logo
Hamster Society Singapore calls out Edward Chia over childhood hamster breeding story in election campaign

Hamster Society Singapore calls out Edward Chia over childhood hamster breeding story in election campaign

SINGAPORE: Hamster Society Singapore has called out Edward Chia, a People's Action Party (PAP) candidate for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC in the General Election 2025, over a childhood anecdote in which he bred and sold hamsters at the age of 10.
According to the group, Chia's story was printed and circulated in a public flyer on 25 April as part of his campaign material.
The flyer described the start of his 'entrepreneurial journey' as breeding hamsters and selling them to pet shops for S$3 each, claiming this experience sparked 'his lifelong passion for creating value.'
However, Hamster Society Singapore strongly disagreed with the framing of this anecdote.
'It's not something to celebrate,' the group said. 'It's something we need to talk about.'
'It's Not Only Illegal, but Irresponsible'
The organisation stressed that unlicensed breeding and selling of pets is illegal in Singapore and described Chia's actions as 'irresponsible.'
'Animals are not products. Whether it's hamsters, dogs, cats, or rabbits—lives should never be reduced to dollar signs.
Breeding without a licence isn't just illegal. It's irresponsible,' the group stated.
Under the Animals and Birds (Licensing of Premises for Pet Shop and other Purposes) Rules, a valid licence is required to breed animals for commercial purposes.
They added that the society frequently rescues hamsters abandoned in dire conditions, many of which suffer from tumours, cancer, or severe neglect—often due to irresponsible breeding practices where animals are sold without proper screening and later discarded.
In a subsequent post, the group detailed the grim realities they have encountered from hoarding and backyard breeding cases, including hamsters packed in filthy plastic boxes covered in their own waste, mothers forced to breed continuously with their babies dead beside them, untreated cancerous tumours the size of their heads, missing limbs, rotting skin, and eyes either falling out or sealed shut with pus.
Some rescues were found in rubbish bins, shoeboxes, food containers, and even a Hai Di Lao paper bag.
'Entrepreneurship is important, but compassion and responsibility must come first, especially when lives are involved,' the group emphasised.
They urged voters to reflect on the values of candidates they choose to support.
'With polling day just around the corner, let's be more thoughtful about the people we vote for. Should we be reinforcing outdated mindsets? Or should we be shaping a future that values compassion, ethics, and accountability?'
The group also noted that the hamster-breeding anecdote had appeared on Chia's official PAP website profile, suggesting it had been intentionally included.
However, as of the time of writing, the anecdote has been removed.
Chia, 41, is the co-founder of the Timbre Group and entered politics in 2020 as part of the victorious PAP team contesting Holland-Bukit Timah GRC.
He has served as the MP for the Zhenghua ward over the past five years.
In GE2025, he is again standing in the same GRC alongside Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, and Deputy Speaker Christopher de Souza.
It Sends the Wrong Message, Says Hamster Society Singapore
The Facebook post by Hamster Society Singapore received mixed reactions from netizens.
While some criticised Chia's past actions, many others excused them, arguing that he was only ten years old at the time—a child.
Hamster Society acknowledged that the incident happened long ago but maintained that romanticising such acts—and presenting them as entrepreneurial inspiration during an election—is not appropriate.
'Sharing a story about unlicensed breeding as something admirable in 2025, through official platforms, sends the wrong message about how animals should be treated,' the group said.
One user accused Hamster Society Singapore of running a smear campaign.
In response, the organisation clarified, 'We're simply pointing out why promoting backyard breeding, even as a childhood story, sends the wrong message in 2025.'
Chia responds, saying that he will support Hamster Society Singapore
Following the post gaining prominent attention, Chia said in a Facebook post that he had a good conversation with the Hamster Society of Singapore regarding his childhood anecdote.
Acknowledging their concerns that his story might inadvertently encourage hamster breeding, Chia added that he would look for opportunities to support the society's work in the future.
Netizens Challenge the Justification
Despite some defending Chia, others pushed back strongly against that view.
They questioned whether a ten-year-old should be given a free pass to do whatever they want. One user pointed out that while Chia may have been 10 when he did it, he is 41 now—and still boasting about it.
One commenter argued that since Chia is a public figure, any statements he makes will be publicly accessible and widely read.
They questioned whether such a story is truly worth celebrating, especially when it is portrayed as a stepping stone to starting a business.
'Is this equivalent to encouraging people to learn from him and start backyard breeding?' the user asked.
Others warned that the message could encourage young people to replicate the same behaviour.
'Children may start breeding their hamsters and selling them as their first foray into entrepreneurship,' one noted.
Another user expressed dismay at the number of people justifying Chia's actions solely based on his age at the time.
'It is unethical and unacceptable no matter the age,' the user said. They added that there is no need to justify such actions on behalf of others.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Driver in fatal Tampines crash faces fresh charge for grievous hurt, bringing total to five
Driver in fatal Tampines crash faces fresh charge for grievous hurt, bringing total to five

Online Citizen​

timea day ago

  • Online Citizen​

Driver in fatal Tampines crash faces fresh charge for grievous hurt, bringing total to five

SINGAPORE – The driver involved in a multi-vehicle accident in Tampines last year that killed two people, including a student from Temasek Junior College, was handed a fresh charge on 9 June 2025. Muhammad Syafie Ismail, 44, is now facing a fifth charge under the Road Traffic Act. His latest charge accuses him of dangerous driving causing grievous hurt to two motorists—van driver Chia Tong Chai, 65, and car driver Muhammad Azril Mahmood, 49. The incident occurred on 22 April 2024 at the junction of Tampines Avenue 1 and Tampines Avenue 4, where a chain collision involved multiple cars, a van, and a minibus. No plea was taken from Syafie during the court session. His case has been adjourned, and he is scheduled to return to court on 26 June 2025. Syafie, a Singaporean, was first charged on 25 April 2024 with four offences: dangerous driving causing death, dangerous driving causing hurt, dangerous driving, and failing to stop after an accident. According to court documents, the fatal series of events began at around 7am on 22 April 2024. Syafie was allegedly driving along Bedok Reservoir Road towards Tampines Avenue 4 when he abruptly changed lanes to overtake a car. This resulted in a sideswipe collision, causing the overtaken vehicle to veer left and scrape its tyres against the road kerb. Syafie allegedly did not stop to provide his particulars. Subsequently, he ran a red light and collided with three cars. The impact led to further collisions with a van and a minibus. The crash resulted in two fatalities. One victim, 17-year-old Temasek Junior College student Afifah Munirah Muhammad Azril, was a passenger in a car driven by her father, Muhammad Azril. The other victim, 57-year-old Norzihan Juwahib, was a passenger in the van driven by Chia. She was an employee of a pest control company. Several others were injured, including an 11-year-old boy in one of the cars and another boy on the minibus. Chia and Azril, now identified as victims of grievous hurt in the latest charge, also sustained serious injuries. Video footage of the accident was widely circulated on social media, drawing national attention to the dangers of reckless driving. In addition to the criminal charges, Syafie is facing two civil lawsuits for negligence. The plaintiffs are Chia and another passenger of the van. If convicted of dangerous driving causing death, Syafie could face two to eight years in prison and disqualification from driving all classes of vehicles. For dangerous driving causing hurt, he could be fined up to S$10,000, jailed for up to two years, or both, in addition to driving disqualification. A conviction for dangerous driving carries a penalty of up to S$5,000, up to 12 months' jail, or both. Failing to stop after an accident may lead to a fine of up to S$1,000, up to three months' jail, or both. The new charge of dangerous driving causing grievous hurt carries a jail term of between one and five years and a mandatory driving ban. Traffic Police: 142 killed in accidents as Singapore's traffic deaths hit five-year high in 2024 The Tampines case comes amid growing concern over traffic safety in Singapore. According to the Traffic Police's annual report, road fatalities and injuries reached a five-year high in 2024. A total of 142 lives were lost in traffic accidents last year, up from 136 in 2023. Injuries also increased to 9,302 in 2024, from 8,941 the previous year. While red-light running violations fell by 11.9%—from 32,867 in 2023 to 28,965 in 2024—the number of fatal accidents linked to red-light violations also declined. However, a more alarming trend emerged. Among the 139 fatal accidents in 2024, 46 were attributed to speeding. This represents one in three fatal crashes, compared to one in four in 2023. There was also a sharp 64.8% increase in speeding offences in 2024. To combat the issue, Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam announced on 15 February 2025 that demerit points and composition fines would be increased. Additionally, from April 2025, red-light cameras islandwide were activated with speed enforcement capabilities. Speaking on the urgency of the matter, Shanmugam stated, 'People are dying and getting injured on our roads. Every vehicle is a potential missile—it's dangerous if you don't use it properly.'

Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy
Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy

Singapore Law Watch

time02-06-2025

  • Singapore Law Watch

Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy

Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy Source: Straits Times Article Date: 31 May 2025 Author: Shaffiq Alkhatib Helen Chia Chwee Imm pleaded guilty to two charges – one count each of cheating and pretending to be authorised to act as an advocate and solicitor. A former lawyer was sentenced to six months' jail on May 30 after she charged two victims for legal services, even though she had been barred from practising law due to bankruptcy. On May 26, Helen Chia Chwee Imm, 55, who has since been struck off the roll, pleaded guilty to two charges – one count each of cheating and pretending to be authorised to act as an advocate and solicitor. Two other charges were considered during her sentencing. Before handing down the sentence, District Judge James Elisha Lee said the overriding sentencing consideration for offences under the Legal Profession Act is the need to protect the public. He added that stiff sentences are warranted for such offences. Judge Lee also noted that defence lawyer Nicholas Narayanan earlier told the court that Chia had depression due to incidents involving two other clients. One of them was a woman she represented in 2015, whose child was killed by the father. The judge said that while he empathised with Chia, there was a 'lack of clarity' on whether there was a contributory link between her mental state and her current offences. In earlier proceedings, Deputy Public Prosecutor Michelle Tay said that Chia was admitted to the roll of advocates and solicitors of the Supreme Court in 1999. However, she did not have a valid certificate to practise law from Dec 17, 2016, after a bankruptcy order made against her earlier that month. Despite this, Chia met her first victim on Dec 19, 2016, for a consultation after the woman e-mailed her. They then discussed legal issues concerning the woman's care and custody of her son. Subsequently, and without Chia's involvement, the woman and her son's father signed an agreement to manage aspects of their child's life amicably. But on Aug 24, 2017, the woman contacted Chia again after disputes with the man resurfaced. She told Chia that she wanted to formally engage her as the lawyer. Chia agreed, concealing the fact that she did not have a practising certificate. After collecting $2,000 in legal fees, Chia gave her client legal advice. In a court application filed on Nov 9, 2017, Chia indicated that another lawyer was the solicitor in charge of the case, deliberately excluding her own name. It was only on Dec 18, 2017, after the woman asked Chia to attend a mediation session with her, that Chia revealed she was an undischarged bankrupt. In total, Chia collected nearly $13,700 from the woman. Separately, some time around Feb 12, 2018, Chia's friend – the second victim – asked her to act as the lawyer in her divorce proceedings and her plan to apply for a personal protection order. They met on Feb 13, 2018, and Chia reviewed her friend's divorce papers and personal protection order case file. The friend then formally engaged Chia to represent her in the divorce proceedings, and the latter did not say that she could not practise. Instead, Chia told the friend about the follow-up steps and quoted her legal fees of $20,000, saying it was a 'friend' rate – a third of what she would usually charge. After receiving a $3,000 deposit from her friend, Chia gave her legal advice and did a host of legal work for her. Chia also enlisted another lawyer to attend the court mentions for this expedited order matter. On May 2, 2018, the friend was dishonestly induced into paying her $23,000 as legal fees. Chia's bankruptcy order was annulled on May 22, 2018, and she was allowed to practise law again. But a disciplinary tribunal was appointed after a complaint of misconduct was made against her. In June 2021, Chia's friend found out from an article in The Straits Times about the tribunal that Chia had been a bankrupt and did not have a practising certificate when she was representing her. On Oct 26 that year, the tribunal found that there was cause for disciplinary action against Chia. She was struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors in August 2022. In January 2025, Chia made full restitution to the two victims of the legal fees paid to her. She is now out on bail of $80,000 and is expected to begin serving her sentence on July 21. Shaffiq Alkhatib is The Straits Times' court correspondent, covering mainly criminal cases heard at the State Courts. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print 150

Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy
Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy

New Paper

time30-05-2025

  • New Paper

Jail for ex-lawyer who provided legal services while barred from practice due to bankruptcy

A former lawyer was sentenced to six months' jail on May 30 after she charged two victims for legal services, even though she had been barred from practising law due to bankruptcy. On May 26, Helen Chia Chwee Imm, 55, who has since been struck off the roll, pleaded guilty to two charges - one count each of cheating and pretending to be authorised to act as an advocate and solicitor. Two other charges were considered during her sentencing. Before handing down the sentence, District Judge James Elisha Lee said the overriding sentencing consideration for offences under the Legal Profession Act is the need to protect the public. He added that stiff sentences are warranted for such offences. Judge Lee also noted that defence lawyer Nicholas Narayanan earlier told the court that Chia had depression due to incidents involving two other clients. One of them was a woman she represented in 2015, whose child was killed by the father. The judge said that while he empathised with Chia, there was a "lack of clarity" on whether there was a contributory link between her mental state and her current offences. In earlier proceedings, Deputy Public Prosecutor Michelle Tay said that Chia was admitted to the roll of advocates and solicitors of the Supreme Court in 1999. However, she did not have a valid certificate to practise law from Dec 17, 2016, after a bankruptcy order made against her earlier that month. Despite this, Chia met her first victim on Dec 19, 2016, for a consultation after the woman e-mailed her. They then discussed legal issues concerning the woman's care and custody of her son. Subsequently, and without Chia's involvement, the woman and her son's father signed an agreement to manage aspects of their child's life amicably. But on Aug 24, 2017, the woman contacted Chia again after disputes with the man resurfaced. She told Chia that she wanted to formally engage her as the lawyer. Chia agreed, concealing the fact that she did not have a practising certificate. After collecting $2,000 in legal fees, Chia gave her client legal advice. In a court application filed on Nov 9, 2017, Chia indicated that another lawyer was the solicitor in charge of the case, deliberately excluding her own name. It was only on Dec 18, 2017, after the woman asked Chia to attend a mediation session with her, that Chia revealed she was an undischarged bankrupt. In total, Chia collected nearly $13,700 from the woman. Separately, some time around Feb 12, 2018, Chia's friend - the second victim - asked her to act as the lawyer in her divorce proceedings and her plan to apply for a personal protection order. They met on Feb 13, 2018, and Chia reviewed her friend's divorce papers and personal protection order case file. The friend then formally engaged Chia to represent her in the divorce proceedings, and the latter did not say that she could not practise. Instead, Chia told the friend about the follow-up steps and quoted her legal fees of $20,000, saying it was a "friend" rate - a third of what she would usually charge. After receiving a $3,000 deposit from her friend, Chia gave her legal advice and did a host of legal work for her. Chia also enlisted another lawyer to attend the court mentions for this expedited order matter. On May 2, 2018, the friend was dishonestly induced into paying her $23,000 as legal fees. Chia's bankruptcy order was annulled on May 22, 2018, and she was allowed to practise law again. But a disciplinary tribunal was appointed after a complaint of misconduct was made against her. In June 2021, Chia's friend found out from an article in The Straits Times about the tribunal that Chia had been a bankrupt and did not have a practising certificate when she was representing her. On Oct 26 that year, the tribunal found that there was cause for disciplinary action against Chia. She was struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors in August 2022. In January 2025, Chia made full restitution to the two victims of the legal fees paid to her. She is now out on bail of $80,000 and is expected to begin serving her sentence on July 21.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store