SINGAPORE: Deep in the heart of Chai Chee, Runda Minimart is everything you’d expect of a heartland provision shop.

The storefront at Block 21, Chai Chee Road is packed with shelves of bread, eggs and children’s toys. Then there’s the customary row of colourful gashapon machines.

But walk inside and there is an unexpected sight: A silver-haired Caucasian manning the cash register. Australian Peter Brown, 62, has worked as a cashier in the shop since it first opened three years ago.

“Several people come in and go: ‘Ang moh in a shop? In Singapore? It’s not possible!’” he told Channel NewsAsia after completing a shift. “Then they ask if it’s my business. They think all ang mohs are bosses, not workers.”

The Permanent Resident, who has lived in Singapore for 24 years, is not your typical expatriate. He earns S$1,000 a month working four-hour shifts, seven days a week. Home is a rented room in an HDB flat a short walk away.

Peter has been around for so long that he’s become a familiar face in the neighbourhood. Even the fruit seller waves and shouts “ang moh” each time he walks by.

Some customers do not register Peter’s race, and automatically speak to him in Mandarin. He has picked up the language over time, although he is still far from fluent. 

So, when he replies to customers, they often look up in shock before asking where he is from. “From China,” he usually says. “I play games with them.”

But Peter’s job is far from being just a game.

On top of his cashiering duties, he takes stock of sometimes challenging deliveries. “There are hundreds of different items and I’ve got to get them on the shelves or stored away because they block the aisles,” he said.

Peter also ensures the racks and fridges are constantly full. This means moving around a lot and topping up the bestselling Carlsberg cans as soon as they fly off the shelves.

“Some days are dull, some days are very busy,” he said. “It’s not my idea of a career. I’m doing it because I can’t find anything else.”

THE ARTIST

It’s Friday morning at the shop and business has been slow all week. Then, a man pulls up with a trolley loaded with boxes of chips and cookies. Suddenly it’s not so slow.

Peter leaves his post and pulls the inventory list close to his nose – something doesn’t seem right. A line starts forming at the cashier and a boy impatiently rings the bell on the counter.

This is Peter’s world.

To understand how this elderly man ended up working in a cramped shop almost 5,000km away from home, you have to go back more than two decades to when he landed his first job in Singapore at an American firm based in Bukit Timah.

Peter, a stained glass artist, had just come off a failed business venture in Australia. He was also hit with a fine after his previous employer ran into some legal problems.

“I needed to find some money urgently,” he said. “This company was offering me a good wage and immediate work, and I jumped at the opportunity.”

In 1993, the then 38-year-old left for Singapore to embark on a six-month contract painting windows for Hard Rock Cafes in the region.

The company had to look as far as Australia because glass painters were a “rare breed”. Furthermore, Peter said, it felt American artists would struggle with the culture shock of living and working in a place like Singapore.

It didn’t take long for Peter to experience the shock for himself.

“Here in Singapore, clients would spend six months debating how much to pay, and as soon as they agree the cost, they want the thing tomorrow,” he said. “My boss was constantly on my back, asking me to work faster and more efficiently.”

Outside of the “punishing schedules” at the office, Peter grappled with the unfamiliar cuisine. He described mee rebus as ingredients “floating around in this dark gravy”, while the smell of shrimp sauce in rojak “made me want to vomit”.

The weather was also too hot, and he did not understand a word of the local slang. “I remember going into the lift at work,” he said. “These girls were talking and I asked my colleague what language they were speaking. English? You’re kidding!”

Over the years, Peter got used to things. He learnt to love rojak and eventually spoke perfect Singlish. As for his job, the American company “kept getting work and they kept needing me”. The six-month contract became 12, then 18.

It wasn’t all good news, though.

The company started losing money and eventually fired him in 1995 after an argument. “I was in a low state of mind because I had lost my job, and I didn’t know whether I would stay here or go back to Australia,” he said.

THE CHURCH-GOER

Back at the shop, Peter usually takes the morning shift, which runs from 8am till noon. He raises the shutters, pushes out the roller shelves and counts the cigarette cartons in the cabinet behind the counter. This is a daily routine.

Cigarettes are one of the shop’s most popular items, Peter said before attending to a customer. He plucked out a pack of Winston Reds and pushed it across the counter. 

Peter’s final assignment at the American company was to paint some windows for Bethesda Cathedral, a large church in Chai Chee. He completed the painting, but got sacked before it went up.

Just before Christmas that year, Peter turned up at the church with his camera as he always made it a habit to photograph his work for his portfolio.

“They were having a Christmas barbeque,” he said. “They were curious and didn’t know who I was, and they invited me to a church service.”

Peter identified as Christian at that time, but he wasn’t particularly pious. Even so, he found himself warming to the church’s messages.

He started attending church every week and eventually taught children at the Sunday school there. He also began teaching kids art and craft on Saturday evenings.

Peter also found a job at a local stained glass company, where he designed pieces for churches, hotels and condominiums. His proudest work? For a private home in Kuala Lumpur, he painted Da Vinci’s The Last Supper on a 3m by 2m window.

Peter admitted that he has grown comfortable in Singapore. “It was just a job,” he said of his first stint with the American company. “My plan was to come here, earn money and go home.”

More than a year after he left the glass company in 2012, a couple of church members opened the provision shop in Chai Chee and hired him as its cashier.

“I never dreamt that I would stay in Singapore for so long,” he said.

THE NOMAD

During his years here, Peter has lived in more than 10 homes, in locations ranging from Queenstown to Bedok North. He’s had to move around a lot because rental fees are “crazy”. “Everybody is selling their units,” he said.

He hates the constant shifting, but it has meant he has been able to explore different parts of Singapore. Because he loves the beach, he is particularly fond of Sentosa. And after moving to the east, he would regularly cycle along East Coast Park, which he called “one of Singapore’s great little places”.

Despite that, Peter said he’s not a very social person. Besides attending gatherings with church members on Friday evenings, he keeps very much to himself.

Still, he makes it a point to see his two brothers and a sister in Australia once a year. He goes to Bathurst, a small town three hours away by car from Sydney, where he grew up on a “beautiful” farm with his parents. His father died last July, his mother four years ago.

He also misses Australia’s seasons, vast spaces and Western food, which he stressed is more than “french fries, coleslaw and baked beans”.

Does he feel lonely in Singapore? “All the time, but you get used to it,” he replied. “Being alone is part of life. You don’t really make friends, but you chit-chat with customers.”

Peter said he’s been through a number of relationships here, but “nothing’s happened”. “I thought that I would like to get married. I thought I’d be a successful artist anywhere I go,” he said. “That’s a bit of a frustration for me.”

At his age, Peter acknowledged that the “book is closing fast, but I don’t know where it leads”. 

“I’ve seen so many people here in Singapore in their 70s who are struggling to walk and don’t work,” he added. “In 10 years’ time, am I going to be sick?”

Peter keeps fit by visiting a gym in Chai Chee twice a week. He used to play tennis too, but his age has put the brakes on that. “Thankfully, my father and mother lived to 95 and 93, so maybe there’s good genes in the family,” he said with a laugh.

He’s also earning some extra cash by giving English tuition and working part-time with the same local glass company. This is so he can cover his S$600 a month rent and expenses like his phone bill and annual trip home.

Peter doesn’t want to retire because he can’t afford it. But things might change. With the inheritance from his late parents, he could buy his own house, be it in Singapore or Australia. It’s something he’s never had in his life.

Nevertheless, Peter described himself as the “biggest procrastinator in the world”. “When I get older, I won’t be able to work hard and my income goes down, so where do I spend my old age?” he said. “I avoid making decisions at all costs.”

He always found himself sticking around in Singapore because “there’s always work here to do”. He has great affection for the church too. “For some strange reason, it’s a good church.”

For Peter, life had not turned out how he thought it would, but he learnt not to “worry about what you think you’re lacking”.

“Life has its way of leading you to places, and it’s not your plan,” he said.

SINGAPORE: Singaporeans do not like to be told that we bombed in a test of any sort.

So it’s no surprise that news on Wednesday (Jan 31) that Singapore is seen as one of the least exciting among 32 cities in Time Out London’s 2018 City Life Index stirred up a storm on social media.

Netizens rushed to defend Singapore’s reputation, with many highlighting how Singapore has become more interesting over the years with events like the Formula 1 Grand Prix.

A few visitors to Singapore also chimed in, saying they’ve enjoyed their trips here.

But the greatest applause for defending the country’s reputation must surely go to the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) which released a video on Facebook.

“There is nothing exciting to do”, the video exclaims against a backdrop of many well-loved attractions, events and activities – including a bungy jump.

Well played STB.

Never mind that no one I know has tried the bungy jump in Singapore. STB’s response showing netizens what Singapore has in store for those with a nose for adventure was a brilliant move in earning scores of eyeballs from all around the world.

Perhaps STB can chalk up the video as a public relations success, with an acquired viewership of what would otherwise require an expensive marketing campaign to promote Singapore as a tourism destination to achieve.

And as it was put out just a day after the Time Out index was reported, one must also commend STB for the speed at which a response was decided upon and issued.

Its video format, which aimed to show netizens how exciting Singapore is as a lifestyle destination with a tongue-in-cheek tone, was also a refreshing break from the usual official practice of issuing rebuttals based on written argument and rational logic.

OWNING OUR 31ST PLACE

Where praises were sung and compliments were generously dished out online following STB’s response, these stood in stark contrast to the majority of comments when the news first broke – comments that seemed to suggest Singapore deserved what it got.

“Agree that Singapore is expensive and boring. I rather spend the money in neighbouring countries to get most of my cash,” said one netizen.

Others lamented our lack of culture and appreciation for the arts, and our dearth of creativity and imagination.

Whatever we say about Singapore, there’s no denying Singaporeans are an interesting bunch who will have something to say about any index the country is placed on, especially if our national pride seems at stake.

Yet it is curious that we should place so much emphasis on such surveys which seem subjective and, in this case, based on the opinions of just 235 people living here. Who are these 235 folks and are they representative of our population?

Global surveys are also never free from respondent bias, so let’s face it – whether Singapore is exciting or not depends on who you ask. What makes for a great city to one might seem tedious to another.

Where the abundance of new clubbing would arguably be more attractive to a millennial in their twenties, people like myself probably derive more entertainment from sitting at home and watching a favourite television show with the family – over a bowl of fishball noodles from the nearby hawker centre.

So who is to say what the best standards for judging how exciting a city is are?

All this is not to suggest that we deserve a higher position. Indeed the other cities on the list are well-established destinations, known for their live music and bustling night life.

But it might be worth taking a step back and asking ourselves – what’s the value of such rankings? 

RANKED FOR WHAT?

Where we have no shortage of information about how Singapore is doing internationally, whether this be the latest World Economic Forum ranking on competitiveness or Bloomberg’s innovation ranking, what is more important is how these should be processed in a meaningful manner.

Where rankings of cities as lifestyle destinations have little relevance to resident populations, it seems worthwhile to understand who their target audience is – to help us contextualise Time Out’s index.

This is where things got a lot more revealing. 

Time Out after all is a publication whose client centre says their audiences are primarily 15- to 34-year-olds who have taken 5.2 holidays in the last 12 months, go to a live music concert 4.4 times on average each year, and visit a bar 10 times a month.

In a popularity contest among these global youths, how should Singaporeans feel about coming in 31st of most exciting cities from around the world? 

It’s just like being told you were ranked 31st in a beauty contest you didn’t even know you entered.

And even if we were the most exciting city, would we attract the most number of tourists, if that is our intention? Lots of readers would likely shudder at that prospect.

Where it’s been pointed out that Singapore’s tourism strategy targets the Chinese market, what reach does Time Out London have in Beijing and Shanghai and other vast population centres like Chengdu and Tianjin?

Even though city rankings like these have more value for specific demographics of tourists than for resident populations, no doubt Singaporeans will continue to follow these with great interest.

Where popular sentiment towards how Singapore fares as a country will remain a nebulous quality that is difficult to quantify, perhaps the value these survey have for us is to simply prompt debate on what we ourselves think, and properly situate just who did the survey and who it’s meant for.

Until then, it might be worth taking these international rankings less seriously, or at least taking them with a pinch of salt.

Unless of course you’re STB. Then it’s a good chance to score some tourism promotion for Singapore at a bargain price.

Lin Suling is executive editor of the Commentary section at Channel NewsAsia Digital News.

SINGAPORE: With Singapore facing its highest security threat in recent years, security spending will be a major item on the Government’s expenditure list and it is expected to increase over the next decade , said Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat on Friday (Feb 2) after a visit to the Home Team Tactical Centre.

He said that it is important that action is taken to keep Singapore safe and secure.

From S$14.8 billion in FY2011, Singapore’s security spending has increased steadily to S$19.5 billion in FY2016, according to data from the Ministry of Finance (MOF). The latter accounted for 4.7 per cent of Singapore’s gross domestic product (GDP).

When asked how much security spending could increase, Mr Heng declined to put a figure to it but noted that it is clearly an “important area to invest resources in”.

To fund these expenditure increases, it will be crucial for the Government to do its long-term projections for expenditure and revenue, which will be revealed on Feb 19 when Budget 2018 is delivered, said Mr Heng.

HOME TEAM TO BUILD STRONGER CAPABILITIES

The Singapore Police Force (SPF) has enhanced its counterterrorism capabilities to tackle the rising security threat, said Director Operations, Assistant Commissioner How Kwang Hee.

“Over the past two years, the police have deployed specialist teams like the Emergency Response Teams and the in-situ reaction teams to respond swiftly and effectively to terror attacks,” he said.

“The police have also leveraged technology to better support our frontline officers by investing in technological infrastructure to help the Home Team better leverage data analytics, sensors and sense-making capabilities to enhance the effectiveness of ground operations.”

One example is the increased use of analytics in operations such as having police cameras equipped with video analytics capabilities to detect safety and security incidents.

The police have installed more cameras in public areas to provide better sense marking capabilities during an attack, said Mr How.

More than 65,000 police cameras have been installed at 10,000 HDB blocks and multi-storey carparks as of Sep 2017. Another 11,000 cameras will be installed at 2,500 locations islandwide by 2020, covering public areas in town, neighbourhood and hawker centres

The police will continue to dedicate more resources into developing its counterterrorism capabilities by enhancing training and equipment of frontline officers, as well as integrating the operations of Singapore’s security agencies. 

As part of his visit on Friday, Mr Heng observed several counterterrorism demonstrations by the SPF and the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF). 

This included a demonstration by the Special Tactics and Rescue (STAR) Unit which stormed a room to apprehend “terrorists”. The ground response forces, emergency response teams, rapid development troop and SCDF also demonstrated a concerted tiered response capability to a public security threat.

SINGAPORE: Issues surrounding the flash floods in Singapore last month, the errant parking of shared bicycles and a money-for-love dating platform will be on the agenda when Parliament sits on Monday (Feb 5).

Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam will also be making a ministerial statement about the Government’s position on the City Harvest Church ruling, and a motion to support seniors will be discussed.

Several parts of eastern Singapore were hit by flash floods on Jan 8 following intense rain, with dramatic photos and videos showing partially submerged cars and pedestrians wading in knee-deep water.

According to the Parliament order paper released on Friday, five questions on flooding have been tabled.

Workers’ Party Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Dennis Tan Lip Fong has asked what caused the heavy flooding on Jan 8, what has been done to help those affected and what measures will be taken to prevent similar incidents. 

People’s Action Party Member of Parliament (MP) Henry Kwek has asked whether flood prevention systems will prevent a recurrence of the Jan 8 floods after the completion of drainage upgrades next year.

MP Cheryl Chan Wei Ling has asked about whether works at Bedok Canal affected the Jan 8 flood at Bedok North Avenue 4. Four of the flash flood locations that day had led to Bedok Canal and are subject to tidal influence.

MP Cheng Li Hui has asked how motorists are notified of flash floods while MP Murali Pillai has queried how PUB ensures drains and canals are kept free of debris to alleviate flooding.

PUB said last month that floods at Tampines Avenue 12 on Jan 8 were aggravated by an obstructed ditch near a construction site.

Other issues on Parliament’s agenda include the errant parking of bicycles. Last month 62 bikes from three bike-sharing companies were impounded for obstructing foot paths during an enforcement operation by the Land Transport Authority.

Minister for Transport Khaw Boon Wan has been asked what can be done to address the indiscriminate parking of such bicycles and what more can be done to make bike-sharing operators clear such bikes, as well as whether there are plans to require these companies to invest in bike-docking stations.

Other issues on the agenda include questions over money-for-love online dating platform TheSugarBook, which seeks to pair wealthy individuals with “sugar babies”. 

Minister for Social and Family Development Desmond Lee has been asked what his ministry’s position is on the platform and whether it will be taking steps to address the “possible harm and exploitation” that its targets could be subjected to.

He has also been asked whether such platforms are legal in Singapore and what measures are in place to protect the vulnerable.

Elsewhere, MP Desmond Choo has asked about issues over the recent theft of fuel from Shell’s Pulau Bukom refinery and whether petrochemical companies’ security needs to be tightened.

NCMP Dennis Tan has asked whether the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau will conduct a “thorough investigation” into the business affairs of Keppel Offshore and Marine following its corruption scandal.

MPs have also posed questions on the number of road traffic accidents overseas involving Singaporeans, recent popping and cracking of floor tiles in HDB flats and cryptocurrency trading.

Several Bills will be up for debate, including the Cybersecurity Bill which is designed to empower the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore to manage and respond to cybersecurity threats.