Singapore Everest Expedition Debate 1
June 6, 2009
Everest climb valuable only to adventurers themselves
THURSDAY’S editorial, ‘A salute to our Everest heroines’, on the Singaporean women who climbed Mount Everest, echoes the skewed views of mountaineer David Lim in seeing only one side of the argument.
While it was clearly a difficult and commendable achievement, The Straits Times and Mr Lim are wrong about such feats deserving contributions from public coffers.
I accept that extreme sports can be personally satisfying. They are tests of endurance, spiritual strength and teamwork. They allow one to gain deep insights into one’s own character.
But the benefits are subjective, and valuable only to the adventurer. There is no benchmarking, no medals to be won.
Public funds should be used only for specific and measurable competitions, or where Singaporeans can be the first to reach a new destination. Coming after that does nothing for our national image. How many people can name the second team to conquer Everest? Who was the second person to run the four-minute mile? Or land on the moon?
Since Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay made the first ascent, more than 4,000 people have reached the summit, including the blind, the legless and the aged. It may be an important journey of self-discovery for anyone attempting the feat, but it is irrelevant to the public whether that person becomes No. 4,801 or No. 4,999 at the top. Like a trip into space, Everest has become an expensive, albeit dangerous, tourist destination.
Many Everest climbers, and other adventurers, pay their own way. Those who want to enjoy such trips should do the same. No responsible manager in either the public or private sectors can contribute to such causes and have any credibility left to face the staff when telling them to control costs.
Lee Chiu San
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
madhouse REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 05:51 AM
——————————————————————————–
Yes,.. fully agree with writer. all i remember about Everest when I was inn school was :-
1. It is highest mountain in the world.
2. Hillary was among the first to reach the mountain top
Thereafter , nobody remembers who was the next climber next and what they achieve.
ntng4268 REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 09:44 AM
——————————————————————————–
I agree with the writer, yes, it was a commendable on the girl’s achievement, however, I do not agree to put on a ‘Heroines’ title on them at all.
They are just a group of adventurers (like many before them) who likes to challenge themselves, including the risks of losing their lives, on these extremes sport.
Many BEFORE them had reached the Everest peak and many AFTER will try to attempt it in the future as well, so I do not see the reasons for them to use the public funds to accomplish their feats.
Yes, these girls do deserved our congratulations, but they pay their own way.
Life goes on.. and who cares…
davelim8850 REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 09:57 AM
——————————————————————————–
what a load of codswallop. The writer seems to define mountaineering by only the ascent of EVerest. It’s as though no sporing challenges, using his analogy is worthwhile, unless we are the first. Thousands have competed in any one of the hundred Olympic disciplines and events. Does that justify the argument of not going in the future We often seek to strive to improve our performances. The athletes in mountaineering at the top end of SIngapore’s game seek to do the same, nothing less, nothing more. And paying your own way? So does it mean after SIngapore gets its ‘ memorable’ FIRST Olympic gold medal, we should shut down all taxpayer spending on supporting sports from schools upto telite level. Again, codswallop……
patleo123 REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 11:43 AM
——————————————————————————–
I agree with the writer. We all have our own ‘high challenges’ in life. Some of us want to dive in the deepest ocean, some want to walk across the Antarctica, some want to do their part to eradicate hunger in the world, yet another may simply wish to be the best soldier in his army unit.
The first person who climbed Everest said he did it because “it’s there”. It was actually to fulfill a personal objective to prove that he can do it — more so to satisfy a personal ego or self-esteem need.
Go ahead - let each person pursue his own personal ambition, even in extreme sports. Some may succeed. Others may die in the process. Let it be a personal matter, a personal decision, funded by personal means.
There are enough real-life examples that true grit, determination and hardwork, will breed higher chance of success. No one should claim that he is aiming to break records to inspire others. Another 10 teams from Singapore reaching the Everest summit, is irrelevant to me.
Baikinman REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 02:44 PM
——————————————————————————–
Yes, it is a personal venture for the climbers and national funds should not be involved. However, it is a missed opportunity for corporates. Imagine if Triumph, Red Bull or Marlboro had sponsored the team and the corporate logo instead of the national flag is planted in the photos of the climbers at the summit, that publicity will live long in our national photo archives.
golden88 REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 03:55 PM
——————————————————————————–
What heroines ????? …. buaypaisay !!!
Go and serve your National Serivce first …. then we are on “level” lah !!! buaytahan ……………..
straitstimes59 REPORT POST
June 06, 2009 Saturday, 08:48 PM
——————————————————————————–
Even if they pay their own way, I just say it’s a waste of money. More poor and underpriviliged people would sing your praises longer and louder if that money had gone to improve their lives.
What a waste of money just to say that you have reached the highest peak. So what, so many other people have done it already. Try feeding a starving kid in Africa or keeping him alive longer from the AIDs virus. The world would be a better place if we help one another. Did the mountain care that you made it to the top? Well I sure don’t care.
grandfather REPORT POST
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 10:17 AM
——————————————————————————–
When the Singapore men team scaled Everest there was a hue and cry they were not true blue Singaporeans: only permanent residents what.
This time round, the all women team conquest of Everest is met with a cynical commentary about the possible misuse of public funds, and a whole lot of crap.
As in the earlier stupendous feat, the recent successful team sourced for and got funds from private organizations only after protracted negotiations and so many heartbreaking rejections.
If only the writer did some basic Internet search he might have been kinder to the ladies , and thousand of others who had reached Everest peak.
I doubt he has the magnanimity given the manner he had argued his stand.
Perhaps, he might want to walk his talk and try sourcing for private funds for any mega project he wishes to
undertake.
I consider it an act of callousness borne of envy to denigrate a very fine feat by fellow Singaporeans.
The writer pontificates on the insignificance of the Everest achievement, detailing it with his warped logic if the public could recall names of Olympic medals winners or Everest conquerors.
It is this sort of trivial hair splitting that mars the simple joy and delight of a marvelous achievement.
golden88
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 10:25 AM
——————————————————————————–
huaiwei …. at least I have done Singapore proud by completing my tour of NS duty !!!!!
How about you ????
And if you did not serve your National Obligation because of your gender ….. then please KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT !!!!!! ……….. buaytahan …… always “giving” lame excuses that “we” are “females” and cannot service the country or our “feminity” will be in jeopardy ………. in my opinion, “ONLY” Singapore women take advantage of Singapore men …….
sigmundringeck
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 11:15 AM
——————————————————————————–
All tok kok. Jealous cannot climb Mt. Everest, ahh???
Go climb Mt Geylang instead, BRO.
Gals climb Everest and shame all the male weaklings. Even cripple, no legs can climb, but need SG gals to climb. U say no big deal, then u climb yourself…..see how tough u are.
Compare NS to climb Everest??? Talk kok only. U go climb Everest see whether it can compare or not. This type never even run simple race like Stan Chart 42K Marathon want to talk kok abt climb Mt Everest.
mshen
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 01:55 PM
——————————————————————————–
For someone who has done endurance race. I understand the grueling stages and time preparing for the adventure.These ladies deserve great respect.
Like any adventurer, funding should come from corporate sponsorship who in turn capitalized on their brand.
purpleknight
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 03:41 PM
——————————————————————————–
I believe the female climebers were funded by the National Association of Travel Agents, Singapore NATAS. If NATAS members approved the usage of the association’s funds to support these female climbers, who are you to criticize?
fatherofgolden88
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 07:45 PM
——————————————————————————–
Hello everyone.
I am golden88’s father. Many of you forumers must be puzzled as to my son’s hatred and despise for women. Allow me to explain. When golden88 was a young child, I was working as a welder on board an offshore barge. The nature of my job took me away from home three or four months at a time. Each time I return home for rest leave, it is only for 3 weeks before I go off again. As such, this allows me very little time to spend with golden88 and his mother. This leaves his mother felt very much neglected and she eventually fell in love with another man. Her new husband was not accepting of childen and thus she had no choice but to leave golden88 behind. As I was unable to look after golden88 due to my job, he was shuffled from relative to relative until I remarried again.
However, my new wife was young and unable to cope with the demands of running a household and looking after a stepchild. To complicate matters, golden88 was dyslexic as a young child and not very bright in his studies. He was also very mischievous and disobedient. Very often, his stepmother lost patience with him and had to discipline him with an iron fist. As a result, golden88 always felt unwanted and unloved. Abandoned by his birth mother and mistreated by his stepmother, golden88 has never known any real maternal love in his growing up years.
This was very difficult for me to write. But I do hope that now, forumers can see where golden88’s coming from and understand him better.
tiensongchuan
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 07:59 PM
——————————————————————————–
It is time for Singaporeans to conquer space. The Malaysians have started doing that.
As of today, no Singaporeans have ever been to space, be it in a spaceship for just a short while , or in orbit, or on spacewalk or in a space station or on the moon etc.
I believe that will be the next proper and final frontier - to leave Earth, not to climb Mt Everest or Bukit Timah etc another time. How many times do you want to do that?
We have the money, we can do it and definitely will do our Nation proud to see the Singapore flag flying in space.
motherGolden88
June 07, 2009 Sunday, 10:57 PM
——————————————————————————–
I am mother of golden88. His father is thinking golden88 is his son. Hey..hey.. he is a fool. He doesnot know that golden88 is not his son. When I married him, I thought since he is a welder he will be good ‘at’ it. But in the very first night he proved that he is not a welder but a melder. He snored and slept. The same story continued everyday. How can I keep quiet. I had stepney arrangement which I made full use of and my son golden88 was born. My paramour was so excellent that I kicked out golden88’s father (my husband) for ever.
bluebelle
June 09, 2009 Tuesday, 12:07 AM
——————————————————————————–
it is okay for the funds to come from corporate organisations. i whole-heartedly salute those corporate groups who funded the adventurers.
however, i do not think that at this time, when singapore is already not doing enough for social welfare, that we should be spending hard earned tax dollars on costly expeditions.
although adventurers deserve our respect, it would be even better if they could use their fame to support social causes, so that at least singaporeans know that they are also people with a heart, people who care about singapore, and not just a self-serving team whose only aim is to surpass themselves.
if all they want is to get the better of themselves, then they should propose the ego trip only to rich corporations. this is not a criticism, but a suggestion, for what i hope is the good of the poorer people in singapore. i feel that government resources should be spent wisely and invested in the things that matter to singaporeans. at the moment, i do not think mountain climbing matters to us.
Melvinchanko
June 09, 2009 Tuesday, 10:08 AM
——————————————————————————–
I want to be the first Singaporean to tour the world…..any sponsors? PLEASE STOP indulging in personal dreams in doing irrelevant things that don’t contribute a wee bit to society or to the good of the earth. Leaving footprints on Everest or the Antartica will only mean you have played a part in tainting what’s left of our beautiful earth. Go get a regular job or if you’re filthy rich and eternity is at your disposal, go help the poor and needy. Go do something that truly deserves you to be called a hero/heroine. Shame on you Sports fanatics who choose to BUM around concocting excuses to make your hobby a national ambition. Go and beg for change to realise your own selfish dreams if you have to…..at least you’ll deserve some respect. People are clinging to their jobs in constant fear of being axed. And here you are dreaming of skating, climbing, walking, running, swimming for your own selfish benefits….SHAME ON YOU ADVENTUROUS BUMS!!!!!!
chomulungma
June 10, 2009 Wednesday, 11:33 PM
——————————————————————————–
When a footballer scores a goal, is there any measurable benefit to the roaring fans? Just because the majority of people on this little red dot are not fans of mountaineering does not mean that nobody in the world is interested in mountaineering news and history. Elite mountaineers in other countries have numerous fans and supporters. They are heavily booked for motivational talks. Their books inspire and educate people. Their supporters encourage and feel proud of their fellow countrymen succeeding in making mountaineering news and history. It’s prideless people like Melvinchanko who should feel ashamed.
While I have my reservations about this particular expedition, mountaineering is not just about self indulgence.The reason why no one would sponsor Melvinchanko to travel around the world is because he is just another shallow and materialistic person who will probably just eat and sleep on his world tour. True mountaineering is serious stuff. It’s not a holiday. It’s as decent and challenging as any job. The rewards go to everybody watching and listening if the mountaineer can articulate his insights and discoveries before members of the public. The unfortunate thing is that we don’t have too many charismatic and eloquent mountaineers.
Why have an arts festival? Why build the Esplanade? Why have fashion shows? Why have a museum? Why have football matches? Why have entertainment programmes? All that unnecessary expediture can be used to help the poor and needy until there are no more poor and needy people in Singapore Inc.
chomulungma
June 10, 2009 Wednesday, 11:58 PM
——————————————————————————–
“More poor and underpriviliged people would sing your praises longer and louder if that money had gone to improve their lives.”
So you haven’t heard of the Edmund Hillary Himalayan Trust Fund and are totally ignorant of the fact that many climbers do make significant contributions to the local populations.
chomulungma
Yesterday, 12:03 AM
——————————————————————————–
Doesn’t anybody know that one very good way to help the poor would be to follow in Edmund Hillary’s footsteps?
bluebelle
Yesterday, 12:22 AM
——————————————————————————–
it remains to be seen whether the mountaineers are willing to use the experience they have gained from climbing everest to help others.
the letter writer stated that they have organised inspirational workshops and so on. are the workshops organised for free or for profit?
perhaps the ST could help them by publicising their charitable work more.
of course everest is a major feat. but after they have finished climbing the mountain, they are basically done with it. do they need to suffer the cold and harsh weather every day?
before you come to the defence of such expeditions, you might want to think about the tens of thousands of needy people here suffer from the lack of health care and poor living conditions. and they have to live like this for the rest of their lives (and not just the short duration of a few mths like the adventurers).
there are people here who are neglected, need basic medical attention but not even have the money to pay for it… some do not even have a roof over their head and have to live out their days sleeping in void decks. and i’m sure you;ve all seen some of them hobbling about or amputees going ard in wheelchairs in hawker centres selling cheap tissue paper.
of course i greatly admire the adventurers, but who do you think is ought to be the priority for government funding?
i believe that singapore needs to strike a balance between doing grand things with a short-lived impact, and small acts of greatness that have real impact on the lives of its people.
looking at the casinos, resorts, the big malls that are built… and the competitions, the international festivals that many singaporeans have been involved in and have received funding for, don;t you think that singapore has done enough “grand” gestures?
isn’t it time to channel more funds to help people on the ground?
davelim8850
Yesterday, 11:10 AM
——————————————————————————–
One main issue - like the 400lb gorilla sitting in the room but being ignored completely is the question of why there has to be justification for mountaineering on a recreational basis, and climbing at an ‘elite’ basis? If you consider climbing to be a sport with technical grades of difficulty and challenge, quite well documented in the climbing world, I thin perhaps the objections by some here is that public funding goes to support mountaineering, without distinguishing between recreational climbing and top level ( in the SG context anyway ) climbing.
Looking at it this way, the climbing that often makes the news is climbing that is breaking new ground in the context of the climb. So while climbing Everest by the usual Nepal route has been done previously by SG teams, the all-womens team set a new standard in that context for their gender. In that light to ALWAYS demand justification , and comparisons, and community ‘ payback’ is applying double standards - demanding so much more from climbers (while giving less) than other sportsmen and women.
I’m not even referring to sports here than get MILLIONS annually from taxpayers fund while producing mediocre results, carry large numbers of admin staff and the usual ‘expenses’.
On a world-level, Everest climbing is NO longer cuttiing edge, but in our context, it still represents and enormous challenge. So I suggest we save the pontification for sports where it participants are often poor role models, suck up large amounts of public funds, and dont quite produce the results expected of them
Cut some slack to mountaineers who train and coach themselves, raise most of their own money, voluntarily do inspiring talks and workshops of climbing skills, And handle of the PR as well
chomulungma
Yesterday, 11:21 AM
——————————————————————————–
Let’s not talk about “tens of thousands of needy people here suffer from the lack of health care and poor living conditions.” If you’ve travelled to Third World countries, you’ll realise that there are hundreds of millions of people who suffer from the lack of healthcare and poor living conditions. Even if you’ve saved up on all the mountaineering expeditions in the history of mankind, you won’t be able to feed and heal every single unfortunate person on this planet.
So should China have postponed their space programme until there are no more Chinese suffering from the lack of healthcare and poor living conditions? Would the poor and needy people in Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos thank you if you remove all the gold from their temples and buy essential items for them? People don’t just need food for their stomachs. They also need food for their “souls”. And many of these “less fortunate” people are actually happier than most 5C Singaporeans.
Charity work can never be finished. Every moment, people are falling ill, deformed babies are born, people are getting disabled due to accidents and sickness, businessmen and gamblers going bankrupt etc. Must we wait until such misfortunes stop happening before we engage in “grand” projects? Why should people involved in “grand” projects feel guilty about it when charity and inspirational projects can coexist and make life more complete and balanced? Which developed country in the world puts “grand” projects on hold until there is no more charity work to do?
Not everyone in the world thinks like an ultra-pragmatic Singaporean. In fact, not many people in the world do. Imagine the shock on a few Thai faces when a Singaporean suggested that the ancient ruins at Ayuthaya should be demolished and nice “historical” theme park built in its place. The more “sensible” we think we are, the more the rest of the human race will find us difficult to understand.
By the way, casinos, resorts and big malls are commercial buildings that generate income for its investors. They are not “grand gestures” in the same vein as mountaineering expeditions. Just because we’ve built an IR doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have a mountaineering expedition.
bluebelle
Yesterday, 12:38 PM
——————————————————————————–
chomulungma,
oh yes, of course we cannot feed every hungry person on the street. but you know, if everyone thinks that way, no one wil be helping these people at all. you cannot make a difference to every person, but you can at least make a difference to one, or two, or ten people. haven’t you heard of this simple principle before?
do you think your comparison of the everest expedition and china or america’s space programme is justified? if you do, then i think you obviously don’t know what a space programme is. you may want to go and up more about what space programmes involve, the number of people it hires to do the jobs, the technological inventions it brings about and the far reaching consequences it has for a nation.
i am not talking about “charity work” here. you need to distinguish between what is considered “charity” and what is considered “welfare”. the word “charity” is applicable only to individuals who can choose whether or not they want to help a fellow human being. however, a government does not do acts of “charity”. it would be silly to think that. at the government level, it is a responsibility, a duty of the people that we vote into office. i am talking about basic social welfare that any government, especially one that aspires to be a good government, ought to provide for its citizens.
as for ayuthya, i am not sure why it was brought up. if you are alleging that the ruins are around to protect the country’s heritage, may i point out to you that these very same cultural ruins is also a tourist attraction that makes money for the country? would the govt maintain the ruins if they were not of any monetary value? there are enough “demolished” historical temples around to suggest that this is not the case.
again, i am sorry that you seem to take the view that social welfare is less important than a mountaineering expedition. if i were an “ultra-pragmatic” singaporean then i would not be suggesting that the government gives priority to giving more help to the needy instead of funding expeditions. because, in hard financial terms, funding the needy also does not give any good returns for the government. they have no money, many of them are old, they cannot attract any investors.
in essence, i think we are two idealists supporting different stands. i guess we shall just have to agree to disagree. hopefully, the everest climbers can be much more active in sharing their experience with the rest of singapore, such as through schools, so that at least, what they have gained doesn’t just remain in the exclusive circle of the mountain climbers.
chomulungma
Today, 11:35 AM
——————————————————————————–
I don’t think you understand my postings at all.
1. I objected to the original posting that a mountaineering expedition only benefits the mountaineers.
2. I objected to the suggestion that mountaineering is a waste of time and money.
3. The late Sir Edmund Hillary and other mountaineers are some of Nepal’s the biggest benefactors.
4. I pointed out that the majority of Singaporeans are not mountaineering fans are just a tiny drop in the ocean.
5. I corrected the misconception that mountaineering and help for the poor/needy are mutually exclusive.
6. I pointed out that people who have less material stuff than we do always need our help.
7. I pointed out that developed countries do not need to wait till they have completely eradicated poverty before they embark on “grand” projects.
8. I highlighted the fact that some Singaporeans often like to play consultant when they don’t really understand foreign cultures and non-mainstream activities.
9. I wish the public can be better educated on the various positive and negative aspects of mountaineering so that they do not draw their conclusions and condemn so quickly.
1. I have never said that public funds should be used to finance mountaineering expeditions.
2. I have never said that social welfare is less important that mountaineering.
In fact, I’m quite against using public funds to finance mountaineering expeditions. Ideally, the sport of mountaineering or recreational climbing should be supported by climbers themselves, fans, enthusiasts and NGOs - not the government. NATAS is an association of commercial entities. If you’re suggesting that they donated the money instead of sponsoring the expedition, that would have been charity, would it not?
Nobody has the right to tell NATAS what they should have done. If the members feel that sponsoring an expedition is good for business, so be it. Anything wrong? Are they obliged to contribute to the government’s welfare programmes so that you would not accuse them of seeing mountaineering as more important than welfare? I happen to agree with you that the welfare part should be handled by the government. Not NATAS, by the way. Our special schools should certainly receive a lot more government funding than what they are getting now. I also agree that subsidies at government hospitals are insufficient. Medisave is our own money. So what are you disagreeing with.
Space programmes are a good comparison because they have generated much public outcry. Like you, activists in America have protested against using tax dollars. They could prove that you are wrong that these programmes generate positive returns. In case you try to pick a bone here, I’m not against space programmes. I agree with you on the intangible benefits that space programmes can have.
I used to conduct trips to Thailand and I often feel embarrassed by some of the things that our uncles and aunties say when they see poverty, inefficiency and other things they feel could have been done better. You missed the point completely. It’s not about Ayuthaya making money or not. It’s the shallow Singaporean aunty’s suggestion that it would look “nicer”, be more comfortable and generate more income if the Thais demolished the whole thing and put an artificial theme park in its place. This seems to be the attitude adopted by some people here who always have ideas on how money could be better spent. Not everybody thinks this way. Building an artificial “historical” park will remove all mystical and romantic appeal. Life is not just about ROI.