![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Some non-trivial things are still uncited, and the section doesn't cover any attempts to reform this/public perception of the service.---- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 23:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
National service in Singapore. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
for some reason there's a chart explaining how much the various ranks have gotten paid over time. ok, cool. But it's WRONG.
There are some columns in the middle that go like this: [march 2012] [blank] [blank] [april 2012] and those blank columns have data in them. What those numbers correspond to is a mystery.
the chart iS WRONGGGG
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on National service in Singapore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:32, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Section 14 of GPA applies to not just SAF but whole of government. The controversy is applicable and in scope of this article as it relates to the death of an NSman while performing National Service. As pointed out by SDP, the government has a moral duty to look after those performing National Service. Section 14 of GPA shields the government from accountability. The same could not be said of regulars who made the choice to join SAF.
Proposed text:
According to section 14 of the Government's Proceeding Act,
Nothing done or omitted to be done by a member of the forces while on duty as such shall subject either him or the Government to liability in tort for causing the death of another person, or for causing personal injury to another person, in so far as the death or personal injury is due to anything suffered by that other person while he is a member of the forces... [1]
In response to Dominique Sarron Lee's death and subsequent lawsuit initiated by his family against the SAF that was dismissed by high court, the Singapore Democratic Party said that Section 14 "unfairly protects the government from being held accountable" and creates "moral hazard" [2]. Jane Dawson ( talk) 05:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
References
"NS man") once, and the form in which the term was used was as an appeal to the conscripts as an audience (
"Which NS man will not feel aggrieved that...") rather than any comment about the merits and demerits of the conscription policy itself. Otherwise, the remainder of the source consists of allegations of unaccountability on the part of another political party that are even less relevant here. Be reminded that the scope of this article is for discussion of the conscription policy only.
@ DeltaQuad: I notice that you have flagged the article for copyvio issues. It has been close to 7 days but no action has been done to solve the copyright issues. Perhaps you can highlight the part that needs to be rewritten so that others like myself can action on it instead of leaving this article in risk of deletion. Jane Dawson ( talk) 00:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
why there is no mention of "female" in this article, despite there is an ongoing consideration into female national service? 2404:8000:1027:D5FD:F516:34C2:47EF:1688 ( talk) 04:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Some non-trivial things are still uncited, and the section doesn't cover any attempts to reform this/public perception of the service.---- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 23:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
National service in Singapore. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
for some reason there's a chart explaining how much the various ranks have gotten paid over time. ok, cool. But it's WRONG.
There are some columns in the middle that go like this: [march 2012] [blank] [blank] [april 2012] and those blank columns have data in them. What those numbers correspond to is a mystery.
the chart iS WRONGGGG
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on National service in Singapore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:32, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Section 14 of GPA applies to not just SAF but whole of government. The controversy is applicable and in scope of this article as it relates to the death of an NSman while performing National Service. As pointed out by SDP, the government has a moral duty to look after those performing National Service. Section 14 of GPA shields the government from accountability. The same could not be said of regulars who made the choice to join SAF.
Proposed text:
According to section 14 of the Government's Proceeding Act,
Nothing done or omitted to be done by a member of the forces while on duty as such shall subject either him or the Government to liability in tort for causing the death of another person, or for causing personal injury to another person, in so far as the death or personal injury is due to anything suffered by that other person while he is a member of the forces... [1]
In response to Dominique Sarron Lee's death and subsequent lawsuit initiated by his family against the SAF that was dismissed by high court, the Singapore Democratic Party said that Section 14 "unfairly protects the government from being held accountable" and creates "moral hazard" [2]. Jane Dawson ( talk) 05:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
References
"NS man") once, and the form in which the term was used was as an appeal to the conscripts as an audience (
"Which NS man will not feel aggrieved that...") rather than any comment about the merits and demerits of the conscription policy itself. Otherwise, the remainder of the source consists of allegations of unaccountability on the part of another political party that are even less relevant here. Be reminded that the scope of this article is for discussion of the conscription policy only.
@ DeltaQuad: I notice that you have flagged the article for copyvio issues. It has been close to 7 days but no action has been done to solve the copyright issues. Perhaps you can highlight the part that needs to be rewritten so that others like myself can action on it instead of leaving this article in risk of deletion. Jane Dawson ( talk) 00:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
why there is no mention of "female" in this article, despite there is an ongoing consideration into female national service? 2404:8000:1027:D5FD:F516:34C2:47EF:1688 ( talk) 04:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)