Woman minister.....finally

The first time I met Mrs Lim Hwee Hua was at a food centre in Serangoon Gardens. The year was 2006. The event was Singapore's 15th General Election.

For us, it was a lazy Sunday brunch after church. For Mrs Lim and her entourage, it was a Pre-election walkabout to touch base with the people. While the all-white ensemble was an impressive sight to behold, I did not pay much attention to it because firstly, I did not live in that area; secondly, politics did not appeal to me much then. Besides, I was more interested tucking into my Char Kway Teow and Roti John.

But I almost fell off my stool when Mrs Lim approached to shake my hand. Unlike other casual-social types of handshake where a limp, lifeless hand meets yours and is withdrawn quickly, Mrs Lim extended a warm, firm, palm-to-palm handshake while maintaining eye contact throughout. Nothing communicated self confidence, sincerity and camaraderie more than this one gesture. She then smiled and said "Please support us."

I was bowled over. Totally.

That single encounter changed my views on politics and politicians. Of course, I had always been a fan of Dr Vivian Balakrishnan and Mr Teo Ser Luck after attending seminars where they graced the event as guests of honour or keynote speakers. But I only saw them as top government officials, albeit good looking ones :0)

Through Mrs Lim Hwee Hua, I began to see politicians as humans; not just policy-makers. Notwithstanding the odd black sheep in every political arena, I began to see that there are people who really wish to make a difference in the lives of others.

With her promotion to a Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, Mrs Lim has broken the so-called invisible glass ceiling to become the first full-fledged woman minister in Singapore. Her credentials and vast experience will see her contributing at the national level but I believe she will also be able to provide a woman's perspective on many policy issues.

I also believe that Mrs Lim, like her handshake, will continue to lead and serve in a warm, sincere and steadfast manner.

What the prawns??!!!

In a debacle involving 6 American tourists, an insidious seafood stall and a hard-nosed stall assistant, the ugliness of our local mentality stuck in the colonial era was played out on a busy Saturday night at one of our tourist hot spots, Newton Food Centre.

Hoping to impress upon his friends the "safe, clean and honest" city-state, Mr Rigby must have felt exceedingly abashed when presented with a bill of $491 for his dinner. Almost $500 for a party of 6 at a hawker centre? Did the diners feast on out-of-this-world delicacy drizzled in ginseng gravy or foie gras or perhaps caviar whipped up hawker centre style?

No, they merely ordered 8 tiger prawns, 4 crabs, baby squids, half a steamed chicken, 4 bottles of beer and fruit juices. The usual run-of-the-mill fare we can find at Lau Pat Saat, Chomp Chomp or East Coast Lagoon Food Centre.

It seems that the protagonists of this saga are from the crustacean family - tiger prawns. At the listed price of $8 per 100g, the 8 prawns would have to weigh an average of 375g each to cost $239. But are we splitting hair here?

Or is the colonial mentality that tourists, particularly those of Caucasian descent are wealthy and free with their money still alive and kicking in this day and age? If so, hawkers at Newton and other tourist attractions have to sit up and take note that the economic recession is felt more deeply in Europe and the Americas than in China and India. With the falling dollar, $491 Singapore Dollars would have meant much more in US Dollars exchange.

Current recession aside, it is also no longer true that 'gwai-louhs' have inexhaustible spending power and are thus easy to fleece. It has not been that way for a long time. Over the last few decades, the spending power of Asians has increased dramatically with profound economic, social, political, cultural and psychological transformations. Although Bill Gates and Warren Buffet still count as the richest men on earth, many Asians now wield tremendous spending power beyond what their forefathers ever dreamt possible.

In today's economic climate and with the integration of foreigners into our midst whether by employment or by marriage, an average Caucasian can be seen to be as dime-watching as the next guy. Indeed, I know of friends who would rather take the MRT than take a cab to get around the island. It is common to see a head or two of blond hair (not the chemically-dyed variety) bobbling in the sea of shoppers at Giant or NTUC Supermarket. Caucasians clad in our national costumes of T-shirts, shorts and flip flops milling about food courts and hawker centres is also an ubiquitous sight today.

In the Newton fiasco, NEA has officially ordered the suspension of the errant stall for 3 months while the staff in question is barred from working in the food centre for a year. Some people attribute the 'harsh' and prompt sentence to the fact that the complaint was lodged by Caucasians. There, you see? Colonial mentality again. Sigh.

I say it's because NEA is looking at the big picture. The Newton saga is the third negative exposure on our tourism in almost as many months. Last December, it was the Singapore Flyer. Last month, it was the Merlion. Now, tiger prawns are hogging the headlines.

It is high time someone stepped in to right our image a little. Right about now and rightly so, I surmise. Right.

It takes 3 days to learn a vice...

I was on duty at the Career & Education 2009 exhibition fair at Suntec yesterday evening. Being second day of the fair, the crowd was understandably thinner than the much publicised 120 000 visitors on its opening day on Thursday.

Interestingly, the booths that garnered the most responses were the Integrated Resorts - Marina Bay Sands and Resort World at Sentosa. Attractively decked out with casino gaming tables to boot, these booths did indeed command a second look. Even exhibitors like us could not keep our curiosity in rein.

At the gaming table, the dealer smoothly dealt the cards. Chips were offered to bystanders who wanted to have a go at the game. I do not know how I ended up with a place at the table and was astounded when dealer looked at me and asked if I wanted a card to follow.

Huh? I went all red and turned around to see if he was speaking to the person behind me. My colleague nudged me and whispered "You have 16 points. Want another card or stay this way?" Huh? Huh? What game is this? Twenty one? Oh, I see.

Actually, I did not see. I was confused because I'm no gambler. I didn't even know how 4D or Toto worked until they were explained to me. I guess I'm one of those who has to live by the sweat of my brow and not depend on windfalls or any other chance money-making opportunity.

However, it did not take me long to get the hang of the game. It was really fun because we were playing with mere chips, not real money. I won a few times but lost many more times over. The Chinese saying came to mind: It takes 3 years to learn to be good but only 3 days to learn vices. Well, it took me only 10 minutes to learn the game. But it was all for fun and experience. No money was used so I was not technically gambling and it is unlikely I will be found at that table again.

The game blackjack has been described as a game of chance with elements of skill and the thrill of playing your hand individually against the dealer while in group setting. To win, you need to beat the dealer without busting. You bust when your cards total to more than 21 and you lose automatically. The winner is whoever has closest to a total of 21. You reach 21 by adding up the values of the cards.

It can be very addictive as I had experienced. If one is on a roll, he might want to continue the winning streak. The appetite grows, the bets get bigger. If he is losing, he might want to recoup his losses because surely, the cards will get better? This is probably how compulsive gamblers lose everything they have, including their homes and families in the hope of a better card.

The IRs can be good for our economy judging by the tens of thousands of jobs created and the revenue each tourist dollar will bring. Our government has assured us on its thorough research into the project and how a slew of social safeguards and the National Council on Gambling will be set up. The control measures put in place will be self-righting and the damage, if any, will be minimal. Time will tell. Let's hope moral values and social order will not be largely eroded in time to come.

As for me, I will continue to be 'blur' in the gambling arena. Someone has asked me to learn mahjong as it has been said to prevent dementia in old age. Er, thanks but no thanks. I think I'd rather do cross-word puzzles or blog or even attempt primary school math problem sums. Now, that would really stave off idleness and inactivity!

Is Chivalry Dead?

Whenever someone mentions chivalry, the oft associated 3 words are: chivalry is dead along the lines of 'cash is best', 'dress for success' or 'service above self'. These 3 words are so well quoted that they seem to have infused the hearts and minds of everyone - particularly women. I am no exception. Gulp!

To thoroughly discuss 'chivalry', we will need to span many pages of this blog and engage in a great deal of debate in the variety of men vs women, Mars vs Venus, etc. You get what I mean. But I shan't expound on something that dates back to the middle ages because I finally believe chivalry is still alive and kicking as I speak, um, type.

I was at a bookstore last weekend. A harried-looking lady was at the payment counter trying to balance her armload of assessment books (presumably for the little girl next to her), some pens, pencils, correction tapes, rulers and "Bob the Builder" CD-Roms. Why she hadn't heard of a shopping basket I wouldn't know but there she was, trying to juggle all those items while trying to fish for her wallet. Precariously, I might add. Very precariously.

Murphy's law won. She dropped half her load with a loud thud and spilled the other half across the counter. Hassled and embarrassed but she didn't seem to know what to do next! To organise the disaster on the counter or the floor first? Just when I thought I should be a good Samaritan, I spied an old spindly hand reaching down to pick up each item from the floor.

Chivalry on 2 legs, albeit knob-kneed and laced with varicose veins. This man had to be in his 70s, I thought. He handed the wayward items to her reverentially and nodded when she mumbled her appreciation.

I don't need further examples of chivalry. That man is my knight in shining armour.

Mathematics and Me

I just found out an undeniable truth. It is sad but so totally indisputable because it has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt. My mathematical abilities are only of primary 3 standard. That realization would send a lot of adults into a tizzy and perhaps vehement denial but it just confirms what I'd known about myself all along.

Since my child started primary school, I've been the one guiding him in his homework and revisions. Primary 1 maths was easy enough. So was primary 2. Last year posed a little more challenge but hey, I managed to solve all the questions with a little aid from teaching resources and answer guides <(sneaky giggles)>.

Yesterday was a day of reckoning. There were at least 3 questions that befuddled me. Why do they set such mind-boggling questions?? I grumbled more than once as I gnawed the end of my pencil to a messy stump. Not a pretty sight. My boy just raised his left eyebrow at me and shrugged as if to say, "You tell me. You've been through the same education system."

Yes, I have. The whole nine yards, in fact. But I do not recall my primary 4 questions being so tough. That said, it's also true that I'd always been a typical 'Arts' student: more comfortable with the likes of Charles Dickens, Shakespeare and Robert Browning than anything with digits or formulas.

I was even advised by my Maths lecturer to drop the subject at A levels. He said I should just concentrate on my strong subjects and not 'waste time' trying to figure out Sine, Cosine, Tangent and Cosecant. So much for motivation and encouragement. But I forgive you, Mr Seah. You only meant well.

Okay, back to the mind-boggling questions. I managed to make sense of the other two but this one really takes the cake.

When Peter is 10 years old, his father is 4 times as old. How old will Peter be when his father is 3 times as old as he is? The answer should be 15 years old but for the life of me, I can't figure out why or how? Is there anything wrong with Peter's father? Or the question?

It's probably just me. Sigh!