| Today I have been made a chimp! |
|
The dull thud my 20-cent coin made inside the donation can is now
resounding in my memory bank as though I am banging my head repeatedly
against a concrete wall. Well, it's too darn late! Today I
have been made a chimp! How could I have been so foolish! I have - very carelessly - donated to the zoo... to save wildlife! Can you believe it? Thinking about it makes me fume. Here is a zoo who is raking in millions of dollars every year - out of animals - and here I am... donating to a profit-driven business on Flag Day? Grrrh... You know... I could just gouge out those greedy-beady eyes peering from the Night Safari logo now. They are peeping out from |
 |
| the
donation can and laughing at me. Ya... laughing to the bank too, I
am sure. If I can help it, today (August 26, 2007) will be their last,
and the last laugh will be mine and the hyenas and the baboons and
the elephants and other enslaved animals
in the zoo. An unwritten but well-proven edifice is this - Don't Ever Abuse A Poor Man's Generosity. Think *NKF Saga and you will understand why ordinary people like myself should cry foul and make a bullock-cart wheel out of a 20-cent coin. So, what is essentially wrong with today's Flag Day? You see... when donation is being canvassed from the public, especially in public places, the poor and ordinary actually donates in faith - not to the extending hand (the zoo, in this case) - but to the 'character of trust' as represented by our public charters and safeguards whose collective system of governance ensure fair and equitable distribution of funds to legitimate causes of the most urgent needs and to ensure no deserving bodies ever fall out of reach of the public's helping hand. Common sense will obviously tell you that profit-driven businesses (or any of their subsidiaries) should have no place within this public system of trust to ask for any monetary help. Now then, you should ask: How did the zoo managed to slip through? Obviously, there are loopholes and plug them we must! While we leave the fine-tuning of the processes to our legislators, public accountants or lawmakers, we ordinary people (who were made chimps by default) can use our chimp-intelligence to unravel irregularities staring in our foolish-monkey-faces! |
Just take one hard look at the donation can; it is in itself overwhelmingly self-incriminating. It says Wildlife Conservation Singapore Fund supported by: Singapore Zoo and Night Safari. Now, what would go through your mind when you read 'supported by'? That the Singapore Zoo and the Night Safari are benefactors? That they may be generously matching a dollar for every dollar the public donates? Well, no such luck. If you bother to read the claimer [i.e. the B5-sized notice carried by every canvasser] you will quickly realized that the zoo is not the benefactor, but the beneficiary. It reads: |
|
The
Flag Day collections will be used to fund the following:
Support the scientific and technical studies on wildlife in their natural habitats, to conserve what precious little nature there is left in South East Asia. Care for and propagate mammals, birds, reptiles, insects and other creatures, from all over the world within the Singapore Zoo and Night Safari. |
The words 'supported by' is therefore deceiving. The public would have been better served by alternative words such as 'Benefited by' or 'Supporting'. In any case, such works should be supported by the profits the zoo makes and not with public funding. If you think it is obnoxious enough for the zoo to ask us part our money to help 'care for and propagate' its enslaved animals so that it can earn more money (and charge us hefty entrance fees as well), try looking into the zoo's filthily-endowed surpluses, for examples, FY 2004/05 ($13 million) and FY 2006/07 ($4.5 million). Now, is that OBNOXIOUS or not? You also should enquire about specific projects and costs when the zoo dispenses grandiloquence such as conserving 'what precious little nature there is left in South East Asia'. I bet the prime ministers of all our neighbouring countries would like to have a full account of such audacity too. Inasmuch, countless local non-profit NGOs in these countries are doing great works with species and habitat conservation. They are the ones who need our direct donations and it is a matter for us to seek them out. There remains, however, many non-profit animal welfare organisations in Singapore (such as ACRES, SPCA and the Cat Welfare Society) who are worthy of our immediate help. If we have the money, why not donate to them? This, of course, should not divorce us of our concern and responsibility to the welfare of animals kept in the zoo. Perhaps, if the zoo comes clean about its expenditures for such things as upgrading and building of restuarants, entrances and offices, we chimps-by-default could help the zoo-people to channel the greater proportion of its own funds rightfully to the betterment of the enslaved animals. But first, we have to stop the zoo from screwing around with our public 'character of trust'. Period. * NKF - National Kidney Foundation |
| See How
Rich the Singapore Zoo is !! See Why it's wrong and what values are joepardiced. |