Apr 13, 2011
PAP has blurred line between State and party
THE cry for multi-party representation in Parliament is the People's Action Party's own doing ("A single party can't represent all views" by Mr Michael Cyssel Wee; last Friday).
The PAP has blurred the line between the State and the party: What belongs to the State belongs to the PAP.
The symbiotic relationship between the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and the Government becomes a symbiotic relationship between NTUC and PAP.
The People's Association becomes a PAP instrument.
Grassroots leaders work solely for the PAP.
If Whampoa deserves an upgrade, why should it depend on whether a PAP candidate wins in Whampoa? The money belongs to the State.
Ang Miah Boon
- 'Separation of powers' [wiki]: "The separation of powers is a model for the governance of a state. The model was first developed in ancient Greece and came into widespread use by the Roman Republic as part of the unmodified Constitution of the Roman Republic. Under this model, the state is divided into branches, each with separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility so that no one branch has more power than the other branches. The normal division of branches is into an executive, a legislature, and a judiciary. ..."
- 'How PAP uses taxpayer-funded grassroots for political gain': "The People’s Association (PA), ..Like all other stat boards, it receives a yearly grant from the government to run its programmes and cover operational costs. .. It spent a total of $320 million last year. However unlike most stat boards, whose chairmen are usually the permanent secretary of the parent ministry or some other senior civil servant, PA’s chairman is none other than the Prime Minister [pict][board]. The de facto leader of all the CCCs, CCMCs, RCs and NCs in each constituency is known as the “adviser to the grassroots organisations (GROs)”. This adviser is appointed by PA, presumably with the nod of its chairman, the Prime Minister. In PAP constituencies, PA always appoints the elected MP as the adviser. But in opposition wards, PA appoints the PAP candidate who lost in the last election, not the opposition MP" [G Giam, 10Oct2009].
- '‘Adviser over MP’ raises many questions': "PAP MPs are appointed as advisers to the grassroots organisations in their wards by the People’s Association (PA). In the two opposition wards, the PA picked the PAP candidates who contested but lost in the wards in the last two polls as the grassroots advisers." [ST, 22Oct2009][alt link]
- 'MND continues to throw smoke bombs over role of PAP 'grassroots advisers'': "There is absolutely no reason why opposition MPs cannot be appointed as grassroots advisers unless they decline to work with the government. The root cause of the problem lies in the lack of a clearly defined demarcation between the state and the party which resulted in many supposedly apolitical institutions like the People’s Association being made use of by the PAP to serve its partisan interests.
As the People’s Association is a statutory board, its members and grassroots advisers should have no political affiliations.
It is disingenuous of the PAP to appoint their losing candidates to continue “serving” in the opposition wards under the veneer of being the “grassroots advisers” appointed by the PA." [TR, 27Oct2009][alt link]
- 'Town Council Act (CAP 329A) states clearly that Govt must work with Town Councils (run by MPs) to implement LUP': "It is a joke that for some strange reasons or another, Mr Shanmugan’s ministerial colleague has refused to obey the Town Councils Act by choosing not to work with Hougang Town Council and even has the audacity to TWIST the facts by claiming that 'it is the role of the grassroots advisers to implement the LUP' through his press secretary when it was stated NOWHERE in the Town Councils Act that the LUP has to be carried out by the grassroots advisers! From beginning to end, there was no mention of the words 'Grassroots advisers', 'People Association' or 'PAP losing candidates' and so how did Mr Eric Low come into the picture at all? " [TR, 29Oct2009][alt link]
- 'Grassroots Organizations should stay non-partisan': "By appointing PAP candidates as grassroots advisers in Opposition held wards, the government is effectively bringing partisan politics into governmental institutions. Using the PA as a vehicle for PAP candidates as grounds to gain political capital so that they may fight their next battle with more goodwill, the governmental risks costing itself the position of Singapore as a Parliamentary Democracy; and put Singapore in par with communist states like Cuba, China and North Korea." [TR, 03Nov2009][alt site]
- 'GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM': "Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics" ; with hosting site footnote: "In Singapore, a Group Representation Constituency is a super-sized constituency where 5 or 6 candidates from the same party have to stand for election as a team. Voters vote for the party, not for individuals, thus weak candidates can still win a seat in Parliament by riding the coattails of stronger candidates."- [ST/ 'Yawningbread, 26June2006]
- ''Yes-men' PAP MPs embarrassed themselves by saying instinctively “Yes” (wrongly) to reduce budget of Home Affairs Ministry': "PAP MPs are so used to saying “yes” in Parliament that they almost screwed up the budget of the Home Affairs Ministry by agreeing to reduce it. PAP MP Alvin Yeo from Hong Kah GRC tabled a motion.. As he was not present during the debate on the next day, Speaker of the House Abdullah Tarmugi asked MPs to decide to approve the motion. As the PAP MPs are used to saying “Yes” in Parliament for many years, when the Speaker asked for a decision to be made on the motion, all of them shouted “AYE” in unison instinctively which prompted him to raise his head to hint to the MPs to listen carefully before voting again. ..." [TR, 07Mar2010][alt Link]
~ "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'"--Matthew 25:40 (NIV)