Warnings to heed

On the 5th of Feb 2005 , in the Straits Times (the nation's newspaper), there is an interesting juxataposition of two articles. The treatment of the content and its presentation will serve to explain the kind of priorities that's placed on the nation's agenda (since we conclude the ST presents the kind of national agenda we should enforce).

The first is an article on a homosexual teacher who was given a warning by the police, but not arrested hence no criminal record. The authorities have decided to warn his employers about his history and thus raise a potential ethical dilemma. Below is the article.

-----------------------------

TEACHER LET OFF WITH A WARNING
Should the police have told school about his offence?
Police arrested him for a sex offence but freed him with stern warning
By Tracy Sua

IN WHAT lawyers describe as an unusual move, police have sent a letter to a school for disabled children, warning that one of its teachers was once arrested for a sexual offence.
TARGET OF WARNING: Mr Fernandez, who teaches students with learning disabilities, openly admits he is gay, but says that does not make him a paedophile. He is afraid now that the police disclosure will lose him his job.

Even though he was let off with a warning and was not charged, police said they acted because the man, Mr Paul Fernandez, 42, deals with young children at The Centre for Exceptional Children, which teaches students with learning disabilities.

However, Mr Fernandez, while openly admitting that he is gay, said that does not make him a paedophile.

He was arrested on Sept 11, 2003, for committing an act of gross indecency on the public staircase landing of a private block of flats in Klang Lane in Little India. He admits being arrested, but is now afraid that the police disclosure will lose him his job.

Police did not reveal the exact nature of the offence, but said that 'after careful consideration of the facts and circumstances in the case, and in consultation with the Attorney-General's Chambers', it was decided last year that Mr Fernandez would be issued with a stern warning in lieu of prosecution.

In addition, police sent a letter to the school around October last year informing it of the action taken against their teacher.

In response, the school did not sack him, but instructed Mr Fernandez to abide by several rules, including teaching in a classroom with a window so he could be monitored by staff.

Mrs Queenie Tan, the school's principal, said the case would be reviewed at a special meeting on Feb 15, when it would be decided whether Mr Fernandez could keep his job.

She said the decision would be made based on whether he complied with the rules set for him, and on parents' sentiments.

She did add, however, that Mr Fernandez had not complied with certain rules, such as teaching in a classroom with a window.

Mrs Tan also said his conduct since he was hired in July last year had been deteriorating. On several occasions, she said, he had failed to turn up for class.

Mr Fernandez refutes the charges, claiming that he had not been told about the new rules. He said the school had intended to fire him from the outset and had concocted a story about the rules to cover up its true intentions.

Mrs Tan denied this, insisting that Mr Fernandez had been given a chance 'to prove himself'.

Lawyers said it was unusual for police to inform private sector employers.

'If the person being investigated is a civil servant and if he is convicted, the police will normally inform his employers. If it is a lawyer, they will inform the Law Society. For private sector employers, it is unusual for the police to inform the employer when it is just a warning,' said criminal lawyer Selva K. Naidu.

However, well-known criminal lawyer Subhas Anandan noted that Mr Fernandez had accepted the warning.

'The fact remains that if you have not done anything wrong, you should not accept the warning,' Mr Subhas said. 'Accepting the warning is practically admitting you are guilty of the charge. In some instances, some people will accept the warning even though they feel the law is not fair, to avoid going to trial.'

Police said they had acted in the best interests of the schoolchildren.

'It was deemed necessary to share this information with the school in view of his role as a teacher to young children,' said police media relations officer Rachel Yeo.

Mr Subhas said the issue was 'a delicate matter'.

'The police feel duty bound to tell because of the sensitive nature of his employment and it is quite fair they did this if he accepted the warning and did not deny the charge,' he said.

'The school has given him a chance, but it has a duty to the kids too... I think he should comply with them.'

-----------------------------------------

The second is an article on global warming and how it could affect Singapore. In the print edition, there was a primer section on global warming and its cycle. That was not reproduced in the online electronic edition but heres a link to assist your understanding. Below is the article that relates this calamity with Singapore (Italics my emphasis).

----------------------------

Global warming could affect S'pore Low-lying reclaimed land could be submerged as sea levels rise

By Arnold Gay

RISING sea levels due to climate change are not just a concern in remote areas. Some low-lying parts of Singapore could also be affected if water levels rise, say experts.

'The sea level rise, with a minimum of 10cm and a maximum of 90cm by 2100, will impact Singapore as it's an island nation with a lot of low-lying reclaimed land, ' said Dr Matthias Roth, a climate scientist at the National University of Singapore.

However, short of a complete meltdown in the Arctic and Antarctic, the immediate impact on Singapore's low-lying areas, some barely above sea-level, is unlikely to be dramatic.

Still, Dr Roth's analysis is based on a conservative estimate. In the Armageddon scenario set out by scientists at a recent conference on climate change in Exeter, England, a meltdown of both the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets could see sea levels rise by up to 7m.

All around the world, there is a growing realisation that global warming is now a real problem.

For years, it was a poor relative to trade and globalisation. But the sceptics have come around in the face of signs of nature's backlash.

'The balance of evidence has shifted one way,' said British Prime Minister Tony Blair at Davos during his keynote address. And it may be shifting faster than expected.

Last week, an independent report warned of global warming approaching the point of no return, with a danger of 'abrupt, accelerated, or runaway climate change'.

'World leaders need to recognise that climate change is the single most important long-term issue that the planet faces,' said Mr Stephen Byers, co-chairman of the task force from the Institute for Public Policy Research in Britain, the Centre for American Progress in the United States and the Australia Institute.

Just days later, a World Wildlife Fund Environment Group report said global temperatures could surge by as much as 2 deg C in just 20 years, and not 100 years.

Until now, few scientists have estimated such an early date for a 2 deg C rise; the broad estimate had been a rise of 1.5 deg C to 5.8 deg C by 2100.

Climatologists also differ over what constitutes a 'critical' level.

'Nobody can define 'critical' because we don't know what a safe level is,' said Dr Roth.

The conventional view is that the earth's temperature would rise gradually as more greenhouse gases get trapped in the atmosphere.

The earth's climate system will then gradually adjust in a predictable linear fashion.

But scientists at Exeter said there was a risk of sudden and catastrophic climate changes.

Some climatologists also say extreme events are now more frequent and more intense.

The last 10 years have already been the warmest on record, with four of the hottest years ever between 1998 and last year.

In the last four years, temperatures rose by an estimated 0.58 deg C, and some climatologists believe it has caused some natural disasters and freaky weather.

One is worth highlighting - the first hurricane developed in the South Atlantic Ocean, where conditions were believed unsuitable for such a formation.

But for all the mounting concern, the prospects of controlling global warming are uncertain, without the involvement of the US.

The Kyoto Protocol, a landmark treaty to limit greenhouse gas emissions among industrialised nations, takes effect on Feb 16 without the US.

'In the long run, treaties are only effective if the major greenhouse gas emitting countries have signed up to it and the reduction targets are enforced,' said Dr Roth.

Ironically, it may be high oil prices and businesses that will get the US involved.

'The business community is somewhat more receptive to the fact that the climate is changing, ... they are the first to feel a loss in revenue or sense business opportunities,' said Dr Roth.

Here too, small states like Singapore can play their part.

As one of the highest per capita producers of carbon dioxide and a wealthy nation, it has the added responsibility of putting the issue on the agenda. Singapore has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol.

'Singapore's main contribution could come from the development of alternative, fuel-saving technologies. It has the infrastructure and brainpower, and money can be made because I feel this will be one of the future growth industries,' said Dr Roth.

-----------------------------------------------------------

There was a difference in how both articles were treated in the newspapers. The first article was posted as Prime news occupying half of the page, while the second article was posted as part of the World news occupying only 1/4 of the page or less. However, the primer article occupied a large space with pictures, colour and graphs hence we can conclude that global warming is indeed a matter we should consider seriously.

My contention, as this example would show, is that the state is more concerned about enforcing its own laws within its own legislation (the criminalising of homosexuals) than playing on active role in scrutinizing its own apathy in following a serious global protocol. As stated, the nation press adopts its own agenda in framing issues that are consistent with state ideology, one of which being to represent homosexuals as "dangerous", "paedophile" or "born criminals". Concerns with the outside world are deemed as less important, our own country's failure to ratify the Kyoto Protocol is given a passing remark and instead glossed over with a plausible, but yet not effective, recommendation by a national university professor. The message is clear: Care more about your local homosexual than the advent of rising sea levels, raising temperatures and possibly more nature disasters.

I believe that there are many possible reasons to explain Singapore's failure to ratify the Kyoto Protocol (for now, my intuition leads to two main hypotheses: a reflexive obedience to US's decision, or a conscious drive to generate more industrial economic wealth despite the costs). This maxim is unacceptable if Singapore, as postulated by President S.R. Nathan in his recent speech, chooses to be a "global citizen". The state must hold itself accountable to contributing to the health of the planet, without any wishy washy debilitation on the matter. Climate warning is a phenomena most scientists have held a firm general consensus over (and one should be skeptical of those who disagree otherwise) and demands a morally responsible decision as resident of the planet we should take. This moral responsibility is no different regardless of the status, size or geography of the country.