Current Affairs
街访被质问水电费调涨? 英兰妮部长亲自驳斥“传言”
一则网络贴文声称总理公署部长英兰妮,在街坊中峇鲁巴刹时,被一名老者斥责,最后灰头土脸离开。此事真伪引起网民热议,甚至英兰妮本身也出面驳斥,有关贴文扭曲事实。
该帖文称,英兰妮拜访该巴刹群众,靠近一堆老夫妇时,主动伸出手作自我介绍,说她是部长暨国会议员。但是老者没有站起来,告诉她:“你是谁我不在乎,我吃饭的时候不想被打扰。”
英兰妮再问老先生,是本地人还是马来西亚人,这时老者回答:“我是土生土长新加坡人,而且我对于今天开始第二次调涨水费至15巴仙和电费6.9巴仙,非常有意见。”
帖文称,在附近观众的围观下,英兰妮没有和老人继续对话,灰溜溜地走了。
英拉妮:未和老者深谈
不过,丹绒巴戈集选区国会议员的英兰妮,则在其个人脸书驳斥,该传言扭曲了他与老者之间的对话,因为老者说不愿被打扰后,她就转而拜访其他民众,根本没有时间再继续进行对话。
英兰妮在其脸书如是阐述:
我到中峇鲁巴刹进行长约探访,借此聆听基层民声,也方便有需要的民众可在现场直接与我沟通。
聚集在此的多是附近邻里,也有来自其他地方的访客。我一般都会询问他们来自哪里,略微了解下他们的身份背景。
当然,在探访过程选民给我的反应不一,有些感到惊讶,有者很热情欢迎,或要求一起合照。有些选民愿意与我分享早餐,非常亲和。
也有少部分民众不愿倍打扰。当时我接触一对老夫妇,也自我介绍我是议员,老太太很友善,只是他的丈夫不想被打扰,我也尊重他们并离开。
奇怪的是,不久后网络流传一则文章,为我和老先生的对话加油添醋。事实上当老先生说不愿被打扰,就没机会在有进一步对话了。
不过,我清楚不应被这种网络传言所影响。走向基层都是身为议员的基本功。
网民:民众有私隐 勿特别奉承议员
虽然只是英兰妮部长在街访时的一段小插曲,但是网民看法不一,英兰妮支持者也和其他网民争议,谁的说法才是真的?基于该贴文只是片面文字,并没有影像,致使大家无从考究。
只要有反对行动党议员的声音,党粉们即一面倒认为这肯定是反对党支持者做的。网民Kiezin对此不以为然,认为也无法证明这是反对党故意捏造的贴文。
有者评述,如果有人主动表示礼貌问候你,至少也应握手回礼,随即遭到反驳,认为人都有个人私隐,老者在吃饭既然不喜欢被打扰而拒绝英拉妮,并无不妥,并不会因为英拉妮是民选议员,就代表她比普通民众高人一等,所有人都要招待、迎接她。
对此网民Ah Quek感同身受,他记得2011年大选,就有行动党助选员来敲门,告诉他母亲,行动党的候选人要到了,请他们一家“准备好”迎接候选人和他握手。
“我们住在阿裕尼集选区。相信是候选人的傲慢,自以为会民众会用王族式的礼遇来夹道欢迎,是行动党在该区败选的因素。”
议员不是巨星 不该期待选民奉承
也有同样经历的Sasakura说:“他们甚至来敲门两次,提醒议员快到了,我告诉他们,最后跳过他的单位,不然我就当面关门。要来拜访就来,无须三番几次来打扰。”
网民不解为何英兰妮特别在意民众是不是本地人,是不是认为新加坡人就应该尊重他?再者,在本国询问对方是不是本地人,形同在伤口撒盐,当然引起对方想起生活上的处境。
Curio就说,如果是大马人就跳过,新加坡人就笑脸迎人?Chen Zyao就补充,记得一次在咖啡店,他拒绝与前议员杨荣文握手,后者还问他是不是该选区选民?他认为, 即便它来自阿裕尼选区,也不必然要欢迎他。
Roger Sim感叹,这些行动党议员已经忘了,服务人民的初衷。他们不要忘了他们必须先是民选议员,才能成为部长。不该自诩拥有“超级公民”身份,享有特别待遇。议员的职责是议员是服务百姓,就用服务的精神来赢取选民的尊重。
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2023/03/26202010/TOC_newlogo_small.webp)
Current Affairs
Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun
A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/09/03132151/PHONE3.jpg)
SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.
The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.
The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.
Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.
The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.
The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.
If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.
In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.
They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.
The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.
The investigation is ongoing.
Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.
Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.
The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.
Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.
However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.
The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.
Current Affairs
Consumers Association of Singapore fined S$20,000 for PDPA breaches following two data security incidents
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/08/30113758/case-fined-Ja2vq4.png)
The Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) has been fined S$20,000 by the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) for breaches under the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA).
According to a judgement which was published on 28 August, the fine was imposed due to the consumer watchdog’s failure to implement reasonable security measures to protect the personal data in its possession and to establish necessary policies and practices required under the PDPA.
The breaches resulted in two significant incidents, one in October 2022 and another in June 2023, where the personal data of up to 34,760 individuals was potentially compromised.
Both incidents were handled under the Expedited Decision Procedure (EDP) at the request of CASE, with the organization admitting to all the facts and contraventions of the PDPA, leading to a faster resolution of the case.
The First Incident: Phishing Attack in October 2022
The first incident occurred in October 2022 when a threat actor accessed CASE’s email accounts and sent phishing emails from its official email addresses.
On 8 October 2022, some consumers received unsolicited emails from “[email protected],” which falsely claimed that their complaints had been escalated to the “collections and compensation department” and that they were eligible for compensation.
The recipients were asked to provide their banking details by clicking on a chat icon.
The following day, similar phishing emails were sent from “[email protected],” an account used for complaints that had progressed to mediation. CASE later discovered that the phishing emails had affected up to 22,542 email addresses.
Further investigations revealed that the phishing emails likely resulted from the threat actor obtaining login credentials from a CASE employee via a phishing attack.
The compromised accounts led to the sending of 5,205 phishing emails to 4,945 recipients. Although CASE acted swiftly to suspend the affected accounts and reset all administrator passwords, three consumers reported that they had clicked on the phishing links and collectively lost S$217,900. CASE subsequently lodged a police report.
The Second Incident: Data Breach During Vendor Migration
While PDPC was investigating the first incident, a second breach came to light in June 2023. On 22 June 2023, PDPC received a complaint about a phishing email that replicated a consumer’s complaint previously submitted to CASE.
This led to the discovery that the personal data of 12,218 individuals, including names, email addresses, contact numbers, and complaint details, had been exposed. The PDPC concluded that the breach likely occurred during a data migration exercise conducted by CASE between December 2019 and January 2020 when CASE switched vendors.
Investigations revealed that CASE’s contract with one of its vendors, Total eBiz Solutions Pte Ltd (TES), did not stipulate clear security responsibilities. This lack of contractual clarity contributed to the data breach during the migration process, highlighting CASE’s negligent vendor management.
PDPC Findings and Penalties
The PDPC found that CASE had failed to enforce its password management policy, with some passwords not meeting minimum length and complexity requirements and others remaining unchanged for up to four years. Furthermore, CASE’s vendor management was deemed negligent, as one of its contracts did not specify clear security responsibilities, putting personal data at risk.
CASE admitted to not conducting regular security awareness training for its staff, with the last session held five years before the first incident.
The PDPC also noted that CASE lacked an Information and Communications Technology (ICT) policy, particularly in relation to patching and maintaining IT systems. The absence of a documented IT infrastructure management plan, insufficient logging and monitoring practices, and the lack of security reviews over the three years preceding the first breach were significant failures highlighted in the judgment.
In assessing the financial penalty, the PDPC considered the nature and gravity of the breaches, the duration of non-compliance, and CASE’s annual turnover. The fine of $20,000 was determined to be appropriate in light of these factors.
Remedial Actions by CASE
It is said that CASE, which is headed by Mr Melvin Yong, People’s Action Party Member of Parliament for Radin Mas, has implemented several measures to enhance its cybersecurity in response to the breaches.
These include introducing multi-factor authentication for all web-based applications, strengthening password complexity requirements, decommissioning end-of-life devices, and implementing patch management software for security updates.
CASE has also revised its contracts with outsourced vendors to include data protection clauses and mandated annual data protection training for all staff members.
CASE is working towards obtaining the Cyber Essentials Mark and the Data Protection Trust Mark to reinforce its commitment to safeguarding personal data and complying with PDPA obligations.
The PDPC has directed CASE to review and update its data protection policies, rectify all identified security gaps, and report back within one week of completion. The organization has also been instructed to conduct a penetration test after addressing the vulnerabilities to ensure no further security gaps exist.
The post Consumers Association of Singapore fined S$20,000 for PDPA breaches following two data security incidents appeared first on Gutzy Asia.
-
Opinion4 days ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Diplomacy3 days ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Food3 days ago
NTU stall food prices questioned after parent pays S$6.30 for meal
-
Politics2 days ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Civil Society4 days ago
CIVICUS Monitor labels Singapore as ‘repressed’ for crackdown on civic freedoms
-
Opinion6 days ago
Is the shuttle bus service at Marine Parade town cluster just a S$1 million political ad campaign?
-
Economy4 days ago
IRAS reports S$80.3 billion in tax revenue for FY2023/24, a 17% increase from the previous year
-
Economy6 days ago
Singapore faces 25% increase in bankruptcy filings during first half of 2024