Ho Ching appears to take aim online at Jamus Lim, but some netizens stand up for him
Afterwards, SM Lee's wife, Ho Ching, waded into the fray with a Facebook post that appeared to be aimed at the WP MP, an associate professor of economics, who had attended the Economic Society of Singapore's annual dinner where SM Lee had made remarks on a number of issues, including the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) and access to car ownership in Singapore.
While Assoc Prof Lim praised SM Lee's 'masterclass in the economist's way of thinking' and called him a 'mighty fine economist,' he also explained how he differed from SM Lee, advocating for policies that lead towards a 'more empathetic and just economy and society'.
While Mdm Ho did not name Assoc Prof Lim in her post, she asked why, instead of standing up 'to propound his proposal', he had gone out 'to post some virtue signals on social media'.
She surmised that 'he' — the unnamed person — 'was afraid to lose his credibility among the thinking people,' that is, academicians, investors, business leaders, and political leaders.
The most telling part of the post that suggested it was aimed at the WP MP came at the end, when she wrote, 'Beware Hep A virus in raw or uncooked cockles!'
Assoc Prof Lim had gone viral during the 2020 general election campaign period for having said in a debate that when Singapore Democratic Party's Chee Soon Juan highlighted inequalities in the education system, it ' warms the cockles of my heart.'
When the WP's Sengkang team won that year, he thanked residents, saying it 'warms the cockles of our hearts to be able to work for the people of Singapore, and for all Singaporeans,' and holding up a finger heart as he spoke. Afterwards, he joked that he had been banned from using the phrase.
While some netizens sided with Mdm Ho, others did not.
'Mdm Ho – you should attack the point, not the speaker,' wrote one.
Some stood up for the WP MP.
'I don't think that was what Jamus intended. You knew that there was not enough time for everyone to ask questions due to time constraints. Only a few questions were entertained,' a Facebook user chimed in.
'Maybe Jamus was courteous and didn't want to put people in a difficult position? What if those esteemed folks agreed with Jamus but didn't want to offend your husband? How are they supposed to react in public? Jamus spared them from having to make a difficult decision between staying true to themselves and keeping their rice bowl,' another opined.
'Imagine thinking that post is virtue signalling, when the man literally delivered a policy rebuttal with nuance and restraint. Must've hit a nerve,' a netizen commented.
A Facebook user reminded others: 'All said and done and dusted, Jamus and his team gave PAP a knockdown in Sengkang, in the recent GE . That speaks for something.' /TISG
Read also: SM Lee vs Jamus Lim on COE and the 'best way to meet people's needs and take care of them'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
25 minutes ago
- CNA
Malaysia PM Anwar announces US$24 cash handout for all adults to head off rising costs
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia's Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim on Wednesday (Jul 23) announced new measures to address growing public disquiet about the rising cost of living, including a cash handout for all adult citizens and a promise to lower fuel prices. The announcement came ahead of a planned protest to be held in Malaysia's capital Kuala Lumpur on Saturday, calling for Anwar to step down over escalating prices and a failure to deliver on promised reforms, among other concerns. Anwar's administration has carried out a number of measures to boost revenue and productivity this year, including a minimum wage hike, increased electricity tariffs on heavy power users, and new sales taxes on some imported fruits and luxury goods. Anwar has said the moves were mainly targeted at large businesses and the wealthy, but critics have voiced fears that higher costs would eventually be passed down to consumers, including lower and middle income earners. On Wednesday, Anwar said all adult Malaysians above 18 years old will receive a RM100 (US$24) one-off cash aid to be disbursed from Aug 31. The government will spend a total RM15 billion in cash aid in 2025, up from RM13 billion originally allocated for the year, he said. Police have said they expect between 10,000 and 15,000 people to attend the Saturday protest, which has been organised by opposition parties. "I acknowledge the complaints and accept that the cost of living remains a challenge that must be addressed, even though we have announced various measures thus far," Anwar said. He added that further initiatives to aid those in poverty will be launched on Thursday. Anwar said the government will also announce details on a long-awaited plan to remove blanket subsidies on the widely used RON95 transport fuel before the end of September. Once the subsidy changes are implemented, Malaysians will see fuel prices at the pump drop to RM1.99 per litre, compared to the current price of RM2.50, Anwar said. Foreign nationals, however, will have to pay unsubsidised market prices for the fuel, he added. Anwar previously said in his Budget 2025 speech last year that RON95 subsidies will be cut for Malaysia's top 15 per cent income group. It is not clear whether this remains part of the rationalisation plan. Some middle-class Malaysians had expressed concerns that they could fall into this group - which a 2022 income survey defined as households with a combined monthly income of at least RM13,500 - despite already struggling with rising expenses. Anwar on Wednesday also announced additional allocations for a government programme aimed at increasing access to affordable goods and necessities, and vowed to improve other existing aid measures. Malaysia has seen inflation fall this year, but worries persist over increasing prices of basic necessities like food. Data released this week showed consumer prices rising 1.1 per cent from a year earlier last month, but the costs of food and beverages were up at a faster pace of 2.1 per cent.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
ICJ climate ruling: Five things to watch for
Find out what's new on ST website and app. The advisory opinion will be read out from 1300 GMT (9pm Singapore time). THE HAGUE - The International Court of Justice is preparing to hand down its first-ever opinion on climate change on July 23, seen by many as a historic moment in international law. The advisory opinion will be read out from 1300 GMT (9pm Singapore time). Judges have waded through tens of thousands of pages of written submissions and heard two weeks of oral arguments during the ICJ's biggest-ever case. Its own 'advisory opinion' is expected to run to several hundred pages, as it clarifies nations' obligations to prevent climate change and the consequences for polluters that have failed to do so. Here are some of the key things to watch for: What legal framework? This is the crux of the matter and speaks to the first question put to the court on countries' responsibilities to tackle climate change. ICJ judges will seek to pull together different strands of environmental law into one definitive international standard. Top polluters say this is unnecessary, and that the legal provisions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are sufficient. But opponents argue the ICJ should adopt a broader yardstick, including human rights law and the laws of the sea. Vanuatu urged judges to consider 'the entire corpus of international law' in its opinion, arguing the ICJ was uniquely placed to do so. The ICJ is 'the only international jurisdiction with a general competence over all areas of international law, which allows it to provide such an answer,' said Vanuatu. And the consequences? This is the more controversial second question the judges will consider: what are the legal repercussions – if any – for countries who significantly contribute to the climate crisis? The United States, the world's biggest historical emitter of greenhouse gases, and other top polluters referred the court to the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement, which does not explicitly provide for direct compensation for past damage. Issues around liability are highly sensitive in climate negotiations, but at UN talks in 2022 wealthy nations did agree to create a fund to help vulnerable countries deal with current impacts caused by past pollution. Many top polluters also say it is impossible to assign blame to individual countries for a global phenomenon with unequal effects. Those on the other side of the debate point to a basic principle of international law – 'ubi jus, ubi remedium' – roughly speaking, where there's blame, there's a claim. In legal jargon, this should result in cessation, non-repetition and reparations, argue the climate-vulnerable nations. They want the ICJ to propose a stop to fossil fuel subsidies, a drastic reduction in emissions, and a formal commitment and timeline for decarbonisation. They also demand monetary reparations, as well as increased support for adapting to the devastating future effects of climate change. Harm or no harm? Another key point is the issue of 'transboundary' law, often known as the 'no-harm' rule. Put simply, this key tenet of international law means one state should not permit activities on its territory that could cause damage to another. The question ICJ judges will have to consider is: does this apply to greenhouse gas emissions that have contributed to climate change? Major polluters argue this law does not apply to climate change as there is no single, specific source that can be identified as damaging another state. Others say that climate change should not be an exception. Other major international judicial decisions in recent months have looked to increasing scientific precision in the link between human-caused climate change and severe impacts like extreme weather, nature loss and sea level rise. When did they know? A fundamental debating point in the oral hearings was: when did governments become aware greenhouse gas emissions were harming the planet? The late 1980s, according to the United States. Switzerland said no one could have linked emissions to rising temperatures before scientific studies in that decade. Rubbish, say climate-vulnerable countries, who point to research in developed nations as early as the 1960s. This could have an impact on when potential reparations kick in. 'Future generations' The concept of 'intergenerational equity' is another fundamental demand of the young climate justice campaigners who helped bring this case to the world's highest court. 'The impact of climate change is not bounded by time,' argued Namibia, with the worst effects hitting people decades or maybe centuries later. But developed countries counter that the rights of as-yet-unborn people have no force in international law. 'Human beings alive now cannot claim rights on behalf of future generations,' argued Germany. AFP
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
Japan vows more US rice imports within tariff-free quota
TOKYO :Japan will import more rice from the United States but within the existing tariff-free quota, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said on Wednesday, stressing Tokyo's success in protecting the agricultural sector in agreeing a bilateral trade deal. After months of negotiations, the two countries struck a deal to lower the so-called "reciprocal tariffs" to 15 per cent from a proposed 25 per cent, and said increased rice shipments from the U.S. to Japan was part of that deal. Under a World Trade Organization (WTO) "minimum access" framework introduced in 1995, Japan imports about 770,000 metric tons of rice tariff-free every year. Last fiscal year, the U.S. accounted for 45 per cent of the total. "We made absolutely no sacrifice in the agricultural sector," Ishiba told reporters. "Import volumes will remain within the minimum access framework and we retain the discretion over how much and what type (of rice) to import from each country," he said. Announcing the trade deal on Tuesday in Washington, President Donald Trump said Japan would increase market access to American producers of cars, trucks, rice and certain agricultural products, among other items. Neither country disclosed what other farm products were included, but Ishiba said the deal did not include a lowering of tariffs. Beyond the minimum access framework, Japan imposes a levy of 341 yen ($2.36) per kg of rice, which has, for the most part, effectively priced imports out of the market. While these imports have typically been negligible due to Japan's self-sufficiency for its staple grain, the country has imported historically high amounts over the past year due to a shortage and ensuing spike in the price of home-grown rice.
