They saw smoke spewing out of the windows of a fifth-storey flat and decided to investigate.

When they got there, they realised there was a fire in the flat’s kitchen.

To their shock, an elderly man inside the unit appeared oblivious to the fire.

Mr Rahizam AB Rahim, 46, told The New Paper yesterday: “My brother-in-law and I rushed to the flat and we saw the uncle sitting on the floor by the gate.

“He was trapped inside and all I could think of was getting him out of there.

“I asked him, ‘Uncle, are you okay? Please open the gate. I’ve come here to help you. Can you give me the padlock key and I’ll help you open the gate.'”

But the man, who was in his 60s, mumbled something incoherent and remained on the floor, leaving Mr Rahizam at a loss over what to do next. The incident happened on Sunday at around 1.50pm at Block 116, Jalan Bukit Merah, when Mr Rahizam, a technical assistant, was about to leave for a wedding.

The father of eight was at the carpark with his brother-in-law. He was waiting for his wife and kids to come down when they saw thick, black smoke coming out of the kitchen window of a unit on the same floor as his. They decided to check it out.

“When we stepped out of the lift, a crowd of people had gathered near the unit, but they didn’t dare go up to the gate.

“When I got to the gate, I could see flames coming out from the kitchen.”

BOLT CUTTER

Just as Mr Rahizam was contemplating how to get the elderly man to safety, a neighbour stepped forward with a bolt cutter.

Mr Rahizam tried to cut the padlock with the bolt cutter but found it too difficult. He eventually used the cutter to break the aluminium windows and grilles to allow another neighbour to climb inside to help the man.

But the resident refused to leave the flat through the window.

The neighbour then got out of the flat as the heat was getting intolerable and he had burned one of his hands, Mr Rahizam said.

“The uncle was very stubborn. He was covered in sweat and mumbling to himself,” he said.

“I told him again to give me his flat keys and this time, he walked slowly to a room and came out holding a pair of jeans.

“At first, I was worried that he was going to lock himself in the room, but luckily he didn’t.”

The elderly man rummaged through the pockets of the pair of jeans and finally produced the keys.

Mr Rahizam asked him for the keys and he complied.

“The fire was so intense that I couldn’t touch the padlock on the gate with my bare hands. One of the neighbours passed me a T-shirt to hold the padlock,” he said.

After Mr Rahizam opened the gate, he helped the man out and sat him down while another neighbour got him a glass of water.

By then, firefighters had arrived and quickly put out the fire.

Mr Rahizam said that when he moved into his flat four years ago, the man was already living there.

Click on thumbnail to view photos. Source: 

The New Paper, Lianhe Wanbao, Stomp, Mr Rahizam AB Rahim

WIFE NOT HOME

Neighbours said the man lives with his wife, but she was not home at the time of the fire.

A housewife, Mrs Russell Santiago, 41, who lives next door to the man’s flat, told TNP that she was cooking lunch when she smelled smoke.

“I thought it was nothing. It didn’t occur to me that it was a fire until I heard an explosion,” she said.

When she looked out of her window, she saw residents in the opposite block and people at the carpark below pointing to the unit next to hers.

To her horror, she saw fumes coming out from her neighbour’s kitchen window and promptly left the flat with her husband and two sons.

A Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) spokesman said it was alerted to the fire involving the contents of a kitchen at 1.50pm. SCDF officers put it out using two compressed air foam backpacks and a water jet.

The cause of the fire is under investigation.

This article was first published on April 19, 2016.
Get The New Paper for more stories.

The Singapore Budget Statement shows only revenues that the Government is allowed to spend under Singapore’s Constitution.

Land sales revenue is excluded as it is not available for budgetary spending by the Government.

* Under the Constitution, State land and revenues from land sales form part of Singapore’s Past Reserves, which are invested.

This avoids a situation where the Government of the day sells land just so that they can meet their expenditure needs, and ensures that the Government plans its long-term budget prudently.

* Singaporeans do benefit from these land sale revenues that are invested. Up to 50 per cent of net investment returns on our Reserves can be included in the Budget for spending.

This amount is reflected in the Budget Statement as Net Investment Returns Contribution. The land sales revenue figures are presented annually to Parliament in the Revenue and Expenditure Estimates, and are publicly available.

The figures are also included in the Singapore Government report to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) based on their prescribed presentation format. The IMF format includes all revenues, even those that are not available for spending under our Constitution.

Watch this video for more information about our reserves: 

The six-year-old boy in the centre of a controversy has been suspended from a PAP Community Foundation (PCF) childcare centre in Jurong for a week pending investigations, said the school.

He was accused of touching a girl, also six, inappropriately during nap time at the pre-school last Tuesday.

The girl’s father posted the incident on his Facebook wall that no teacher was present when the alleged incident took place and that another child in the class had witnessed it.

It went viral after online news portals picked up the story over the weekend.

According to the post, the boy had purportedly put his hand under the girl’s skirt during afternoon nap time. He allegedly admitted to doing so after being questioned.

The principal later told the girl’s parents that the school has informed the boy’s mother, who gave the school permission to mete out punishment but that was not allowed under PCF regulations.

“Not even a word of apology from the school and not even a word of apology from the boy’s parent. My girl is now feeling so frightened and traumatised. She even voiced out that she is so scared that it will happen again,” said the post by the girl’s father.

A video was posted on YouTube last Friday, showing a confrontation between the girl’s parents and PCF staff. Police officers were also seen trying to defuse the situation.

The girl’s mother was heard crying and asking: “Is that right or not? She’s my daughter? Of course I get upset.”

In a statement to the media yesterday, PCF Chief Executive Officer Victor Bay said its headquarters was informed of the incident on Wednesday and has been investigating the matter.

“We deeply regret the incident and fully sympathise with the parents in their distress. Our top priority is the well-being of our young children,” he said.

Kids under 7 ‘incapable of crime’

Children of pre-school age are generally curious about the differences between males and females.

They begin to explore these differences or “show curiosity about sexuality in play at a very young age, such as playing house or doctor”, senior clinical psychologist Loo Wee Shyon of the Institute of Mental Health’s Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry told The New Paper.

“There are some sexual behaviours that are problematic and warrant attention from parents, adults and even professionals – for example, if the child continues touching someone else’s private parts even after he or she has been told consistently not to do so,” he said.

Dr Loo said in such instances, parents and caregivers should remain calm and resist the impulse to react strongly or to tell the child that he or she has done something “dirty” or “shameful”. The adult should intervene and divert the child to an appropriate activity “as soon as possible”.

“The adult or parent should then calmly explain that it’s not okay to touch someone else’s private part because private parts are not for sharing,” he said.

WITNESSED

Dr Loo added that adults should “try to explore where the child could have learnt the inappropriate behaviour and if they had been subjected to or witnessed any inappropriate sexual activity by someone”.

“If unsure, they should share their concerns with a trusted adult, such as a counsellor, doctor or teacher,” he said.

Children below the age of seven cannot be charged with offences because the law assumes they are doli incapax (Latin for incapable of crime).

Criminal lawyer Luke Lee said: “Under the age of seven, they are deemed to be too young and are incapable of forming the intent to commit a crime. Therefore, they cannot be held responsible for their actions.”

Those below 12 will not be considered to have committed an offence if they are deemed not mature enough to understand the result of their behaviour.

According to the Ministry of Social and Family Development website, the main priority for very young offenders is to provide early intervention to prevent their behaviour from escalating to serious delinquency.

juditht@sph.com.sg

This article was first published on April 19, 2016.
Get The New Paper for more stories.