Jobless may hit 300,000

Jan 20, 2009

By Robin Chan

A NEW Credit Suisse report has predicted an astonishing 300,000 jobs could be lost in Singapore this year and next.

Most of the affected would be foreigners, who would then have to leave the country, leading to a drop in Singapore's population, it said.

But other economists and industry body heads say the Credit Suisse figure is extreme, even in an unprecedented crisis such as this one.

Monday's report was written by Singapore-based Credit Suisse economists Cem Karacadag and Kun Lung Wu.

They estimated that notwithstanding government action, a deep, economy-wide recession will mean that 160,000 jobs could be lost in the services sector, another 100,000 from manufacturing and about 40,000 in construction over this year and next.

Most of the job losses would be from the 725,000 new jobs created over the past five years and were filled mainly by foreigners, who make up a quarter of the population here.

'As harsh as our assumptions may seem, they only imply that the economy gives up all of the jobs it created in 2008 and a portion of the new jobs in 2007,' they wrote.

Of the total, 200,000 would be foreigners and permanent residents (PRs) who, assuming they leave Singapore, would reduce its population by around 160,000 to 4.68 million.

The drop in population would have serious implications for any economic recovery as it would lead to a fall in private consumption, a surge in unemployment to 5.6 per cent in 2010 - it was 2.2 per cent last September - and a plunge in residential property prices.

The figures represent a loss of about 10 per cent of Singapore's workforce of just under three million. By comparison, the Asian financial crisis led to job losses of over 30,000, or about 1.4 per cent of the workforce.

However, other economists say the numbers are far too bearish - even given the severity of the global crisis. OCBC economist Selena Ling said: 'The socio-economic implications of that would be severe... The figures discount the Government policy responses which would kick in before we get to that stage.'

CIMB-GK economist Song Seng Wun said: 'Our labour growth has been well above trend... so job losses of that magnitude are not unimaginable.

'But the Government has indicated that it is willing to dip into the reserves, and it has shown a strong response to the crisis right from the word go.'

Still they believe that in a worst case scenario, job losses here could reach 100,000.

President of the Singapore Manufacturers' Federation Renny Yeo also disputed the numbers. He said Singapore has seen growth in higher-end manufacturing industries such as biotech, and renewable energy which are not as susceptible to a dip in consumer demand. The manufacturing sector employs about 230,000.

The report comes just days before the Budget announcement on Thursday, which will set the tone for how the Government plans to tackle a worsening recession.

In Parliament on Monday, ministers faced questions from MPs over the job market. Acting Minister for Manpower Gan Kim Yong said that job losses this year could exceed 30,000, while Minister for Trade and Industry Lim Hng Kiang said more than 30,000 new jobs would be created this year.

[Saving this article to see how accurate the predictions are. If true, the impact of a decreased population on the domestic demand will be a crippling on efforts to jumpstart the economy. We shall see.]

Partying cuts dementia risk

Jan 20, 2009

LONDON - KEEPING a full social calendar may help protect you from dementia, researchers said on Monday.

Socially active people who were not easily stressed had a 50 per cent lower risk of developing dementia compared with men and women who were isolated and prone to distress, they reported in the journal Neurology.

'In the past, studies have shown that chronic distress can affect parts of the brain, such as the hippocampus, possibly leading to dementia,' Hui-Xin Wang of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, who led the study, said in a statement.

'But our findings suggest that having a calm and outgoing personality in combination with a socially active lifestyle may decrease the risk of developing dementia even further.'

An estimated 24 million people worldwide have the memory loss, problems with orientation and other symptoms that signal Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia.

Researchers believe the number of people with dementia may quadruple by 2040, underlining the importance of better understanding the condition.

The Swedish study involved 506 elderly people who did not have dementia when first examined. The volunteers were given questionnaires about their personality traits and lifestyles and then tracked for six years.

Over that time, 144 people developed dementia with more socially active and less stressed men and women 50 per cent less likely to be diagnosed with the condition.

'The good news is, lifestyle factors can be modified as opposed to genetic factors which cannot be controlled,' Dr Wang said. 'But these are early results, so how exactly mental attitude influences risk for dementia is not clear.' -- REUTERS

Microbot to swim in arteries

Jan 20, 2009

PARIS - IN 1966, the movie 'Fantastic Voyage' recounted the tale of doctors who are miniaturised along with a submarine and injected into the body of a Soviet defector, sailing up his bloodstream to destroy a brain clot that imperils the VIP's life.

The improbable storyline - and the equally improbable casting of sex icon Raquel Welch as a scientist in a wetsuit - invited the audience to suspend their disbelief and enjoy a good sci-fi romp.

More than 40 years later, some of the futuristic potential of 'Fantastic Voyage' has taken a step closer to realisation, thanks to a remarkable achievement in miniaturisation unveiled on Tuesday.

There's no submarine or Raquel Welch, but instead a motorised robot that its inventors believe is small enough to be injected into the human bloodstream.

One day, the remote-controlled bot could carry sensor equipment for observation work, relaying images back to surgeons.

Or it could become a tiny surgeon, cutting away blood clots, reaming out clogged arteries or repairing damaged tissue, its inventors hope.

The 'microbot' measures just a quarter of a millimetre, or 'two or three human hairs wide,' said lead scientist James Friend, from the Nanophysics Laboratory at Monash University, Australia.

'We are looking for something that can be placed in human arteries, especially in locations where it can't be done with the technologies that were around previously,' he told AFP.

Conventional methods of 'keyhole' and other minimally invasive surgery today use tubes called catheters, which are inserted into body cavities and arteries.

But catheters are rigid and despite their small size can still puncture thin arterial walls.

In a paper published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, Friend's team describe prototype work on a motor based on piezo-electricity, the energy used in quartz watches, upmarket cigarette lighters and gas-stove lighters.

Piezo-electric materials are ceramics or crystals that generate a voltage in response to mechanical stress.

In this case, the materials vibrate a corkscrew-like microstructure inside the bot that then drives a 'propellor' comprising soft flagella.

Like a swimming bacterium - but guided externally by remote control - the robot would make headway against the bloodstream, at least in blood vessels where the flow is not too great, the inventors hope.

The device could transmit images, deliver microscopic payloads and, eventually, carry out surgery, said Dr Friend. It would then be retrieved by syringe at the point of entry.

'For the moment, we are going for observation, because it is the easiest thing to do,' said Dr Friend. 'From that point on, we will go for other kinds of operations, mainly snipping and cutting.' If the device breaks down, it would return downstream to the point of entry and then be picked up, or it could be recovered by micro-catheter, he said.

The team has produced prototypes of the motors and is now looking at how to improve the assembly method and a mechanical device that moves and controls the micromotor.

But years of work probably lie ahead before it is used on a human patient.

In a link with 'Fantastic Voyage,' the microbot has been baptised Proteus, carrying the same name as the miniaturised sub in the movie.

The moniker was chosen by readers in a 'name-that-bot' poll on the technology website Wired, said Dr Friend. -- AFP

Israeli tail, US dog

Jan 20, 2009

By Gwynne Dyer

MR EHUD Olmert really doesn't care any more. He is serving out his time as Israel's prime minister until next month's election, but then he will spend a long time fighting the corruption charges that forced him to resign, and he won't be going back to politics afterwards even if he wins. Not after two bloody, futile wars in three years, he won't. So he's very angry, and he tells it like it is.

On Jan 8, he had a problem. United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was going to vote for a United Nations Security Council resolution that called on both Israel and its Palestinian enemy, Hamas, to accept a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. Indeed, she had been largely responsible for writing it, and Mr Olmert was furious. He wanted more time to hammer Hamas, so he phoned up Mr George W. Bush and yanked on his choke-chain.

According to Mr Olmert's account of what happened, given in a speech on Jan 13: 'I said, 'Get me President Bush on the phone'. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said, 'I don't care: I have to talk to him now'. They got him off the podium, brought him to another room, and I spoke to him.'

'I told him, 'You can't vote in favour of this resolution.' He said, 'Listen, I don't know about it. I didn't see it. I'm not familiar with the phrasing'.' So Prime Minister Olmert told President Bush: 'I'm familiar with it. You can't vote in favour."

Mr Bush did as he was told: 'Mr Bush gave an order to Dr Rice and she did not vote in favour of it - a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organised, and manoeuvred for,' said Mr Olmert triumphantly. 'She was left pretty shamed, and abstained on a resolution she arranged.' The Security Council passed the resolution 14-0, but the US, its principal author, abstained.

Senior Israeli politicians are usually much more circumspect about the nature of their relationship with the occupants of the White House, and Mr Olmert's colleagues were appalled that his anger had led him to speak so plainly. It is one thing to talk to the President of the United States that way. It is quite another thing to reveal to the American public that Israeli leaders talk to US presidents in that tone of voice.

The Bush administration, deeply embarrassed, tried to deny Mr Olmert's account of the conversation. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that the story was 'just 100 per cent, totally, completely not true', and White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said more cautiously that 'there are inaccuracies' in Mr Olmert's account of events. Mr Olmert's office replied curtly that 'the Prime Minister's comments on Monday were a correct account of what took place'. He really doesn't give a damn any more.

There is little reason to doubt Mr Olmert's story: He may be extremely cross, but why would he make it up? After all, he did get his way. And there is every reason to doubt the Bush administration's denials. Not only does the story humiliate Mr Bush personally, but it gives wings to the suspicion, already widespread in the US, that under Mr Bush, the Israeli tail has consistently wagged the American dog.

Merely to mention this issue is still to court accusations of anti-Semitism, but the fear of such accusations that once silenced any serious examination of Israeli influence on American foreign policy has dwindled in the past few years. Indeed, Mr Olmert's little indiscretion has opened up a wider question: is it normal for Israeli leaders to speak to American presidents like this?

There can be little doubt that Mr Ariel Sharon, Mr Olmert's predecessor, also spoke to Mr Bush in a bullying way, because he bullied everybody. Did Mr Binyamin Netanyahu give orders to Mr Bill Clinton? Probably not, because silken menace is more his style, but he certainly got his way almost all of the time. Did the Mr Yitzhak Shamir talk to Mr George H.W. Bush that way? He wouldn't have dreamt of it, and the senior Bush would never have stood for it.

These discussions usually end up being about the alleged power of the 'Jewish lobby' over US foreign policy, and in Congress it is obviously huge. The vast majority of the members of Congress will always vote for Bills that involve aid or support for Israel, in many cases because they know what will happen at the next election to those who don't. But the key foreign policy decisions are made in the White House, not in Congress, and the presidency is different.

At the top, it really depends on who the president is. President Ronald Reagan always gave Israel everything it wanted, whereas Bush senior forced Mr Shamir to start talking to the Palestinians after the first Gulf War and paved the way for the Oslo accords and the 'peace process'. The US is still a sovereign country, and it can choose its own Middle East policy if it wishes.

Which way will it go under the new administration that takes office today? Well, can you imagine Mr Barack Obama letting an Israeli prime minister talk to him like that?

The writer is a London-based independent journalist.

Turbulence hits AirAsia's airport plan

Jan 20, 2009

KLIA operator's main shareholder trying to get govt to review go-ahead

By Leslie Lopez

KUALA LUMPUR: - The controversy over a plan by budget airline AirAsia to build its own airport is exposing a major problem that ails corporate Malaysia - how the dominance of state-controlled agencies often stifles entrepreneurship.

The wrangling also highlights the government's inability to rein in poor- performing public enterprises and pursue policies to maximise the use of resources, economists and bankers say.

Unless the government moves quickly to resolve the public feuding between state-controlled airport operator Malaysia Airports Bhd (MAB) and AirAsia, it could undermine the country's tourism sector.

'Especially in these times of crisis, the issue is how well does the country maximise its resources. Building a new airport to resolve this squabble isn't the solution,' said a CEO of a local stockbroking firm.

AirAsia, one of Malaysia's more successful private entities, says the current low-cost terminal located near the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) in Sepang would not be able to cope with passenger and fleet growth by 2013.

AirAsia's aggressive chief executive Tony Fernandes predicts that the airline will handle 60 million passengers in four years' time and have a fleet of 184 aircraft.

He also says that MAB's plans to expand its facilities in KLIA will not be completed in time.

Since it would not have any say in the new facilities that MAB intends to build, AirAsia fears that landing and other charges could rise. It thus announced a plan to build its own airport to keep expenses low.

Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's Cabinet had given AirAsia the green light for this new airport at Labu in Negeri Sembilan, roughly 8km away from KLIA. But that is just part of the story.

AirAsia had tried to negotiate a better deal with MAB, but why the latter did not try hard enough to keep its major customer happy remains a mystery. There are suggestions that the problem may be with MAB's main shareholder, government investment fund Khazanah Holdings. AirAsia's rapid growth has partly come at the expense of national carrier Malaysia Airlines, in which Khazanah holds a majority interest.

In recent weeks, Khazanah officials have lobbied senior Finance Ministry officials to get the government to review its decision on the Negeri Sembilan airport.

But this has received mixed reactions.

While proponents of Khazanah say that it is merely protecting its investments in MAB and Malaysia Airlines, others believe the investment agency is crowding out private enterprise. Khazanah dominates the national economy with controlling stakes in dozens of companies, such as transportation, medical services, finance, property and utilities.

Economists have long argued that this domination has led to inefficiency in policymaking, which is often skewed in favour of government-linked entities.

The turf war aside, there are strong arguments against a new airport. Detractors of the proposal say the KLIA was purpose- built to allow for another three satellite terminals. A new airport would also mean additional expenditure for transport infrastructure and duplication of resources.

What Datuk Seri Abdullah's administration ought to do is to play the role of referee effectively, analysts say.

If the government is of the view that a new airport would be a waste of resources, it should get MAB to negotiate with AirAsia, even if it means giving the latter wide autonomy to operate within KLIA. Under such an arrangement, the government would be able to protect its investment in the airport operator and at the same time allow AirAsia to grow profitably.

ljlopez@sph.com.sg

[Maybe AirAsia might do better from Singapore, but their market is Malaysia, and they still need to land at airports there. This is still typical of doing business in Malaysia, where politics crowd out commonsense and the common good.]

An open & hard-headed approach

Jan 20, 2009
SINGAPORE PENAL SYSTEM

In a recent article in the Law Gazette, Law Society president Michael Hwang argued that Singapore is 'sadly lacking a principled and transparent penal policy'. Law Minister K. Shanmugam rebutted this in Parliament yesterday, in reply to a question posed by MP Lim Biow Chuan.
MR HWANG in his article in the Law Gazette asserts that:

# Detailed statistics on crime and punishment should be published. Not publishing such statistics has prevented social scientists from undertaking adequate research on the causes of crime and the effects of current penal policies on prisoners.

# This has resulted in our system being unprincipled.

# Rigorous research with full access to relevant information will help us decide on issues like the effectiveness of capital punishment.

I will deal with each of the three assertions.

# Statistics not published?

THIS assertion is questionable for two reasons:

One, Mr Hwang does not make clear what is the data - which would help in penal research - that he is referring to.

Two, law enforcement agencies such as the Singapore Police Force and Central Narcotics Bureau do publish crime and drug offence statistics regularly. Where there is public interest to be served, additional relevant information is collected and disseminated.

In addition, it should be noted that Home Team departments also undertake qualitative and quantitative research, often in collaboration with independent researchers, on topics relating to crime, punishment and criminal behaviour. Further, as a matter of practice, assistance is given to researchers (including students) who wish to do serious research and such research has been done. To suggest that there are inadequate published statistics and that that has prevented proper research is untenable.

# The lack of statistics has led to our penal system being unprincipled?

SINCE the basis of the assertion (that we do not publish statistics) is itself not clear, this further conclusion is equally questionable. Further, any objective analysis of our penal system will show that the system is based on sound practical philosophy and principles, which have been made clear several times.

While we take a tough stand on crime, we also believe strongly in compassion and rehabilitation. These principles underpin our approach to prescribing punishment and sentencing, the treatment and rehabilitation of prisoners when they are in prison, and the reintegration of ex-offenders back into society.

The Government's approach to prescribing punishments is a matter of public record. During the Second Reading (in 2007) of the amendments to the Penal Code, our approach was again restated clearly.

In brief summary, these are as follows: First, the type and quantum of punishment should provide sufficient flexibility to the courts to mete out an appropriate sentence in a particular case; second, the prevalence of the offence; third, the proportionality of the penalty to an offence, taking into account its seriousness; and fourth, the relativity in punishment between related offences.

On sentencing, our courts have set out the applicable principles. The approach is not based exclusively on either deterrence or retribution alone. Rather, the approach to sentencing an offender is to consider both these aspects, and also take into account other considerations such as: potential for rehabilitation; suitability of the punishment for each individual offender; and the nature of the offence committed.

Hence, both in prescribing punishments and sentencing offenders, much thought has been given to how justice can be best secured for each individual offender.

As for rehabilitating prisoners, we believe strongly in rehabilitation and we believe that the process of rehabilitation should start even while the sentences are being served. Thus, during incarceration, inmates who are genuinely willing to change are given education, training and rehabilitative opportunities that will better help them to reintegrate into society after their prison sentences.

Our focus on reintegration of ex-offenders back into society continues after the prisoners are released. The Yellow Ribbon Project (YRP), set up to create awareness on giving second chances to deserving ex-offenders and generate acceptance of ex-offenders into the community, has been widely lauded by international experts, and has received an honourable mention at the 2007 United Nations Grand Award. Coupled with the YRP was the setting up of a Yellow Ribbon Fund which contributes to the development and implementation of reintegration programmes for ex-offenders.

A key measure of the success of our rehabilitation and re-integration programmes is our recidivism rate, which is now one of the lowest in the world.

Another example of the successful rehabilitation and reintegration programmes for offenders is the Home Detention Scheme. Deserving inmates are released earlier, at the tail-end of their sentences, and placed on electronic monitoring to work or study. Prisoners on Home Detention have lower recidivism rates compared to the general population.

Thus far from being unprincipled, our penal philosophy has been carefully thought through and has been articulated publicly several times. Theoretical arguments on our penal policy, bereft of any reference to these key aspects in our system, may make for good sound bites. But they do not have any real merit.

In evolving our policies, we take into account the views of parties involved in the administration of justice, including the courts, law enforcement agencies, civic interest groups, the legal profession, academia and the Law Society.

# A definitive answer to the debate on capital punishment?

MR HWANG'S suggestion is that publication of detailed statistics will lead us to a possibly conclusive answer to the debate on capital punishment.

The debate on capital punishment is not going to be settled on the basis of statistics. Leaving aside the fact that it is not clear what statistics are said to be lacking, I should point out that all capital punishment cases are matters of public record in Singapore and the media usually widely covers capital punishment cases. Each criminal case heard before a court is also a matter of public record.

On the issue of capital punishment itself, the reality is that there is no universal consensus on such punishment, and there is unlikely to be such consensus any time soon. Serious and bitter debate on capital punishment has raged on in many countries. The philosophical and ideological chasms that separate the proponents and opponents of capital punishment are quite unbridgeable. Both sides marshal powerful arguments.

On an issue like this, the Government has to take a stand. And the Government believes that the death penalty should be retained. A Straits Times survey conducted a few years ago reported that 95 per cent of Singaporeans supported the retention of the death penalty.

Our firm position on crimes and the considerable benefits of such a stand to our society can be illustrated by reference to the drug situation. In a region where drugs are a very serious problem, Singapore has kept the problem very much under control and is in fact almost unique in battling it successfully so far.

Why have we succeeded so far, when so many others have not? It is because we took a practical, hard-headed approach to the problem and tackled it decisively. In this context, the introduction of the death penalty for drug trafficking has, we believe, had a deterrent effect. There are no widely prevalent syndicated drug activities linked to organised crime in Singapore, in contrast to the hierarchical and organised drug syndicates and cartels in various countries. As a result of our policies, thousands of young people have been saved from the drug menace.

Singaporeans appreciate the safe environment here. And the international community has taken note of our success in maintaining law and order. In 2008, the Institute for Management Development World Competitiveness Yearbook ranked Singapore first in personal security and private property.

In closing, let me assure Members that our approach to penal policy is both principled and transparent. And quite fundamentally, the approach has been shown to work, ensuring the safety and security of our citizens. We will continue to review our approach and ensure that it remains relevant and effective.
-------
Far from being unprincipled, our penal philosophy has been carefully thought through and has been articulated publicly several times. Theoretical arguments on our penal policy, bereft of any reference to these key aspects in our system, may make for good sound bites. But they do not have any real merit.

Worried about imported hives

Jan 18, 2009

ATWATER (California) - BEEKEEPERS who are battling a mysterious ailment that led to the disappearance of millions of honeybees now fear the sting of imported Australian bees that they worry could outcompete their hives and might carry a deadly parasite unseen in the United States.

The US Department of Agriculture has allowed shipments of Australian bees to resume despite concerns by some of its own scientists.

Australia had been airfreighting the insects across the Pacific for four years to replace hives devastated by the perplexing colony collapse disorder. But six weeks ago the Australian government abruptly stopped the shipments, saying it could no longer be certain the country was free of a smaller, aggressive bee that has infested areas near the Great Barrier Reef, US officials said.

Early this month, the USDA decided to permit the bee shipments to resume with some precautions, and the first planeloads arrived in San Francisco last Monday.

Beekeeper Ken Haff of Mandan, North Dakota, says he fears the foreign hives could kill off his apiary.

'We've got enough problems with our own bee diseases that we don't know how to treat, and they open the border to a whole new species that could carry God knows what,' said Mr Haff, a vice president of the American Honey Producers Association. 'That's a total slap in the face for us.'

Shad Sullivan, a bee wholesaler in California's Central Valley, said that in the four years he has imported bees from Australia, he has found that the hearty imports outlive domestic bees that have been weakened by pesticides, pests and diseases.

'If the bees were truly carrying something that bad, I would have been the first to get it,' Mr Sullivan said as a thick cloud of the buzzing insects flew overhead. 'I just haven't seen those kinds of devastation.'

Domestic honeybees feed on most flowering plants, and are vital pollinators for many food crops.

However, domestic bee stocks have been waning since 2004, when scientists first got reports of the puzzling illness that has claimed up to 90 percent of commercial hives and has been labeled colony collapse disorder.

That's also the year the USDA allowed imports of Australian hives, and scientists have been investigating whether Australia was a source of a virus tied to the bee die-off.

Entomologists also fear that the aggressive bee species found near Australia's Great Barrier Reef could carry a deadly mite, said Jeff Pettis, the USDA's top bee scientist.

'This could be a threat worldwide, because if those bees are moving around the chances are this mite would move with it,' Mr Pettis said. 'We just don't need another species causing problems.'

The Australian government has adopted emergency controls to quarantine and destroy the aggressive bees and has never detected that mite, according to materials provided by Chelsey Martin, counselor for public affairs at the Australian Embassy in Washington.

US agriculture officials say they also are taking precautions.

Agricultural officials started sampling Australian bees last week after they were released in the Central Valley.

'Bees from Australia make great sense,' said Wayne Wehling, a senior entomologist in the USDA's permit unit. 'But we certainly don't want to bring any economic impacts onto our honeybees that we don't already have or introduce any new pests or disease.'

Government officials said they do not know how many Australian bees have been imported, but hive importer Mr Sullivan estimates that he has sold 110,000 hives since 2005.

On Wednesday, a USDA inspector in a protective suit collected samples of bees at Mr Sullivan's operation.

'Hopefully this will ease the minds of people who have their own hives here,' said inspector John Iniguez. 'We're trusting Australia that they're clean. Now we just want to confirm that.' -- AP