Whut?

[pirate]

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/new-citizen-permanent-resident-singapore-application-english-test-pritam-singh-josephine-teo-3309261


And the WP should only speak in English at their election rallies.

My Pioneer Generation mother is almost 80. She barely speaks any English. She is apparently not Singaporean enough for Pritam Singh.

:roll:

[pirate]

And since Recess at KSP is becoming too quiet nowadays, here's one more.


https://www.channelnewsasia.com/world/covid-19-origins-china-laboratory-leak-us-agency-reports-pandemic-white-house-3307386

Back home in the meantime, the Multi-Ministry Task Force has delegated pandemic management to Singapore Power.

:siam:

[sushi88]

pirate\" post_id=\"2099225\" time=\"1677549840\" user_id=\"66252:

https://www.straitstimes.com/sport/sportsg-and-partners-apologise-after-lapse-in-shoe-recycling-project-uncovered

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-shoe-recycling-sportsg-donated-footwear-exported-sale-3308626

:whut:
Is this a recycling project or a publicity stunt?

Can someone explain again the meaning of \"recycling\"? Re-using perfectly serviceable things is apparently now a \"lapse\"?

I think somebody is letting a bunch of foreign media people set the agenda in Singapore. And if they are local journalists with Reuters, then something is wrong with our education system.
:slapshead:

I agree with you that as long as the shoes are reused or recycle, they contribute to sustainability purpose.

However, in this case, when the shoes are exported and sold, who pocketed the money? Apparently the \"lapse\" is in not knowing the shoes were being sold, not so much about them being sold as a reused item. The article suggested that they were not tracking the inventory of the collected items well(show of a lack of responsibility). If they have informed the public that the better shoes would be sold and the money channeled into this recycling project to convert the worn out shoes used for their recycled materials in the building the playgrounds etc, then it would not be considered a lapse. Right now, as the news is suggesting, the shoes have been \"taken\" to sell without their knowledge during the sorting process, can this then be considered stolen? :scratchhead:

[sharonkhoo]

sushi88\" post_id=\"2099230\" time=\"1677554595\" user_id=\"100857:

I agree with you that as long as the shoes are reused or recycle, they contribute to sustainability purpose.

However, in this case, when the shoes are exported and sold, who pocketed the money? Apparently the \"lapse\" is in not knowing the shoes were being sold, not so much about them being sold as a reused item. The article suggested that they were not tracking the inventory of the collected items well(show of a lack of responsibility). If they have informed the public that the better shoes would be sold and the money channeled into this recycling project to convert the worn out shoes used for their recycled materials in the building the playgrounds etc, then it would not be considered a lapse. Right now, as the news is suggesting, the shoes have been \"taken\" to sell without their knowledge during the sorting process, can this then be considered stolen? :scratchhead:

I think that whoever wrote the article isn't sure what the point is! I also think the main issue is that someone pocketed money when the items were donated and expected to be used charitably. The main issue is not that items were reused, but that someone made private profit from it.

Frankly, I am happy the servicable shoes were used longer rather than crushed for running tracks, but unhappy that someone profited financially. That is the part that should be addressed. Those who would prefer servicable shoes to be crushed rather than reused hasn't thought \"sustainability\" and \"waste reduction\" through properly.

[sushi88]

pirate\" post_id=\"2099226\" time=\"1677551072\" user_id=\"66252:

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/new-citizen-permanent-resident-singapore-application-english-test-pritam-singh-josephine-teo-3309261

And the WP should only speak in English at their election rallies.

My Pioneer Generation mother is almost 80. She barely speaks any English. She is apparently not Singaporean enough for Pritam Singh.

:roll:

This point also probed my thoughts when I saw it yesterday.
The pioneer gen folks in my household all can understand and read English albeit not speaking it much.

[sushi88]

pirate\" post_id=\"2099227\" time=\"1677552069\" user_id=\"66252:

And since Recess at KSP is becoming too quiet nowadays, here's one more.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/world/covid-19-origins-china-laboratory-leak-us-agency-reports-pandemic-white-house-3307386

Back home in the meantime, the Multi-Ministry Task Force has delegated pandemic management to Singapore Power.

:siam:

Their Dept of Energy manages the research and development of nuclear power and nuclear weapons(synonymous with bio-chem weapons?) .....our Singapore Power don't....

It's really odd that this judgement without proof can even make it into news.

[sushi88]

slmkhoo\" post_id=\"2099233\" time=\"1677556074\" user_id=\"28674:

I think that whoever wrote the article isn't sure what the point is! I also think the main issue is that someone pocketed money when the items were donated and expected to be used charitably. The main issue is not that items were reused, but that someone made private profit from it.

Frankly, I am happy the servicable shoes were used longer rather than crushed for running tracks, but unhappy that someone profited financially. That is the part that should be addressed. Those who would prefer servicable shoes to be crushed rather than reused hasn't thought \"sustainability\" and \"waste reduction\" through properly.

The news only reported termination of contract but in truth, whoever stole the shoes need to face legal consequences for profiteering from a charitable cause.

I also agree that reuse should always be a step before recycle.
I think the slogan has somewhat a priority in it...

Reduce --> Reuse --> Recycle.

[Estéema]

Agree with slmkhoo. I’ve no problem with reusing either & esp when one don’t see the value anymore & and ano is in need of an item o’wise going into total transformation fr it’s original intended use. Someone must hv seen the waste it’ll be gone into & decided to salvage it to extend the life of those shoes, except that it eventually turned a charitable effort into an unaccounted profitability channeled without public accountability. Not only shld the culprit be punished, but the I’ll-gotten gains be donated back towards the labour & resources used for filling the turf.

[pirate]

But we have not seen Yok Impex's contract, so we don't know whether they are allowed to do that, so long as they collect X kg and deliver X kg.


We don't know if it is contractually stipulated that cannot swap out and salvage the still good condition shoes, whether the contract price will still be the same.

Many people forget that just because it is supposed to be a charitable project does not mean that the service providers are necessarily doing it as a charity too. Otherwise all the full time employees working in charitable organizations need not be paid a salary either.

Seems that the \"lapse\" is in not expressly stipulating a no salvage clause in the contract. But there is a cost to such a clause as well.

We also don't know whether there might be donors who would decide not to donate their shoes if it is made known there is such a clause. Some donors might think it is wasteful.

I am more concerned about what kind of mind would even think to put tracking devices into old shoes. Somebody is trying to create a narrative here.

I am going to say \"Look! Balloon!\" here.