It’s hip to be green but is there a line between being genuinely concerned about the planet and being an eco poseur?
IT’S been cloudy and raining the past week and I love weather like this.
My bed’s next to a window which I keep open, and I love it when lightning and thunder wake me up at night.
I love the sound of the rain. I love it when the downpour gets so heavy that sheets of it slant past my blinds and raindrops start splattering against my face. I love the mossy smell of dampness seeping up from the ground during a storm, and I love digging deeper under my blanket and going back to sleep. This wet weather is weird for July, but then the world’s weather has gone all screwy.
Floods in summertime Britain and China but heatwaves in Romania, Austria and Bulgaria. Mother Nature has become one capricious old lady.
The most common explanation for all this is global warming. Temperatures around the world are rising because cars, factories, power plants and the like are emitting a lot of carbon dioxide, trapping heat in the atmosphere.
Global warming is said to be the villain behind weather woes from droughts to floods, wildfires to melting glaciers. Some even say it caused 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in the United States.
The thing is, a lot of what constitutes global warming – as well as the green movement itself – continues to baffle me.
Oh, I’ve watched Al Gore’s 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth. He did a good job of explaining global warming. He was also convincing in putting across the message that much of it is caused by humans and that we’ll be in big trouble if we don’t stem the emission of carbon dioxide.
It’s not a view that everyone accepts, but the problem with the green movement for neutral observers like me is how vicious and personal debates always degenerate to.
Green advocates and sceptics alike are so zealous in their views – just read the Internet forums – that they put off more open-minded folk like me who want to find out more about the issues, which are often complex. (Do you really understand how carbon offsets work?)
As I gather, one hot topic right now is whether buying eco-friendly products actually reduces global warming, or is it something one does just to appear “cool”. With celebrities lending their names to the green cause and companies rolling out stylish, expensive earth-friendly products from clothes to bedsheets, has the focus moved from saving the planet to making a fashion statement? There’s a term for people who indulge in this – eco poseurs. The urban dictionary on the Internet defines this as one who “buys all the eco-friendly non-toxic household products, organic local growns, hybrids and other gree’ery’.
“They really do not ‘do’ anything to help our earth, they just purchase
over-priced stuff from companies that try to help. So they wear the hemp and eat the organic, but do they actually take time out of their cell phone lives to give a helping hand?”
TAKE the much-hyped Anya Hindmarch I’m Not A Plastic Bag bag.
The British accessories designer is most famous for her Be a Bag project where customers can get their photographs printed onto her bags. (I’ve got one with my niece’s face on it).
Earlier this year, she worked with a British non-profit organisation to design an affordable, environmentally friendly bag that people could use in lieu of evil plastic bags.
Made of unbleached cotton and sold for £5 (S$15), the bags with the cute logo were snapped up in Britain. Women lined up from 2am to buy them and celebrities were spotted carrying them.
When the bags came to Asia, fights broke out in Hong Kong as women rushed for them.
In Singapore, there were more people on the waiting lists than the number of bags alloted. They are now sold on eBay for many times their price. Fakes have appeared in China.
Kudos to Hindmarch for her contribution to the cause, but what can one say about the consumers? How much of the rush for the bag was because of a genuine desire to use it in place of plastic bags, and how much merely coveting the latest trendy must-have and to be one up on your neighbour because you have the bag and she doesn’t?
You see the same green chic bandwagon mentality in fashion.
The in thing now is for designers to have “eco” lines that boast raw materials – natural silk organza, organic wool – and “ethical” production and manufacturing processes.
All well and good, but their price tags are laughable – $700 silk dresses, $2,000 clutch bags with wooden beads, $5,000 blazers made of cork. Is this what being green is about? Shopping choices, and expensive ones at that?
I’d always thought that the starting point of the green movement was consuming less rather than more. Then again, who am I to sneer at the green chic chick for being insincere?
If Anya Hindmarch’s I’m Not A Plastic Bag bag was dangled before me, I’d grab it too and, yes, because it is trendy and cute. It’s the same reason one of my favourite T-shirts features a huge recycling logo. It’s a cool cause to be associated with right now.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if you’re latching on to the eco cause just because it’s the fashionable thing to do so. It’s better than not being bothered at all. In any case, taking small steps is the only way that we, digits on the planet, can help.
While politicians and big businesses slug it out over the causes and effects of global warming, it’s actually quite simple on the personal level to do your part to bring down global warming. According to Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth website, it’s as easy as this:
Replacing a regular lightbulb with a compact flourescent one; driving less; recycling more; checking that your tyres are properly inflated to improve gas mileage; using less hot water; avoiding products with lots of packaging to cut down on garbage; adjusting your thermostat; planting a tree; turning off electronic devices when not using them.
I’m late in the game, but I’m trying.
The other day, I surprised myself when I was buying doughnuts. The cashier was putting the plastic bag of doughnuts into another plastic bag when I told her I didn’t need it – the doughtnuts could easily fit into another (plastic) bag I was already carrying.
It was no big deal of course, but I did feel virtuous and smug.
And my most important contribution of all to alleviate global warming? I never sleep with the air-conditioner on. I get ventilation from an open window.
Which, of course, is also perfect when it rains in the early hours of the morning, as has been happening.
My reflections:
Have people been too obsess in “going green”? Have we been “going green” just because it is the “hip” thing to do? Well, the author of this article certainly feels so.
She realized that “green” items, which are items that are made of natural materials to cut down on the use of plastics or items to help one cut down on waste, are becoming ridiculously expensive. For example, it costs $2000 for a clutch bag with wooden beads. To the author, people nowadays starts going green because they realize that their friends are starting to eat organic food, carrying recycled material bags. How many people actually are willing to spend money to have the desire to save Earth and not to keep up with the fashion?
Although the author thinks that it is not very good to spend so much to go green only to want to keep up with the fashion, it is better than those who are not doing anything. She believes that rather than spending so much, it might be better to actually return to the conventional of saving Earth, in other words, stop wasting electricity, increasing gas mileage, cut down on items with a lot of packaging.
This is important to those who are constantly spending money to keep with the fashion of going green. It will allow them to reflect on the real need of spending so much and finding out that they can actually possibly help Earth more through practical and costless efforts. To the designers of those ridiculous expensive items, they should also reflect on the real intention of making such an expensive item, is it really to save Earth, or to fill one’s own pocket?
To the general public, this is not too big a problem. If one does not have the means to spend so much on purchasing “green” items, all they can do is to be responsible in their homes and try as best to help reduce the amount of damage on Earth. For those who have got more money, it would be great if they are still willing to spend the money to save Earth and at the same time not neglect the things they can continue to do at home. To the environmentalists, this is a win-win situation as no matter if people spend or do not spend money, they will be informed and hopefully learn to save the Earth they live in.
I personally am not obsessed with going green but I try as best to do my part. I try to turn off lights in the room when there is no one in, or cut down on the amount of air-conditioning I use. However, I do know that there is a limit to how much I can do, so I hope that anyone that reads my blog can learn from the author. It might be difficult but after some time, it would become one’s second nature and it would feel much easier to save Earth.
(499 words)
Saturday, August 4, 2007
Friday, August 3, 2007
Article 5: Shipping feels the heat over dirty fuel fumes (Environment)
Rapped over global warming, industry wrestles with ways to lower emissions. [SINGAPORE] The shipping industry is starting to sweat over global warming after it was revealed recently that it is guilty of producing twice as much harmful emissions as the aviation sector.Global shipping accounts for 5-7 per cent of total global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and 15-30 per cent of all nitrogen oxide (NOx) being belched into the atmosphere. This, when fuel usage in shipping is only about 2-4 per cent of world fossil fuels.The culprit is the quality of “dirty” bunker fuel used by vessels.Two recent studies, one by oil major BP and another by the European Union (EU),suggest shipping emissions could rise by as much as 75 per cent in the next 20 years as world trade growth demands more shipping services. Currently, shipping carries 90 per cent of global trade.A third study by the DP Group estimated that the shipping industry will emit at least 1.2 billion tonnes of CO2 every year by 2011, eclipsing the declining emissions of the aviation industry which currently emits 600 million tonnes of CO2 per year.But this must be put into perspective, argues the managing director of the Hong Kong Shipowners’ Association, Arthur Bowring. “Sea cargo is a necessity, air cargo is a luxury,” he told BT in a phone interview.“Without shipping, half the world would starve, half would freeze and the rest would both starve and freeze,” he said.Mr Bowring’s organisation became an unlikely environmental champion two years ago, when it proposed a one per cent global sulphur emission cap. The issue now is how to lower the emissions, how soon and what is a reasonable level.Historically, according to Mr Bowring, the industry is “dragged kicking and screaming into the regulatory arena and then reluctantly changes its practices”.But this time around it appears to be different, partly because it wasabundantly clear that the first steps to regulate the industry’s emissions by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) were already woefully out of date by the time they came into effect last year and this year.These moves placed a 4.5 per cent global cap on the amount of sulphur in a ship’s fuel and special SOx (sulphur oxide) Emission Control Areas (Seca) where the cap was only 1.5 per cent.The Baltic Sea Seca became operational in May this year and the second – North Sea and English Channel – will come into effect this November.But to put these levels into perspective, the EU, for instance, limits the sulphur content in automotive fuel to 15 parts per million, or 0.0015 per cent.Also the global average for sulphur content in bunker fuel is only 2.8 per cent.The problem is that the fuel used by ships is essentially the leftovers from the crude oil-refining process after gasoline and the distillate fuel oils like diesel are extracted. This leftover is known as “residual fuel”.It was largely seen as a win-win situation until recently, because shipowners get cheaper fuel and the oil majors get rid of their rubbish.Current residual bunker fuel – of which nearly 200 million tonnes is used each year – is the dirtiest fuel in use and emits high levels of not just SOx and NOx, but also volatile organic compounds and particulate matter – all harmful to both human health and the environment.“We burn crap in our ships,” acknowledges Mr Bowring who describes the residual fuel as being “only one step up from the asphalt you put on roads”. While a number of proposals have been tossed into the ring, they basically revolve around two broad camps. Continuing to use residual fuel but lowering the sulphur content either duringrefining or on board the ship using scrubbers and other technology; orswitching completely away from residual to cleaner distillate fuel like diesel.But vested interests at every turn have made this a complicated debate.What will become of the “leftovers” now used as bunker fuel? Are shipowners willing to pay higher fuel costs associated with distillate fuel, now almost double that of residual fuel?Studies have suggested, however, that if the entire shipping industry switched over to distillate fuel, the cost would only be 15-25 per cent more than current residual fuel costs. Still, are consumers prepared to pay more? “The bunker fuel supply industry has many stakeholders who do not view emissions regulations the same way,” according to Douglas Raitt, global FOBAS manager at Lloyd’s Register.The refining industry has estimated that US$130 billion would need to be invested to facilitate a switch to distillate fuel.The refiners have also suggested this switch could result in the creation of an extra 120 million tonnes of CO2.“In effect, this would suggest that we would be decreasing sulphur emissions at the expense of increasing greenhouse gasses,” said Mr Raitt. “If true, is that a solution we want to support?” But he is nonetheless encouraged by the debate which is slowly moving towards a consensus.As a major refining hub, shipping and bunkering port and the sixth-largest shipping registry in the world, Singapore has much at stake in this debate. The Maritime & Port Authority of Singapore is part of an IMO study group formed to complete, “on an urgent basis, a comprehensive and in-depth assessment of each proposal”, it said in response to BT queries.
My reflections:
What is global warming caused by? Yes, the emissions of harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide into the atmosphere, destroying the ozone layer. In this article, it can be seen that actually about 6% of the carbon dioxide and 16% of nitrogen oxide that destroys the atmosphere is actually produced by global shipping.
Global shipping is a huge business which delivers goods around the world. As said by Hong Kong Shipowners’ Association, Arthur Bowring, global shipping cannot be stopped as if it is, “half the world would freeze, half the world would starve, and the rest will both freeze and starve.” This shows how important global shipping is to the global village now.
As one would be wondering, what is the real root of the problem? The real reason why global shipping can produce so much harmful gases is due to the usage of bunker oil. Bunker oil, is the waste after refining oil, a type of oil that is of even lower quality than diesel. This oil emits high levels of harmful gases and is at the same time harmful to organic materials. This is however still in used because oil-refineries considers it as waste and shipping companies can buy is at very cheap prices. This is an important matter as if this type of oil continues being used by ships, the atmosphere would be continuously filled with harmful gases.
In the articles, two solutions were given, first to persuade shipping companies to change to using cleaner distillated oil, or secondly using technology to decrease the amount of harmful gases produced by the residual fuel.
This fact can be used by scientist to find a way to deal with this “waste oil” and at the same time find ways to refine oil in a cheaper way. In this way, shipping companies would not be reluctant in changing to using diesel. Also, it would be useful if people can come up with easy technologies to cut down on the amount of harmful gases released.
From the point of shipping companies, changing the type of oil used would require a certain sum of money and it would be inconvenient. Being businessmen, it is possible that they care for their profits more than the environment. To the environmentalists and the general public, it would be great if the amount of harmful gases can be cut down as this would greatly help in the health and climate problems.
Although it can understood that it would be troublesome for all shipping companies to change to cleaner fuel, they should take into account the amount of damage they are causing the Earth to suffer. Being people living on Earth, if we do not take care of our planet, who else would? From the point of the public, we would greatly appreciate if there is an effort to reduce global warming. Despite being just one out of six billion people, we should do our best to save Earth.
(495 words)
My reflections:
What is global warming caused by? Yes, the emissions of harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide into the atmosphere, destroying the ozone layer. In this article, it can be seen that actually about 6% of the carbon dioxide and 16% of nitrogen oxide that destroys the atmosphere is actually produced by global shipping.
Global shipping is a huge business which delivers goods around the world. As said by Hong Kong Shipowners’ Association, Arthur Bowring, global shipping cannot be stopped as if it is, “half the world would freeze, half the world would starve, and the rest will both freeze and starve.” This shows how important global shipping is to the global village now.
As one would be wondering, what is the real root of the problem? The real reason why global shipping can produce so much harmful gases is due to the usage of bunker oil. Bunker oil, is the waste after refining oil, a type of oil that is of even lower quality than diesel. This oil emits high levels of harmful gases and is at the same time harmful to organic materials. This is however still in used because oil-refineries considers it as waste and shipping companies can buy is at very cheap prices. This is an important matter as if this type of oil continues being used by ships, the atmosphere would be continuously filled with harmful gases.
In the articles, two solutions were given, first to persuade shipping companies to change to using cleaner distillated oil, or secondly using technology to decrease the amount of harmful gases produced by the residual fuel.
This fact can be used by scientist to find a way to deal with this “waste oil” and at the same time find ways to refine oil in a cheaper way. In this way, shipping companies would not be reluctant in changing to using diesel. Also, it would be useful if people can come up with easy technologies to cut down on the amount of harmful gases released.
From the point of shipping companies, changing the type of oil used would require a certain sum of money and it would be inconvenient. Being businessmen, it is possible that they care for their profits more than the environment. To the environmentalists and the general public, it would be great if the amount of harmful gases can be cut down as this would greatly help in the health and climate problems.
Although it can understood that it would be troublesome for all shipping companies to change to cleaner fuel, they should take into account the amount of damage they are causing the Earth to suffer. Being people living on Earth, if we do not take care of our planet, who else would? From the point of the public, we would greatly appreciate if there is an effort to reduce global warming. Despite being just one out of six billion people, we should do our best to save Earth.
(495 words)
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Article 4: Anti-piracy ad campaign targets youth (education)
Pub Date: 26/04/2007 Pub: BT Page: 10Headline: Anti-piracy ad campaign targets youthBy: Tettyana JasliPage Heading: Singapore NewsSubject: Singapore Youth, Singapore Copyright
Only 22% of youth concerned about IP infringement: poll HONOUR Intellectual Property (HIP) Alliance, an Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) initiative, will launch a new advertising campaign today aimed at young people who are engaging in online piracy. The launch coincides with World Intellectual Property (IP) Day. HIP Alliance brings together a group of public and private sector organisations with a common interest in pursuing the need for education on IP. 'The new advertisements have been developed to be more personal and contemporary to increase (youths') understanding of the impact of online piracy on their lives, the original creators and the very content they enjoy,' said Ms Liew Woon Yin, director-general of IPOS. This year, IPOS intends to focus more on the moral and educational aspects. It feels that the educational rather than a prohibition approach, is more likely to have a long term impact. The new campaign focus was developed in view of the findings of the IPOS Perception Study 2007, which investigated young Singaporeans' attitudes towards IP. The IPOS-commissioned study, which was carried out by Blackbox Research Pte Ltd, was conducted through peer investigation, focus groups and an online survey with 630 Singaporeans aged 14 to 35. The key findings of the study are that while local youths agree with the need for IP protection in principle, they do not necessarily walk the talk in practice. Although 82 per cent of young Singaporeans are aware of the importance of IP protection, only 22 per cent, or two in 10 are concerned about IP infringement. Meanwhile, it seems that the 'economic national interest' argument about how piracy and counterfeiting hurt Singapore's economy may not cut it anymore with young Singaporeans: only 45 per cent saw this reason as most important to IP protection, as opposed to 75 per cent who cited supporting local creativity as the most important. According to a report by Channel NewsAsia earlier this month, some $9 billion is lost to piracy every year.
My reflections:
Piracy was something I did not really care about in the past. However during the recent years, I realized, through the media and advertisements in the movies, I realized that it is actually something very serious.
From the article, HIP (Honour intellectual property) is coming with a campaign to teach youths the seriousness of infringing intellectual properties, through advertisements, regarding the impact of online piracy on the lives of youths, the original creators and the content they enjoy. This campaign concentrates more on the educational values and less of the prohibition part of piracy. So, they would not go, “You MUST not infringe intellectual property”, but instead talk more about the consequences of infringing intellectual property, not just on the youths but also the original creators. This would not just teach youths not to infringe IP, but also realize how important the products of the original creators are, and that people respect it by purchasing original copies.
I believe that this is a very good start to encourage youths not to infringe IP through making them think and putting themselves in the shoes of the creators. To the creators, this campaign would be a great help as they would feel that people are respecting their creations more and would come up with more fantastic products.
To the youths, it is a sort of experience to understand the anger that original creators have when they realized that the products they put so much time in is being “stolen” and not respected.
As a youth of this society, through this piece of information, I am better able to feel for the creators and respect their works. Despite some not abiding to the laws of infringement, I must say that the majority of Singaporeans do have integrity and will not succumb to piracy.
To me, the most shocking thing about this article is the last line, “According to a report by Channel NewsAsia earlier this month, some $9 billion is lost to piracy every year.” I think that is very shocking as I never knew that piracy can cause such “damage”.
9 billion is lost because people download music and share files and not buy the original CDs. I hope that people’s attitude would change and stop piracy. Not is a sense that they have to riot or make their message heard, but as an individual, not to use the internet to infringe others creations.
I think that this piece of information is useful to those that are currently infringing intellectual property. They can take this chance to learn about the consequences of succumbing to piracy and how others would feel. Hopefully through the series of advertisement the HIP has came up with, not just youths, but even adults, can learn and get educated on the IT issues that has bothered many original creators.
From the article, I hope that people would get the message about the seriousness of infringing IP and would stop piracy as an individual.
(495 words)
Only 22% of youth concerned about IP infringement: poll HONOUR Intellectual Property (HIP) Alliance, an Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) initiative, will launch a new advertising campaign today aimed at young people who are engaging in online piracy. The launch coincides with World Intellectual Property (IP) Day. HIP Alliance brings together a group of public and private sector organisations with a common interest in pursuing the need for education on IP. 'The new advertisements have been developed to be more personal and contemporary to increase (youths') understanding of the impact of online piracy on their lives, the original creators and the very content they enjoy,' said Ms Liew Woon Yin, director-general of IPOS. This year, IPOS intends to focus more on the moral and educational aspects. It feels that the educational rather than a prohibition approach, is more likely to have a long term impact. The new campaign focus was developed in view of the findings of the IPOS Perception Study 2007, which investigated young Singaporeans' attitudes towards IP. The IPOS-commissioned study, which was carried out by Blackbox Research Pte Ltd, was conducted through peer investigation, focus groups and an online survey with 630 Singaporeans aged 14 to 35. The key findings of the study are that while local youths agree with the need for IP protection in principle, they do not necessarily walk the talk in practice. Although 82 per cent of young Singaporeans are aware of the importance of IP protection, only 22 per cent, or two in 10 are concerned about IP infringement. Meanwhile, it seems that the 'economic national interest' argument about how piracy and counterfeiting hurt Singapore's economy may not cut it anymore with young Singaporeans: only 45 per cent saw this reason as most important to IP protection, as opposed to 75 per cent who cited supporting local creativity as the most important. According to a report by Channel NewsAsia earlier this month, some $9 billion is lost to piracy every year.
My reflections:
Piracy was something I did not really care about in the past. However during the recent years, I realized, through the media and advertisements in the movies, I realized that it is actually something very serious.
From the article, HIP (Honour intellectual property) is coming with a campaign to teach youths the seriousness of infringing intellectual properties, through advertisements, regarding the impact of online piracy on the lives of youths, the original creators and the content they enjoy. This campaign concentrates more on the educational values and less of the prohibition part of piracy. So, they would not go, “You MUST not infringe intellectual property”, but instead talk more about the consequences of infringing intellectual property, not just on the youths but also the original creators. This would not just teach youths not to infringe IP, but also realize how important the products of the original creators are, and that people respect it by purchasing original copies.
I believe that this is a very good start to encourage youths not to infringe IP through making them think and putting themselves in the shoes of the creators. To the creators, this campaign would be a great help as they would feel that people are respecting their creations more and would come up with more fantastic products.
To the youths, it is a sort of experience to understand the anger that original creators have when they realized that the products they put so much time in is being “stolen” and not respected.
As a youth of this society, through this piece of information, I am better able to feel for the creators and respect their works. Despite some not abiding to the laws of infringement, I must say that the majority of Singaporeans do have integrity and will not succumb to piracy.
To me, the most shocking thing about this article is the last line, “According to a report by Channel NewsAsia earlier this month, some $9 billion is lost to piracy every year.” I think that is very shocking as I never knew that piracy can cause such “damage”.
9 billion is lost because people download music and share files and not buy the original CDs. I hope that people’s attitude would change and stop piracy. Not is a sense that they have to riot or make their message heard, but as an individual, not to use the internet to infringe others creations.
I think that this piece of information is useful to those that are currently infringing intellectual property. They can take this chance to learn about the consequences of succumbing to piracy and how others would feel. Hopefully through the series of advertisement the HIP has came up with, not just youths, but even adults, can learn and get educated on the IT issues that has bothered many original creators.
From the article, I hope that people would get the message about the seriousness of infringing IP and would stop piracy as an individual.
(495 words)
Friday, April 27, 2007
Article 3: Top govt officials to get 14-33% pay rise (Politics)
Pub Date: 10/04/2007 Pub: BT Page: 1Headline: Top govt officials to get 14-33% pay riseBy: Chuang Peck MingSubject: Parliament, Singapore Civil Service, Singapore WagesNotes:Tables
First salary revision in seven years will benefit 95% of Singapore's64,000-strong civil servants, with two-thirds getting 3-5% raise [SINGAPORE] The pay of top government officials will rise 14 to 33 per cent as part of a major salary revision for the Civil Service, with the Prime Minister and ministers getting a rise of 25 per cent on average. Announcing the details in Parliament yesterday, the Minister in Charge of the Civil Service, Teo Chee Hean, said the adjustment will take effect this month. The salaries of top civil servants and ministers have fallen far behind those in the private sector, and the revision is a first step to make up the shortfall, he said. The immediate adjustment will lift the salaries of senior permanent secretaries and the starting pay of ministers - the MR4 grade - from $1.2 million to $1.6 million a year, or 73 per cent of a benchmark pegged to the private sector. This is an improvement from the current 55 per cent. The benchmark - now $2.2 million - is set at two-thirds of the median pay of the top eight earners in banking, law, engineering and accountancy, as well as employees of multinational corporations and local manufacturers. A second adjustment at the end of this year will lift the pay of the MR4 grade to 77 per cent of the benchmark. And by end-2008 the government aims to close half of the remaining gap and raise salaries up to 88 per cent of the benchmark. The pay of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who drew $2.5 million in 2006, will go up to $3.1 million this year, said Mr Teo, who is also Defence Minister. This will raise the Prime Minister's ranking among top earners in the private sector from position 164 to 102. President SR Nathan will get $3.2 million, up from the current $2.5 million, while Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, who each made $2.7 million last year, will now be paid $3.04 million each. At the Superscale entry grade - SR9 - the annual pay for young very promising officers in the core Administrative Service will increase 3 per cent to $384,000. The pay at this level is currently near its benchmark, which is pegged to the annual salary of the 15th top earner aged 32 in six professions - banking, law, accountancy, engineering employees of MNCs and local manufacturers. Mr Teo said that because of the booming economy, salaries in the private sector have probably moved ahead of the benchmark, which is based on income-tax data that is two years behind. The pay increases for MR4 grade and above which taper off progressively in percentage terms for higher grades - will be made through adjustments to monthly salaries and annual components. Monthly pay will rise by an average of 15 per cent. The monthly salary of those on MR4 grade will climb 22.5 per cent - from $42,800 to $52,400. Much of the pay increase will be performance-based - especially for ministers and senior permanent secretaries. Close to half - 47 per cent – of their new annual package will be in variable form, up from 34 per cent before the revision. Three changes will be made to boost performance-linked components. The car allowance for senior officers - now 2.5 times the officer's monthly salary – is no longer relevant, Mr Teo said. It will be scrapped and built into the GDP bonus, which is tied to the economy's performance. The President, Prime Minister and Speaker do not receive the car allowance because they are provided with an official car. They will continue to use an official car, but the car benefit will be subject to tax. The GDP bonus itself will be beefed up. It will increase from the current two months' pay to three months' pay if the economy expands 5 per cent. And if the economy grows 10 per cent or more, the bonus will be eight months. The third change is to increase the performance bonus by two months for those at MR4 grade and above to a norm of seven months. The President, Prime Minister, Judiciary and Statutory Appointment Holders, who now get a fixed service bonus of five months instead of a performance bonus, will see their service bonus increase to seven months. Mr Teo said the government has carefully examined the benchmarks and found that they remain sound, after some modification to the benchmark for MR4 seven years ago. 'They follow economic and employment market conditions up and down,' he said. 'After calculating the benchmark figure, we also do a check against the private sector income earners. The ranking of the benchmark against the private sector earners is stable and does not fluctuate widely. The latest salary revision - the first in seven years - will benefit some 95 per cent of Singapore's 64,000 strong civil servants. Two-thirds of them will get a pay rise of 3 to 5 per cent. The revision will cost the government $214 million more in wages. The total wage bill for the Civil Service after the pay revision will be $4.7 billion. All the salary adjustments are non-pensionable, so there will be no increase in pension cost.
My reflections:
An increase in wages for the government officials has caused much talk in Singapore. Some question why they should get a pay rise, some question if that money was from the increment of taxes. According to the article, it can be seen that the increment is in view of closing the gap between the wages of the private sectors and those working in the government. Moreover, the booming economy allowed the government to have funds to increase the pay of the government workers.
This adjustment in wages is quite significant to me as this is the first time I realized that the government is actually very open and transparent. In order to explain to people why they do certain things, they are actually willing to tell us their wages before and after the increment. Yes, although it is quite a lot of money, but I feel that it is all right for the government to do this.
The first reason being the government having done so much for us. The government as been coming up with policies to suit the needs of people as best as they can and this is no simple feat. They would have to consider different race groups, income groups and even ages or gender.
The second reason is that since our economy is doing relatively well, it is all right to increase the wages of the people who helped to achieve this. Hopefully, this increment would also encourage people to work harder and serve for the country.
From the government point of view, it is something good as it would most likely spur government workers to continue and keep up with the hard work. For many ministers, it is also a reward for working so hard. I know this as during a school trip to the parliament, we learnt that the ministers actually debate for up to 8 hours or more non-stop, in order to come up with new plans for the country.
To the people, some might feel unfair or unhappy. They might feel that the government has no reason to take money and increase their own wages. Maybe it might be okay to feel that way but I hope that they would try to understand and view things in a more positive way. Instead of looking at the increment as a money problem, how about looking at it as a form of encouragement and fuel for the government to continue.
Although I am just a teenager and might not know how the adults really feel or what other consequences there might be due this change in wages, from the information I have, I can see that our government is very open and I think they would not mind to answer any questions that people throw at them regarding the issue. All in all, I view this issue as something rather good and not something bad, as my stand is that it something to keep the government running, which would benefit the citizens.
(499 words)
First salary revision in seven years will benefit 95% of Singapore's64,000-strong civil servants, with two-thirds getting 3-5% raise [SINGAPORE] The pay of top government officials will rise 14 to 33 per cent as part of a major salary revision for the Civil Service, with the Prime Minister and ministers getting a rise of 25 per cent on average. Announcing the details in Parliament yesterday, the Minister in Charge of the Civil Service, Teo Chee Hean, said the adjustment will take effect this month. The salaries of top civil servants and ministers have fallen far behind those in the private sector, and the revision is a first step to make up the shortfall, he said. The immediate adjustment will lift the salaries of senior permanent secretaries and the starting pay of ministers - the MR4 grade - from $1.2 million to $1.6 million a year, or 73 per cent of a benchmark pegged to the private sector. This is an improvement from the current 55 per cent. The benchmark - now $2.2 million - is set at two-thirds of the median pay of the top eight earners in banking, law, engineering and accountancy, as well as employees of multinational corporations and local manufacturers. A second adjustment at the end of this year will lift the pay of the MR4 grade to 77 per cent of the benchmark. And by end-2008 the government aims to close half of the remaining gap and raise salaries up to 88 per cent of the benchmark. The pay of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who drew $2.5 million in 2006, will go up to $3.1 million this year, said Mr Teo, who is also Defence Minister. This will raise the Prime Minister's ranking among top earners in the private sector from position 164 to 102. President SR Nathan will get $3.2 million, up from the current $2.5 million, while Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, who each made $2.7 million last year, will now be paid $3.04 million each. At the Superscale entry grade - SR9 - the annual pay for young very promising officers in the core Administrative Service will increase 3 per cent to $384,000. The pay at this level is currently near its benchmark, which is pegged to the annual salary of the 15th top earner aged 32 in six professions - banking, law, accountancy, engineering employees of MNCs and local manufacturers. Mr Teo said that because of the booming economy, salaries in the private sector have probably moved ahead of the benchmark, which is based on income-tax data that is two years behind. The pay increases for MR4 grade and above which taper off progressively in percentage terms for higher grades - will be made through adjustments to monthly salaries and annual components. Monthly pay will rise by an average of 15 per cent. The monthly salary of those on MR4 grade will climb 22.5 per cent - from $42,800 to $52,400. Much of the pay increase will be performance-based - especially for ministers and senior permanent secretaries. Close to half - 47 per cent – of their new annual package will be in variable form, up from 34 per cent before the revision. Three changes will be made to boost performance-linked components. The car allowance for senior officers - now 2.5 times the officer's monthly salary – is no longer relevant, Mr Teo said. It will be scrapped and built into the GDP bonus, which is tied to the economy's performance. The President, Prime Minister and Speaker do not receive the car allowance because they are provided with an official car. They will continue to use an official car, but the car benefit will be subject to tax. The GDP bonus itself will be beefed up. It will increase from the current two months' pay to three months' pay if the economy expands 5 per cent. And if the economy grows 10 per cent or more, the bonus will be eight months. The third change is to increase the performance bonus by two months for those at MR4 grade and above to a norm of seven months. The President, Prime Minister, Judiciary and Statutory Appointment Holders, who now get a fixed service bonus of five months instead of a performance bonus, will see their service bonus increase to seven months. Mr Teo said the government has carefully examined the benchmarks and found that they remain sound, after some modification to the benchmark for MR4 seven years ago. 'They follow economic and employment market conditions up and down,' he said. 'After calculating the benchmark figure, we also do a check against the private sector income earners. The ranking of the benchmark against the private sector earners is stable and does not fluctuate widely. The latest salary revision - the first in seven years - will benefit some 95 per cent of Singapore's 64,000 strong civil servants. Two-thirds of them will get a pay rise of 3 to 5 per cent. The revision will cost the government $214 million more in wages. The total wage bill for the Civil Service after the pay revision will be $4.7 billion. All the salary adjustments are non-pensionable, so there will be no increase in pension cost.
My reflections:
An increase in wages for the government officials has caused much talk in Singapore. Some question why they should get a pay rise, some question if that money was from the increment of taxes. According to the article, it can be seen that the increment is in view of closing the gap between the wages of the private sectors and those working in the government. Moreover, the booming economy allowed the government to have funds to increase the pay of the government workers.
This adjustment in wages is quite significant to me as this is the first time I realized that the government is actually very open and transparent. In order to explain to people why they do certain things, they are actually willing to tell us their wages before and after the increment. Yes, although it is quite a lot of money, but I feel that it is all right for the government to do this.
The first reason being the government having done so much for us. The government as been coming up with policies to suit the needs of people as best as they can and this is no simple feat. They would have to consider different race groups, income groups and even ages or gender.
The second reason is that since our economy is doing relatively well, it is all right to increase the wages of the people who helped to achieve this. Hopefully, this increment would also encourage people to work harder and serve for the country.
From the government point of view, it is something good as it would most likely spur government workers to continue and keep up with the hard work. For many ministers, it is also a reward for working so hard. I know this as during a school trip to the parliament, we learnt that the ministers actually debate for up to 8 hours or more non-stop, in order to come up with new plans for the country.
To the people, some might feel unfair or unhappy. They might feel that the government has no reason to take money and increase their own wages. Maybe it might be okay to feel that way but I hope that they would try to understand and view things in a more positive way. Instead of looking at the increment as a money problem, how about looking at it as a form of encouragement and fuel for the government to continue.
Although I am just a teenager and might not know how the adults really feel or what other consequences there might be due this change in wages, from the information I have, I can see that our government is very open and I think they would not mind to answer any questions that people throw at them regarding the issue. All in all, I view this issue as something rather good and not something bad, as my stand is that it something to keep the government running, which would benefit the citizens.
(499 words)
Monday, February 19, 2007
Article 2: Why so vain? (teenage issues)
It has been noticed that there are more and more teenagers signing up to become members of fitness centers and slimming centers. This is to keep themselves fit and slimmer. There are two groups of teenagers doing this, the females and the males.
The female group of people believes that only by looking or being slim can they look good. An example provided by the article spent 600 dollars on losing 4 kg and up to half of her salary on beauty products and treatments.
The other example in the article, a male, signed up to become a member of a fitness center in order to look and feel confident. This was achieved by building on his biceps and chest muscle, making them more “noticeable”. This is as he felt that after becoming fitter he was not as shy as before and was treated better due to him becoming more attractive, according to the person interviewed.
After reading the article, I realized that teenagers nowadays cared a lot about their appearances. They go to a long and expensive extent to make themselves look good and most importantly, feel good.
Why is it important to look good and feel good about oneself? It is the thing that makes us able to feel a sense of satisfaction and achievement after doing something good. Moreover, feeling confident is the key to doing and making things we do successful.
The idea of being vain to get confidence and looking good has its strengths. You are able to feel good by looking good and this can be achieved quickly. This is helpful in situations such as giving a talk because just by tidying up one’s appearance, he would be able to gain a little more attention and confidence.
However, I feel that it is not good to gain confidence by paying money, especially so for teenagers. This is as we as teenagers change quickly and one cannot guarantee that he will look the same forever, being fit now does not mean you will look as muscular next time. If one gets his confidence from looks, does that mean that he will have no confidence next time?
Actually, I do feel for those who try to get confidence through being vain and looking good. Sometimes, it is just very hard to get the confidence from yourself. Also sometimes, we might feel that we do not look good enough because we are born like this.
When this happens, tell yourself that this is what makes you unique and different from others, and then you will feel good about yourself and love your looks. This is just one way out of the many others I do not know to make one happy.
Personally, I feel that people have rights to be vain sometimes however, they should know when to stop, because it is not how you look, but what you do and how you treat others that would leave a mark in peoples’ memories.
Article from: http://enewslink.asia1.com.sg/brsweb/read_1.brsw?this=result&QDT=1&QFLST=HD%3AHG%3APD&DB=BT%3AST%4006-07&QSTR=Why+so+vain&DTSTR=%28%28PD+%3E=+20060919%29+and+%28PD+%3C=+20070219%29%29&PSZ=10&MAXL=200&SUMY=1&HLT=0&LSTN=0&ID=000058646@ST06
The female group of people believes that only by looking or being slim can they look good. An example provided by the article spent 600 dollars on losing 4 kg and up to half of her salary on beauty products and treatments.
The other example in the article, a male, signed up to become a member of a fitness center in order to look and feel confident. This was achieved by building on his biceps and chest muscle, making them more “noticeable”. This is as he felt that after becoming fitter he was not as shy as before and was treated better due to him becoming more attractive, according to the person interviewed.
After reading the article, I realized that teenagers nowadays cared a lot about their appearances. They go to a long and expensive extent to make themselves look good and most importantly, feel good.
Why is it important to look good and feel good about oneself? It is the thing that makes us able to feel a sense of satisfaction and achievement after doing something good. Moreover, feeling confident is the key to doing and making things we do successful.
The idea of being vain to get confidence and looking good has its strengths. You are able to feel good by looking good and this can be achieved quickly. This is helpful in situations such as giving a talk because just by tidying up one’s appearance, he would be able to gain a little more attention and confidence.
However, I feel that it is not good to gain confidence by paying money, especially so for teenagers. This is as we as teenagers change quickly and one cannot guarantee that he will look the same forever, being fit now does not mean you will look as muscular next time. If one gets his confidence from looks, does that mean that he will have no confidence next time?
Actually, I do feel for those who try to get confidence through being vain and looking good. Sometimes, it is just very hard to get the confidence from yourself. Also sometimes, we might feel that we do not look good enough because we are born like this.
When this happens, tell yourself that this is what makes you unique and different from others, and then you will feel good about yourself and love your looks. This is just one way out of the many others I do not know to make one happy.
Personally, I feel that people have rights to be vain sometimes however, they should know when to stop, because it is not how you look, but what you do and how you treat others that would leave a mark in peoples’ memories.
Article from: http://enewslink.asia1.com.sg/brsweb/read_1.brsw?this=result&QDT=1&QFLST=HD%3AHG%3APD&DB=BT%3AST%4006-07&QSTR=Why+so+vain&DTSTR=%28%28PD+%3E=+20060919%29+and+%28PD+%3C=+20070219%29%29&PSZ=10&MAXL=200&SUMY=1&HLT=0&LSTN=0&ID=000058646@ST06
Happy Chinese New Year
Well,
It is the time of the year again to celebrate Chinese New Year.
Everyone would be older and more matured....
Anyway here is wishing everyone a Happy New Year!
It is the time of the year again to celebrate Chinese New Year.
Everyone would be older and more matured....
Anyway here is wishing everyone a Happy New Year!
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Article 1: Hibernating Animals Suffer Dangerous Wakeup Calls Due to Warming (environmental issues)
This is an issue, not concerning us humans, but how animals suffer. It has been noticed that winters are getting milder and this causes animals which hibernate through winter to wake up earlier than usual. This means that they do not hibernate as long as before, one full winter, but instead, a shorter winter.
To animals which hibernate, this process is an important one. In the winter, food for the animals is scarce, causing trouble when the animals try to look for food. By hibernating, the animals are able to conserve the energy which they stored in their fats. Moreover, by hibernating, the animals sleep through winter and do not move about, allowing them not to lose any energy.
So what does it mean for the animals to wake up earlier than usual? It means that the animals are abnormally active. This causes them to lose energy stored more quickly than they can find food. Moreover, as mentioned, food is scarce, making it practically impossible for them to find food.
Looking at the consequences of a shorter, milder winter, we cannot help but wonder why this happening is. Well the answer is simple, “Global Warming”. Yes, global warming is causing our winters to be shorter. Although we as humans might not be greatly affected by it, animals are suffering, especially those which hibernate.
One example will be hedgehogs in England. Due to the changing climate pattern, hedgehogs gave birth later than usual. This resulted in the hedgehog pups not being able to put on enough weight, or in other words, store enough energy to sleep pass the winter.
I personally feel that the animals are very pitiful as they are suffering because of something mostly caused by humans, Global Warming. It is quite unfair that other creatures on Earth are suffering because of us. Polar caps are melting and many species of animals are decreasing due to weather changes. After reading this article, I really wish to stop Global Warming, but I as an individual cannot do anything much. But as a group, we should not harm animals anymore and instead try to preserve their natural habitat. We might not be able to help them by giving them food or providing shelter, but we should not harm them by damaging the environment. We can help by reducing Global Warming. This can be achieved by reducing the use of electricity and CFC products.
This is quite a grave environmental issue as there is a possibility that after a few generations of this type of occurrence, it might be possible that the particular type of animal goes extinct. This would affect our ecosystems and it might be damaging to Earth. Therefore, it is important that we try as best to stop or slow down Global Warming.
Think of yourself waking up early because you are suffering from a problem that someone else caused and you will understand and have empathy for the poor animals out there suffering due to a shorter winter.
Article from: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070202-groundhog.html
To animals which hibernate, this process is an important one. In the winter, food for the animals is scarce, causing trouble when the animals try to look for food. By hibernating, the animals are able to conserve the energy which they stored in their fats. Moreover, by hibernating, the animals sleep through winter and do not move about, allowing them not to lose any energy.
So what does it mean for the animals to wake up earlier than usual? It means that the animals are abnormally active. This causes them to lose energy stored more quickly than they can find food. Moreover, as mentioned, food is scarce, making it practically impossible for them to find food.
Looking at the consequences of a shorter, milder winter, we cannot help but wonder why this happening is. Well the answer is simple, “Global Warming”. Yes, global warming is causing our winters to be shorter. Although we as humans might not be greatly affected by it, animals are suffering, especially those which hibernate.
One example will be hedgehogs in England. Due to the changing climate pattern, hedgehogs gave birth later than usual. This resulted in the hedgehog pups not being able to put on enough weight, or in other words, store enough energy to sleep pass the winter.
I personally feel that the animals are very pitiful as they are suffering because of something mostly caused by humans, Global Warming. It is quite unfair that other creatures on Earth are suffering because of us. Polar caps are melting and many species of animals are decreasing due to weather changes. After reading this article, I really wish to stop Global Warming, but I as an individual cannot do anything much. But as a group, we should not harm animals anymore and instead try to preserve their natural habitat. We might not be able to help them by giving them food or providing shelter, but we should not harm them by damaging the environment. We can help by reducing Global Warming. This can be achieved by reducing the use of electricity and CFC products.
This is quite a grave environmental issue as there is a possibility that after a few generations of this type of occurrence, it might be possible that the particular type of animal goes extinct. This would affect our ecosystems and it might be damaging to Earth. Therefore, it is important that we try as best to stop or slow down Global Warming.
Think of yourself waking up early because you are suffering from a problem that someone else caused and you will understand and have empathy for the poor animals out there suffering due to a shorter winter.
Article from: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070202-groundhog.html
Hi I am a new blogger...
Hi,
This is my very first blog and this is meant to be for my english assignment....
But I might use this to blog and continue blogging despite the assignment ending.
So I hope whoever who reads my blog will like it!
This is my very first blog and this is meant to be for my english assignment....
But I might use this to blog and continue blogging despite the assignment ending.
So I hope whoever who reads my blog will like it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
