Does the PAP impose partisan loyalties amongst civil servant
-
Does the PAP impose partisan loyalties amongst civil servants in its quest to 'fix the opposition'?
Although the website of the Public Service Division (PSD) PSD (Role)> Nurturing Talent> Progressive Policies [link][archive] states "Remaining completely neutral in all political matters and matters of public controversy" as part of the "principles of incorruptibility, integrity and propriety" that the civil service abides by, it remains doubtful if the PAP government really respects this rule/ distinction.
In 03May2006, during parliamentary general elections, PM Lee warned voters that if even 10 opposition members were elected into parliament, then he would "spend all my time thinking what's the right way to fix them, to buy my supporters votes, how can I solve this week's problem and forget about next year's challenges?" ('PM Lee says countries worldwide respect and admire Singapore's proven system' [YouTube/@1m10s]).
That same election, the buying of supporters votes through preferential selection for the lift upgrading programme (LUP) in Hougang and P.Pasir was offered in lieu of voters in the two opposition held constituencies voting for PAP MPs rather then returning their incumbent opposition MPs."Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has expressed concern that Hougang and Potong Pasir residents will lose out on upgrading if they do not vote for the People's Action Party" [CNA, 26Mar2006] and ('Upgrading should be a separate issue from the General Election' ['petition online']),
To their honour, neither opposition ward voters gave the PAP any credit in response to the blatant bullying and pork barrel politicking that the PAP had engaged.
Later, in 2009, when the MND/ HDB decided that in any case, all constituencies should eventually undergo the lift upgrading scheme as part of the national HDB LUP ('Lift Upgrading Programme to be completed as scheduled in 2014' [CNA, 06Mar2009]); MND Minister MBT, contrary to statutory specifications regarding the proper conduct of the LUP, decided to, through the PA's overtly partisan and thus illegitimate 'grassroots adviser' scheme, announce to the residents of the 2 opposition constituencies about their respective constituency's inclusion in the LUP via the respective loosing PAP candidates of the last general election; unsurprisingly, this abnormality yielded a barrage of online complaints besides opening a Pandora's box about PAP impropriety wrt compliance with statutory laws, ('Town Council Act (CAP 329A) states clearly that Govt must work with Town Councils (run by MPs) to implement LUP'. [TR, 29Oct2009][alt link]).
Critical to appreciating the LUP conspiracy is the existing PA 'grassroots advisers' scheme'; its essence is described in an ST report as: "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." ('‘Adviser over MP’ raises many questions': [ST, 22Oct2009][alt link])
It is noted at both PA website [link] and its govt directory record [link][archive], that PM Lee is the chairman of PA, with Mr Mah BT the first board member on the list, ditto many other PAP ministers and MPs.
The MND's last public response to multiple complaints about loosing PAP electoral-candidates announcing the LUP in opposition wards adds complicity, with MND admitting: "Opposition MPs cannot be appointed advisers, because they do not answer to the ruling party." ('Advisers and MPs have different roles' [ST,27Oct2009]); by so, the MND has very much confirmed the fact that in the PA, its grassroots advisers must "answer to the ruling party"- isn't this syndromic of systemic partisan cronyism if not nepotism that the PAP has imposed throughout the ranks of the civil service if not just the PA and the MND?
There is of course no mention of any partisan political loyalties in the PA's role and mission statement on 'gov.sg', [link][archive] and rightly so, :"The People's Association is a statutory board promoting racial harmony and social cohesion, nurturing leadership, providing community services and outward bound training and facilitating communications between the Government and the people. The mission is to promote active citizenship and multiracial harmony, connect the citizens for community bonding and volunteer work, provide affordable access to lifeskill and lifestyle activities, and to bring people closer to one another and to the government."
This undue and overt partisan loyalty imposed by the PAP government upon the PA and other statutory boards under its executive governance is thus improper and prejudicial, not to mention unconstitutional (see: "'Civil servants under the constitution hold their allegiance to the president..'", 'Integrity of election process a hot topic during youth forum': [CNA, 17May2009]) to the fair and transparent conduct of government affairs.
Thus, if the PM (like he said [YouTube/@1m10s]) is unable to avoid imposing partisan loyalties upon statutory boards such as the PA, then he ought to resign from his post as Chair of the PA or else revise the constitution of the PA so that the PA can be "like most stat boards, whose chairmen are usually the permanent secretary of the parent ministry or some other senior civil servant" ('How PAP uses taxpayer-funded grassroots for political gain' [G Giam, 10Oct2009]).
In conclusion, Mr Lee's cold and calculated efforts at corrupting the integrity and impartiality of statutory boards to act in his fancy as a wedge between legitimate opposition MPs and their grassroots/ supporters, at the expense of national funds is most reprehensible if not already an incursion upon the constitutional sanctity of the civil service. "Civil servants under the constitution hold their allegiance to the president." ('Integrity of election process a hot topic during youth forum' [CNA, 17May2009])
In the words of PM Lee: "..we demand high standards of integrity and performance from every public servant, MP and office-holder. We assess them rigorously and objectively, and apply disciplinary rules fairly and impartially to all. This is what Singaporeans expect from their Government. And this is what we have delivered and will continually strive to achieve".('Ministerial Statement by PM Lee HL in Parliament on 21Apr2008' [link])
But really, in the midst of this admission of culpability, what assurance is there that PM Lee's systemic civil service incursions and impositions, besides enhancing PAP political hegemony, will really do Singapore much if any possible good?
-------
References/ resources:
- '(PSD) Maintaining High Standard of Conduct': "The Civil Service works under a Code of Conduct based on the principles of incorruptibility, integrity and propriety. Civil servants are expected to conduct themselves with impartiality and honesty at all times, by: Remaining completely neutral in all political matters and matters of public controversy ... " [PSD (Role)> Nurturing Talent> Progressive Policies]
- 'SM Goh concerned Potong Pasir, Hougang residents will lose out on upgrading': "Mr Goh says: 'I do not want the two constituencies to be left behind, especially Potong Pasir, an old estate. Five years down the road, assuming Chiam do win, there will be no upgrading'." [CNA, 26Mar2006]
- 'PM Lee says countries worldwide respect and admire Singapore's proven system': "...I'm going to spend all my time thinking what's the right way to fix them, to buy my supporters votes, how can I solve this week's problem and forget about next year's challenges?.. " [CNA:03May2006][YouTube/@1m10s]
- 'Integrity of election process a hot topic during youth forum': "'Civil servants under the constitution hold their allegiance to the president. The symbolism that is attached to that is we actually serve at the pleasure of a politically neutral institution. It is one of the values of the civil service that we are politically impartial,' said Ms Owi. " [CNA, 17May2009]
- '‘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]
- 'Advisers and MPs have different roles' Lim Yuin Chien, Press Secretary to the Ministry of National Development: "the government-appointed adviser, his main role is to assist in implementing national programmes, such as government campaigns, and HDB's upgrading programmes, including the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP)... Opposition MPs cannot be appointed advisers, because they do not answer to the ruling party." [ST,27Oct2009]
- '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. .. No other public sector board in Singapore has so many “Men in White” on it..." [G Giam, 10Oct2009]
- 'Town Council Act (CAP 329A) states clearly that Govt must work with Town Councils (run by MPs) to implement LUP'. [TR, 29Oct2009][alt link]
- '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. ..."
- 'Civil servants – no longer politically neutral?': "The question which arises is: should civil servants be involved in a political party and participate in its activities?" [TOC, 27Feb2011] -
aiyah..............sure what...............
people in civil service and STATUTORY BOARDS...............plus ALL uniform groups..........
their families will vote PAP too.................
due to rumour that PAP can track votes so family scared affect civil servant's career............
others like scholars earning big bucks sure vote PAP one.................
-
Originally posted by Asromanista2001:
aiyah..............sure what...............
people in civil service and STATUTORY BOARDS...............plus ALL uniform groups..........
their families will vote PAP too.................
due to rumour that PAP can track votes so family scared affect civil servant's career............
others like scholars earning big bucks sure vote PAP one.................
Yes, that's why most of my friends who is in civil services will vote PAP, no question about it.
-
you guys seem to be experts in things you know nothing about
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
you guys seem to be experts in things you know nothing about
They have friends who represented the entire Government. Just like when I go to a village, 1 guy is a fisherman, all are fishermen.
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
you guys seem to be experts in things you know nothing about
Well, I personally talked to them.
No, of course, they will be some who voted for opposition.
But my friends are mostly in Armed Services or police, they will have problem finding jobs that is has the same pay as their previous jobs, most have families and they will simply not risk it.outside.
The serial number on voting ticket is to certified that the individual have voted but who controlled the information? The election department is under PM. Even if he is to abuse the data, will any of use know or have the power to do anything?
People will vote for opposition despite that but they are some who really worry for their rice bowl. If they lose their rice bowl, who is going to take responsible for it?
-
Originally posted by Askingyouto:
Well, I personally talked to them.
then your "friends" are lying to you
-
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
then your "friends" are lying to you
Well, I certainly hope they are lying to me.
-
they are...
because remember this: governments come and go.. the civil service stays to serve the people..
the MIW attempts to blur the line and keeps referring to themselves as civil servants.. THEY ARE NOT!!
they are politicians!
do not forget that
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
they are...
because remember this: governments come and go.. the civil service stays to serve the people..
the MIW attempts to blur the line and keeps referring to themselves as civil servants.. THEY ARE NOT!!
they are politicians!
do not forget that
I will be wishing for one of the oldest of the lot to go faster.
-
Originally posted by Nelstar:
They have friends who represented the entire Government. Just like when I go to a village, 1 guy is a fisherman, all are fishermen.
More likely one fisherman in the village con them, and they come back and tell everyone to be careful at that village, the fishermen are crooks.
-
reminds me of the fishermen story.
A group of guys want to do some fishing and tried to contact some fishermen to take them out fishing. Most were quite expensive but there was one fisherman promised he will take them out at a bargain.
They were happy and went with that fisherman. But after spending whole night without any catch they came back to the village very disappointed. Some of the other fishermen saw them and laughed out loud. That's what you get for a bargain.
So they get another fisherman that charged almost triple of that bargain but the outcome is still the same. Now the whole fishing village was laughing when they returned empty handed. Now the group was very angry and stormed off.
Why no fish?
get a boatman not a fisherman.
-
Originally posted by Clivebenss:
reminds me of the fishermen story.
A group of guys want to do some fishing and tried to contact some fishermen to take them out fishing. Most were quite expensive but there was one fisherman promised he will take them out at a bargain.
They were happy and went with that fisherman. But after spending whole night without any catch they came back to the village very disappointed. Some of the other fishermen saw them and laughed out loud. That's what you get for a bargain.
So they get another fisherman that charged almost triple of that bargain but the outcome is still the same. Now the whole fishing village was laughing when they returned empty handed. Now the group was very angry and stormed off.
Why no fish?
get a boatman not a fisherman.
No conflict of interest.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
More likely one fisherman in the village con them, and they come back and tell everyone to be careful at that village, the fishermen are crooks.
Think is more like there's a mother of all conman, who conned even conmen and every conmen lived happily in this lala land whiling away in pleasure while the fishes in the sea are getting less but no one wants to even investigate why. -
Originally posted by Askingyouto:
Think is more like there's a mother of all conman, who conned even conmen and every conmen lived happily in this lala land whiling away in pleasure while the fishes in the sea are getting less but no one wants to even investigate why.1 bamboo pole to spear all the fish.
-
It is not easy to defeat PAP if people are not united, then together with election boundaries changes, moles in opposition camps, opposition infighting, the election will simply go the way of PAP.
People undoubtly have different ideals and beliefs but I urge all to consider breaking PAP stranglehold first. This country was never free to begin with, ISD and so much oppression of free speech and a kind of fear have always gripped citizens so we have to first start anew if we want really proper ideals and people who really feel a sense of belonging and will contribute their time, engergy and their soul into this country.
Break PAP stranglehold first.
-
Originally posted by Askingyouto:
It is not easy to defeat PAP if people are not united, then together with election boundaries changes, moles in opposition camps, opposition infighting, the election will simply go the way of PAP.
People undoubtly have different ideals and beliefs but I urge all to consider breaking PAP stranglehold first. This country was never free to begin with, ISD and so much oppression of free speech and a kind of fear have always gripped citizens so we have to first start anew if we want really proper ideals and people who really feel a sense of belonging and will contribute their time, engergy and their soul into this country.
Break PAP stranglehold first.
Choosing politicians is like choosing who is going to poison your food. The chef or the server.
Breaking PAP stranglehold is like telling me I should always go for the other type of poison administered no matter if it is more lethal, more devastating than the previous. Even without listening to the description of the poison that is eventually served just because the previous poison had killed many.
I advise all to vote who best represents your interest.
-
I advise all to vote for the future of this country.
-
Originally posted by Nelstar:
Choosing politicians is like choosing who is going to poison your food. The chef or the server.
Breaking PAP stranglehold is like telling me I should always go for the other type of poison administered no matter if it is more lethal, more devastating than the previous. Even without listening to the description of the poison that is eventually served just because the previous poison had killed many.
I advise all to vote who best represents your interest.
Utimately you are saying that all are poison and which kind suits you?
Why not have more faith in the opposition, PAP ministers are not exactly that good also, some more they are selfish and unwilling to take responsible for their own mistakes.
After this election, if PAP wins again, there's no holding back the amount of damage that they can wreck also. Many citizens have left and locals are just a minority now, how long more time, do we can afford to have?
It is true that when opposition comes on board, things will get a lot more tough, business might be forced to shed off cheap workers, possible alongside locals, gov-linked businesses will be tore to many small ones to enable them to be more competitive. Some cushy jobs will be lost.
It is a question of being a nation, a question of finding back our souls, a question of sovereignty, a question of being citizens with rights to govern this nation, not subcontract this to traitor PAP to destroy this country.
-
Originally posted by Nelstar:
Choosing politicians is like choosing who is going to poison your food. The chef or the server.
Breaking PAP stranglehold is like telling me I should always go for the other type of poison administered no matter if it is more lethal, more devastating than the previous. Even without listening to the description of the poison that is eventually served just because the previous poison had killed many.
I advise all to vote who best represents your interest.
if you want the fish the fish get a boatman.
If the boatman start to fish forget it.
-
I believe PAP should still stay in power but with a stronger opposition in the parliament.
I will vote for the opposition but I still want PAP to be the majority party.
-
Originally posted by Clivebenss:
if you want the fish the fish get a boatman.
If the boatman start to fish forget it.
Never ask the boatman to remove the gills and scales of the fish. Ask a fish monger!
-
vote in your favours not for their favours.
-
Originally posted by Nelstar:
Never ask the boatman to remove the gills and scales of the fish. Ask a fish monger!
if I need to pay tax I vote wisely.
