Walking Time-Bombs

Back in December 2013 right after the Little India riot, many with the benefit of hindsight asked if it was an accident waiting to happen given the size of the crowd, the long queues of people waiting for their buses and the narrow roads. Could it have been prevented?

Fast forward to 2016, with history on the side, in Parliament, MP Denise Phua referred to the crowd that has once again reached pre-riot level and registered her concern that this could lead to incidents waiting to happen.

Notwithstanding her choice of words, one would expect people to appreciate that someone is keeping an eye on the situation and raising awareness of its potential to get out of order. No?

After all, who wants a repeat of 2013? And do we not learn from history?

The overwhelming reactions to Dennis Phua's 'walking time-bombs' make you wonder how much of these reactions is deliberate with an agenda.

Take the 'reaction' from The Independent Singapore (TISG) for example. The exaggerations in the article is but an attempt to pour oil to fire.

It began with "Has absolutely nothing been learnt by her with regards to the Little Indian riots that happened not so long ago?"

TISG claims that segregation was one of the causes of the 2013 riot. Really?

We check the COI's Report on the riot and 'segregation' is not listed in it. Do you know of any segregation of residents and workers in Little India that led to the 2013 riot?

Dennis Phua is NOT even asking for a segregation of workers from residents. She is asking for some communal space like playgrounds and void deck space to be returned to children and the elderly to use.
Don't the children and the elderly who live in Little India deserve some consideration?

There are public spaces that are 'cordoned off' by law and no one cries foul over it and calls it segregation or questions the meaning of 'public space' like the way TISG does it.

For example, the law stipulates where you can smoke and where you cannot - in public. You may not see a literal fence, but there are areas that are marked as 'non-smoking' zones. This is not segregation. This is about managing the use of public spaces so that everyone can enjoy themselves.
.
TISG went on to say:
[By all means build more facilities for them but building more facilities for them does not mean that you limit their freedom of travel within the country. That is as preposterous as it is misguidedly elitist. Has Ms Phua in her snobbery, mistaken workers for criminals? Or can she not tell the difference?]
.
.
Does this even make sense to you? Did Dennis Phua call for workers' travel within Singapore to be limited? Did TISG just put words into Dennis Phua's mouth? Did TISG also ignore the fact that Dennis Phua also called for regular dialogues that includes the foreign workers?
.
If this is not bad enough, TISG then asserted that the views of Dennis Phua can "trigger a massive foreign affairs faux pas with the countries that these foreign workers are from". Goodness! The exaggeration just to make a case. Haha. And this is an article that is pinned to the top. Does Leon Perera believe this?

On a positive note, we completely agree with TISG that it is "also important to stress that we need foreign labour to build and maintain our infrastructure which is a vital component to our economic success."

Perhaps Leon Perera who runs TISG will relay a very strong message to Workers' Party that we need foreign workers. After all, while it is good to 'promote female and elderly labour participation' (Manifesto 2015), we really cannot expect women and our grandparents to build infrastructure.