among them was Dr Ong Seh Hong who is currently the community hospital's chief operating officer and clinical director of Ren Ci Hospital and Medicare Centre. Dr Ong is also a Member of Parliament for Marine Parade GRC.

When contacted by Channel NewsAsia, the MP said in a letter dated Friday: "I was an employee of GIC in 1999. I was offered by Ren Ci Hospital and Medicare Centre to be Director, Medical & Paramedical Services in January 2000.

"However to leave GIC, I had to pay S$560,000 to settle my outstanding staff housing loan. I agreed to join Ren Ci on condition that I received a loan of S$60,000, to pay off in part the amount of S$560,000 and I paid the remaining S$500,000 from bank loan.

“When I borrowed the sum of S$60,000 from Ren Ci, I was not an MP. It was lent to me as staff, and was part of the terms on which I agreed to join Ren Ci. I have since repaid the sum fully."

The court also learnt that Ming Yi's former aide, Raymond Yeung, was offered an employment contract in 2001, despite his unsuccessful application for an employment pass.

Ming Yi subsequently granted Yeung a S$50,000 loan, even though the latter remained without an employment pass until 2004. This was recorded on Ren Ci's books as a loan made to Mandala Buddhist Cultural Centre.

At issue now is whether Yeung, who is an Australian citizen and only became a Singapore Permanent Resident in 2006, had received the loan as a legitimate Ren Ci employee.

The trial continues.

- CNA/yb

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27140.1

The dissenting civil servant and the online media

The dissenting civil servant and the online media

SINGAPORE - It is not uncommon for the citizenry to express dissenting views of the establishment. Even those within the establishment may harbor such views. The question is - are they able to express such views without fear of backlash from the establishment?

Readers may recall that some time before the General Elections of 2006, the authorities had to come out and reassure the public that their votes are secret despite the presence of a serial number on the voting slip. According to the authorities, the serial number is present as a measure to ensure that the voting slip is authentic. However, the fact remains that not all Singaporeans are convinced of the authority’s reassurance. One would not be surprised to find civil servants among such a group of unconvinced Singaporeans. Thus, there is this niggling fear for their job prospects that go through their heads should they decide to vote for the opposition. Serious attention should be paid to this group of voters in reassuring them the secrecy of their votes. It would be a pity if this fear factor interferes with the actual voting decisions because it is not a sin for a civil servant to express his dissenting opinion at the ballot box.

Casting votes aside, civil servants working in certain government ministries are not allowed to publicly express dissenting opinions on the establishment. Doing so will result in serious repercussions such as dismissal. Chua Beng Huat, currently Professor of Sociology at the National University of Singapore is one such example. Taking up a Director of Research post at the Housing and Development Board, he wrote critical pieces on Singapore politics which subsequently earned him the sack.

And even if the civil servant wishes to express dissenting views in the mainstream media, for instance by writing letters to forums, would their writings ever see the daylight? Our mainstream media is known for its pro-establishment stance, and it doesn’t come as a surprise that many articles critical of the establishment are locked away in the cold storage.

Thus, it is imperative that the online media must step up to fill the void. Of course, those responsible for the running of the online publications should exercise discretion, and advise dissenting civil servants to abstain from revealing their true identities in a bid to protect them from repercussions.

Until the General Elections of 2006, citizenship journalism wasn’t in vogue. Singapore Review was perhaps the only prominent entity that came closest to citizenship journalism. Until then, online forums was the common source for Singaporeans to vent their anger and pent up frustrations. The General Elections of 2006 could be seen as a fire of baptism for citizenship journalism in Singapore. Independent citizen reporters recorded the proceedings of various political rallies, and posted the videos on their websites, and appended their own reports.

The growth of citizenship journalism continued its momentum with the establishment of alternative media sites like The Online Citizen and others. Singapore’s high Internet penetration rate will only play to the advantage of such online media entities.

Whistle-blowing by civil servants alleging wrongdoings or irregular practices within government bodies is virtually unheard of. However, that could change with the proliferation of online media. The mainstream media with its pro-establishment stance is least likely to feature whistle-blowing reports that reflect badly on the establishment. It is likely that online alternative media entities will pick up the baton and cast the spotlight on the alleged government bodies. Of course, the onus is on these online media entities to protect the whistle-blowers.

Thus, it becomes increasingly likely that dissenting civil servants may resort to the online media as a platform to air their views.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27139.1