Next on TOC: About 3 weeks after 16 activists were arrested in May, 1987, the man accused of being the mastermind – Tan Wah Piow – published a book to refute the government’s allegations. That’s next on TOC. Stay tuned!
Ravi Philemon
“We don’t want to sign the petition”, says John (not his real name). John and Ryan (not his real name either), are visually handicapped (blind) buskers. They try to sell tissue-papers to the passers-by at various Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations.
“We don’t earn much,” says John, “maybe about $15 or $20 every month”. “Of course there are a lot of people passing by, but they are blind to us or maybe we are invisible to them”, he adds.
When asked why he would not support the petition, John says, “Our association will be upset with us, or the government will be upset with us. And anyway, we sometimes get free bus rides to the MRT stations when we show our card.”
However, the card is not a concession card but merely a form of identification, and the visually handicapped would have to pay full fares when the driver asks them to do so. Ryan, who says that he is aware of that, adds, “Our social worker has told us to just pay when the driver asks us to pay.”
John, who identified Reena, the Challenged Alliance Network! (CAN!) Coordinator, said, “We are glad that you are brave enough to fight for this. Although we (John and Ryan) will not sign the petition, we wish you all the best”.
Fear is a factor encountered by the team who are trying to garner support for the petition for public transport subsidy for the challenged people. “I have had people who have phoned me to demand that I drop this campaign because it is not supported by the associations. Yet others have said that they are afraid that they will be marked because this is anti-government or because we are fighting for our rights. It is one thing to fight for your rights and quite another to ask for your rights.”
Misinformation is another huge obstacle the team faces as they try to garner sufficient support. “I have had people who call me and tell me to drop the petition saying that anyways [sic] we get to ride for ‘free’ on the buses. And when I remind them we are actually at the ‘mercy of the drivers’ when we ride for free and that this does not apply when we take the train, because there is no driver to be at his mercy, the person said that handicapped people actually are discouraged from taking the train because it is not safe for them.”
Reena, who notes that public transport has become more and more disabled-accessible over the years, says that public transportation should not only be about accessibility for the disabled but should also be disabled-friendly.
Mr. Edmund Wan, the former Executive Director of Singapore Association for the Visually Handicapped who has lobbied for this cause, recommends a concessionary scheme because the majority of handicapped people fall into the lowest strata of earning power.
Reena notes the tremendous support the call for concessionary support for the disabled has gotten from the likes of Mr. Gerard Ee, the President of Public Transport Council, Judy Wee the secretary of Singapore Disabled People’s Association and Nancy Chia, the head of Handicaps Welfare Association, who reportedly said in the Straits Times article : “If the elderly, school children and NSmen can have concession, why not the handicapped? They are generally lower-income people who rely on public transport”.
But Reena has some pertinent questions for the transport providers:
1. Although she welcomes SBS Transit’s statement that they are looking into offering concession fares to commuters with physical disabilities, why is it that subsidy is only being considered for the physically disabled and not all the disabled?
2. Why the need for staggering the concession, first to buses and only at a later stage to trains?
3. Why is SMRT a major public transport operator in Singapore silent on this topic?
Reena who has been asking for concessionary public transportation for the disabled for the last ten years says, “We are not asking for a free ride. Give us our dignity!”
———————-
Support the disabled people in their call for Concessionary Public Transportation for the Disabled.
Speakers’ Corner (Hong Lim Park)
23rd May 2009 @ 5pm
http://challengedsalliancenetwork.blogspot.com/
—-
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
I support the petition to ask for concessionary public transportation for the Disabled.
However, there is no need for Reena to question SBS Transit and SMRT and put them into defensive. It is not a matter of fear but graciousness. Ask for help, encourage them to help but don’t question why they are not helping or that they are not helping enough. You win a battle by making friends by appealing to their heart.
I never know it is so difficult to get concessionary rates for the disabled and handicapped. Why are the MPs so silent about it anyway? They are paid so high and yet such matters should escape their notice. Funny world Singapore is.
I thought our “president” always asked us to help the poor and why are he questioning this govt for not doing so? I didn’t know that handicapped in Singapore still have to pay full fares, and it makes me sick to think we have a highest paid govt with the most uncompassonate record. Has satan comes to earth alreadly and give us hell?
ArtReach@1: Thank you for supporting the petition. Affordable public transportation should be the right of everyone and that is what we are asking for. Although we welcome the goodwill, we don’t want to be the objects of pity. It is not a matter of questioning SMRT or SBS but about asking the right questions. If we don’t raise the right questions there is a risk of being conveniently forgotten.
Who are those trying to silence them? Associations? What associations? Are they imagining things?
Hi Catfight,
It is not imagination of fear. The article is talking about how Singaporeans are unwilling to put up their names on petition. I recall from my personal experience trying to gather signatures for the abolishment of the GRC. Many Singaporeans express their support but they are unwilling to put up their identities to the authorities.
But now it seems the case is even more alarming – Singaporeans are even paranoid that signing a petition for improving the disabled’s access to public transport will lead to some kind of repercussion on their access to the public transport system.
#4 Can “Affordable public transportation should be the right of everyone”
How did you arrive at that?
If all who commented in this forum are so passionate about helping the disabled, and if each one of the 7 just adopt one of them and pay for their transport fares from today, you will be achieved your goal. And when others see you put your money where your mouth is, more likeminded like you will follow your path.
KopitiamApek@7:
Link: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disacc.htm
Can @ 9
That article is about accesibilty to the disabled. It does not say “Affordable public transportation should be the right of everyone”
And also: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/comp402.htm#2.5.3
Can@11
That article also do not say “Affordable public transportation should be the right of everyone”
It’s is popular to ape others to hold petitions, stage some street protests for this cause and that cause. I admire those who take action and just go directly and help the people they really want to help. Otherwise it is NATO. No action talk only.
Dear KopitiamApek
Do you agree that access to basic healthcare, access to education, access to food & shelter and access to employment are rights?
If so, then you’re already agreeing that affordable (not ‘free’) transportation is a infrastructural pre-requisite each of those rights are dependent on access to transport services.
@13 KopitiamApek
I agree with you. Direct services volunteerism is very important.
But Singaporeans, as taxpayers, should have a say in where their money go to.
Do we want the next $10million going into some international investment somewhere with no promise of return? Or do we want the $10million invested into our own people so that they become more capable?
For a government, I don’t believe there is a clear answer to that. But as an individual I would choose the latter. If there are enough people who agree with me, then it would be the government’s obligation to channel resources in a way I believe it should be; but first we’d have to make our opinions known.
” I admire those who take action and just go directly and help the people they really want to help”
To protest and send petition is ask for change on the government’s policies that benefit majority of people, but “just go directly and help the people they really want to help”, you only get to help “few” people in “the short term” ? So which one has larger impact and more effective over “the long term” ?
Hi yw.
Thank you for your questions.
“Do you agree that access to basic healthcare, access to education, access to food & shelter and access to employment are rights?”
“If so, then you’re already agreeing that affordable (not ‘free’) transportation is a infrastructural pre-requisite each of those rights are dependent on access to transport services.”
Are these rights. Do we need to work hard to have all of these? Is access to them not achieved by effort? Or by petitions and street protest?. Because we live in a comfortable life where everthing is taken for granted, we start believing these are our rights. If you live in a well off country, (we can see many around us), where in some cases the public transport system is a near non existence, where there are no jobs, do you petition and hold street protest for your right to access to something non existence.
The train fare we pay is only for the running cost of the system. The entire infrastructure is funded by the state.
#16
Hi Daniel,
On one hand I can sense all the cynism in all the comments in TOC that garmen will not give a hoot of whatever we say and and the other hand we are sending petition to the garmen so that we can help more people as individual volunteerism helps a few. Last time I checked my maths, a few should be more than zero.
Are we confused or are we confused?
” Do we need to work hard to have all of these? Is access to them not achieved by effort? Or by petitions and street protest?. Because we live in a comfortable life where everthing is taken for granted, we start believing these are our rights.”
The question I like to ask too why is it that people tend to harbour the thought that only citizen take thing for granted but not the government taking the citizen for granted and they too believing it is their right ? Frankly, I won’t even think that petition and protest are necessary if the MPs are not partisan but the fact that majority are means that other means of making change is necessary. What other ways do you think change can be made and voice can be heard “practically” ?
The essence of petitions and protests is to get someone else to do what you want.
It is also someone else who has not done this and that.
We are a country of complainers. Complaint is free. Action need effort.
KopitiamApek,
that is nothing to be confused about. Some will say it is effective and some say it is ineffective about petition and protest but it is their perogative. Still it is better to do something to adovacate change in their own ways than end up doing nothing. There will never be one voice and view in the virtual world just like the physical world.
we didn’t expect that goverment to open up Hong Lim park for protest, didn’t we ? Is international pressure lead by Dr Chee behind it ? No one knows for sure but it still better for someone to do something “no matter” how uncertain it is.
It is the them and us mentality that will destroy us.
I have heard of residents complaining non stop when their lift was being upgraded, scolding those poor workers at every opportune moment as if these poor foriegn workers are part of the PAP. When a brand new lift was finally there for their use, the first reaction was to complain that the lift was too small. In reality, if they would take the effort and measure it against lifts elsewhere, it is the same size.
Complaint is free.
#21
“we didn’t expect that goverment to open up Hong Lim park for protest, didn’t we ? Is international pressure lead by Dr Chee behind it ? ”
It is someone else again, Aiyah!
And I don’t think garmen open up HLP for protest, it is for people to voice what they want to say, and there are more ways to say what you want to say then just ape-like protest?
KopitiamApek,
it is hard to blame the citizen for complain culture. The distrust of the government, the stress of the society, CPF manipulaton, the exploitation of the citizen through policies and regulation and many more fedup will breed dissatisfaction of the citizen on the government especially the citizen realize that they are “short-charged” whereas the government become wealthy and disconnected with the citizen.e g The citizen is asking for low cost of living and justifies hike, the government offer them no choice, and instead giving bull and rhetoric, I’m sure you aware of that by now. These dissatisfaction will sure to cause the citizen to vent their anger find ways to fault the gov, good or bad, because whatever, they link it directly to the gov since the gov “is so involved” with their life.
Yes, complain is free until you realize that government complain too but the major difference is that government has the power to act on their own complaint. eg Money not enough, just increase own salary. Profit for GLC not enough, just ask minister to give crap. Smoking increase health cost, ban smoking in place etc.
So as much as we like to say citizen love complaining, the government isn’t any better.
“And I don’t think garmen open up HLP for protest, it is for people to voice what they want to say, and there are more ways to say what you want to say then just ape-like protest?”
Gahmen hate the taboo world “protest” and we know it is the way for them to save face to use VOICE rather than PROTEST when talking about Hong Lim Park after all for many decades the gahmen speak negatively about protest. But we citizen know it means protest, voice been the gentle word for it. A voice can be gentle and soft but Protest means emotional anger. But then whether it is opened up for Protest and for voice, it doesn’t matter because the government allow both in Hong Lim Park.
“#21
“we didn’t expect that goverment to open up Hong Lim park for protest, didn’t we ? Is international pressure lead by Dr Chee behind it ? ”
It is someone else again, Aiyah”
Yes, so why the discrimination of credit when it comes to opp party if Singaporeans can even accept that LKY build Singapore even though I never see the man constructing building and road before.
KopitiamApek,
People will always complain – this is human nature that is not specific to Singaporeans. But what is characteristic of Singaporeans? It is not doing something about it. And I think TOC’s current articles on the ‘Marxist Conspiracy’ will give you a clear indication as to why.
Why are protests and petitions important? To give a voice to a marginalised group within a community. This is a basic principle of democracy and why it is better than other political systems where the citizen literally has no say. As a democratic system, petitions and protests are part of the democratic process that the authorities.
Yes, this is also about getting someone else to do what we want, but that’s also because we live in a society with quarternary industries possessing specialised capabilities, getting someone else to do something for us is part of how the system works (who cleans your pipes, waters the trees along the roads, and sweeps the streets?). As contributors to the society, we have a say in what we want.
And the ‘them and us’ attitude is very damning. The government, rightfully, represents the citizens. If we want something to be a certain way, both parties should engage in discourse and reach a consensus in how it should happen. The PAP is *supposed* to REPRESENT the people. So if people want to complain about their lifts, let them complain. You and I may not agree that it’s the most mature thing to do, but it is their rights as citizens.
KopitiamApek@12: I am no expert at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But being a human being, I have an innate compass about what should be rights. Anyway, the link earlier provided says that, “…cash subsidies, improvement to existing public transport system, and specially adapted automobiles and the transfer of new technology in transport is also very important in ensuing the integration of persons with disabilities into mainstream society”.
And the United Nations Declaration on Social Progress and Development also says that, “All peoples and all human beings, without distinction as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, family or social status, or political or other conviction, shall have the right to live in dignity and freedom and to enjoy the fruits of social progress and should, on their part, contribute to it”.
Link: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/m_progre.htm
KopitiamApek: It would probably have been easier for you to say “Shut up and sit down!”
Since so many are on the opposing side of KopitiamApek, let me play devil’s advocate and be on his side. =)
I think KopitiamApek made a good point about the complaint culture of Singaporeans. Yes, it is the right of citizens. But there is a danger of it being NATO.
I don’t really see why the choice for citizens is between protest/complain and doing direct action help. Why can’t citizens do both? Like what KopitiamApek noted, protest/signing a petition is simple and takes only a minute. If citizens feel passionate about the issue, he/she should not stop at the ‘one minute effort’. Unless the issue is only worth more than a minute and less than the volunteering effort.
While we look at the ‘protest’ aspect of citizen participation in other countries, let us not forget the ‘action’ aspect. In US, active participation & volunteerism is an equally important aspect of their civil society.
Let’s not be boxed in by the simple dichotomy of either ‘voice’ or ‘action’. People can do both. The danger is that protesting/complaining becomes a crutch that people use to avoid participation/volunteering!
the only time stupid singaporeans dare to give their paticulars? credit cards..free gifts..vouchers..Nigerian scams..etc
I am not making a trip to HLP today. How do I sign the petition online?
CAN profile is blank. It will be good that it has names or brief description of the team members. If team members are willing to tell the public who they are, it will remove any question on whether there is any hidden agenda. People appreciate transparency.
I believe it will take a long time (hopefully not) and great effort to get wide spread support from the public and to finally convince the transportation bodies to give the concession.
The aim is to get concession for the disable poor people who need it most and take the most appropriate actions to achieve it. Avoid turning the campaign into a fight for Right war. To do so, will run the risk of driving the disable people and their organization away from you. The disable people do not want to sign the petition so it tells us that CAN needs to be sensitive.
ArtReach@30: We will put up our petition online after tonight. The petition signing will be opne until 31 May 2009, after which it will be delivered to the Minister of Transport through REACH.
As the petition is not started by any organisation but by individual challenged people, you may meet them at the HLP today. It is a petition for the challenged people by the challenged people. I don’t know if such an effort has been organised in Singapore before, but we believe it is the right thing to do.
we are also not very computer savvy and have to wait on the help of volunteers to update our website. I hope you understand. nevertheless, I will put up the names (even if the photos are not availbale) of the people who first got this project going. But of course this is a project of all the challenged people and we cannot put everyone’s name on the website.
One thing for sure, no hidden hands in this project.
Thank you RW @ 29
Thank you CAN for your responsiveness. You will face many obstacles and need many people to come forward to help and I believe you will overcome the difficulty when the public is on your side.
To the people who read and post in this thread, shall we spread the words to our friends, create the awareness and encourage them to sign the petition if they believe in it.
The cause is a noble one.
One that I believe many Singaporeans will support.
But there is no need to drag in all the irrelevant and negative blame-the-garment for-every-damn-problem-you-got comments.
It does no benefit except to reduce credibilty.
Look at the big picture.
Stay on focus.
Can @ 27
NO one in these discussion can claim to be an expert in Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Not you. Not me.
But we have to read all these stuff in the right context.
If our mind is set on witchhunt mode, we will have the tendency to dig up every fragment of info that seemingly suits our cause as evidence,
One must be aware that even the most powerful nations do blatanly ignore some of the things UN set out as “ideal” policies. And some policies of the powerful nations are put in place under clever disguise of rights but they do no more than put obstacles in the path of other less devt countries to catch up economically.
#28
Thank you for your comment
I repeat myself.
there is no need to drag in all the irrelevant and negative
24) Daniel ,
“it is hard to blame the citizen for complain culture” – due to?
1.The distrust of the government,
2. the stress of the society,
3. CPF manipulaton,
4. the exploitation of the citizen through policies and regulation
would you like to elaborate on these points you made?
Some postings are off topic. Shall we focus on what else we can do to help?
1) ArtReach I support the petition to ask for concessionary public transportation for the Disabled. However, there is no need for Reena to question SBS Transit and SMRT and put them into defensive. ”
Put them into defensive is a very very valid point.
That is what many of these TOC posting are doing to the target party. This mode of compliants, grumblings, accussations, bringing up ever possible bad things real or percieved relevant or irrelavant about the target party will only put the target party in defensive (you would react the same way if you are treated that way) and reduces the chance of achieving your aim. It is self sabotage.
If our aim is really to help some groups, we are actually putting them into a spot with all these rnegative opinions.
All emotion here, some tact will be useful
The Online Petition is here: http://challengedsalliancenetwork.blogspot.com/2009/05/online-petition-for-transport-subsidy.html
Please do support our cause. Thank you.