http://www.andrewkuan.com/
-
more info abt andrew kuan is available at his website :
http://www.andrewkuan.com/
a contested election will give more legitimacy to the presidency.
lets hope he gets a chance to contest. -
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=79160
Panic in the PAP?
Posted by "yawning_bread"
Aug 8, 2005
Ever since Andrew Kuan announced his intention to seek the presidency, Singaporeans have been treated to an unaccustomed spectacle - the PAP coming out with all guns blazing, almost as if they're in panic.
Daily since Andrew Kuan was first mentioned by the Straits Times on
Friday 5 August, PAP politicians and the media have been badmouthing
him.
He has been described as arrogant, too full of himself, and now dirt is being dug up by the New Paper about something that might or might not have happened at a condominium.
Minister Lim Swee Say today was quoted by the Sunday Times as saying
that Singaporeans should not hope for a contest in the presidential
election just for the sake of it.
What matters more is whether those who want to run for president
have the qualities to perform the duties of the highest post in the
land, the Sunday Times reported him to have said.
Lim was reacting no doubt to a heightened interest on the part of
the public in the presidential contest that had just days before
looked like it would be another walk-over.
Of course, the rejoinder is: who is going to decide whether someone
is qualified? Shouldn't it be the electorate? Isn't that what
elections are for?
But not in Singapore though. Like in Ayatollah-ruled Iran,
interested candidates must first be prequalified by unelected
guardians of the faith (the PAP faith in Singapore's case). Only
safe candidates can be presented to voters.
Was Lim preparing the public for a disqualification?
Andrew Kuan has to obtain a COE - not a certificate of entitlement
to buy a car, but a certificate of eligibility - before he can stand
for election. Two issues now appear to possibly stand in his way.
The committee determining eligibility has to decide firstly, whether
his previous job (2001-2004) as the Group Chief Financial Officer
(CFO) of Jurong Town Corporation (JTC), which Kuan says has $11
billion in assets, is equivalent to management experience leading a
company with at least $100 million in paid-up capital - one of the
statutory requirements for eligibility.
Secondly, whether he is a person of "good character and standing" -
the other statutory condition.
It is possibly difficult to persuade the public that a CFO of JTC is
not sufficiently experienced, and thus to disqualify him on this
ground would create a credibility nightmare for the PAP and for
future presidential elections.
Having said that, we should remember that the PAP has often enough undermined electoral systems and state institutions whenever their party fortunes were at risk, so if they're not confident that Nathan can win re-election, I won't be at all surprised if Kuan's CFO experience is ruled as insufficient, never mind what people in the street think, never mind the damage it does to already low public respect for the electoral system.
The less nightmarish course would be to disqualify Kuan on the ground that he is not of good character. Hence, the determined effort you see now to dig up dirt on him.
Even if he passes the eligibility test, any dirt unearthed (or any
simple issue spun as dirt) will prove useful in the campaign itself.
Of course, the whole affair begs the question of why we need such
stringent eligibility standards anyway, but I shan't get into this
here.
It is a little ironic that Kuan is being described adversely as
stubborn, sure of himself and so on.
When the elected presidency was first proposed in the early 1990s, the PAP government argued that it was necessary to have a person with enough toughness of character and the mandate from the people to stand up to whichever government of the day it was that wanted to spend the reserves.
"Sure of himself", stubborn even, were what the PAP would have described as necessary qualities in the elected president.
Of course, that was then - when the PAP feared a steady erosion of
voter support that would one day lead to a non-PAP government.
As everybody knew, the elected presidency proposal was meant to be a
second line of defence to stymie the plans of whichever opposition
party might form a government.
As things turned out, the PAP had enough trouble with one of their
own - Ong Teng Cheong, the first elected President, who was to prove
to be too independent of mind.
Now the prospect of Andrew Kuan, someone not endorsed by the PAP,
becoming president over the PAP government must be as comfortable as
eating cacti.
From the panic we see, the prospect is real.
Singapore has only seen one presidential contest before, in 1993.
That year, the government gently persuaded Chua Kim Yeow, a former
auditor-general (a civil servant) to contest the election against
Ong Teng Cheong. Chua was a total unknown.
In his few speeches on television, he lived up to the image we all have of civil servants - dowdy, overcautious, scripted, completely uninspiring.
In contrast, Ong was well known, having been in the public eye for
more than a decade, first as head of the National Trades Union
Congress, then cabinet minister and subsequently Deputy Prime
Minister.
Yet, Chua polled 41% of the vote. Just about everyone (and more) who
had a gripe against the PAP took the opportunity to register his
displeasure.
Now, if we have a Kuan vs Nathan contest, the odds must be too
difficult to call.
Despite having been president for 6 years already, Nathan has no natural warmth with people. He says little and is generally unspontaneous. At 80, age may count against him. But most worrying of all, he is not Chinese.
Kuan is 51, Chinese, and showed up to submit his papers for
eligibility with the former Archbishop of the Anglican Church in
tow.
Immediately, he has the advantage with those voters who prefer
to factor in Chineseness, relative youth and Christianity.
Of course, one can - and should - argue that it isn't good for
Singapore's future that some people still vote along racial and
religious lines. However, it's a reality (among some voters) we
can't dismiss.
Keep your seatbelts fastened. It's going to be a rough ride.
Yawning Bread -
It's spooky, did you notice that there's almost no difference btw his photo at age 35 and him at 50??
Anyway yah, i think you raised plenty of valid points.
Nice thread.
edit: got the age wrong... typo -
I think you really made some good points. PAP is trying to use the media to influence the public on the possible bad integrity of Andrew Kuan. We must really try to give Kuan some chance to prove himself.Originally posted by crazy monkey:http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=79160
Panic in the PAP?
Posted by "yawning_bread"
Aug 8, 2005
Ever since Andrew Kuan announced his intention to seek the presidency, Singaporeans have been treated to an unaccustomed spectacle - the PAP coming out with all guns blazing, almost as if they're in panic.
Daily since Andrew Kuan was first mentioned by the Straits Times on
Friday 5 August, PAP politicians and the media have been badmouthing
him.
He has been described as arrogant, too full of himself, and now dirt is being dug up by the New Paper about something that might or might not have happened at a condominium.
Minister Lim Swee Say today was quoted by the Sunday Times as saying
that Singaporeans should not hope for a contest in the presidential
election just for the sake of it.
What matters more is whether those who want to run for president
have the qualities to perform the duties of the highest post in the
land, the Sunday Times reported him to have said.
Lim was reacting no doubt to a heightened interest on the part of
the public in the presidential contest that had just days before
looked like it would be another walk-over.
Of course, the rejoinder is: who is going to decide whether someone
is qualified? Shouldn't it be the electorate? Isn't that what
elections are for?
But not in Singapore though. Like in Ayatollah-ruled Iran,
interested candidates must first be prequalified by unelected
guardians of the faith (the PAP faith in Singapore's case). Only
safe candidates can be presented to voters.
Was Lim preparing the public for a disqualification?
Andrew Kuan has to obtain a COE - not a certificate of entitlement
to buy a car, but a certificate of eligibility - before he can stand
for election. Two issues now appear to possibly stand in his way.
The committee determining eligibility has to decide firstly, whether
his previous job (2001-2004) as the Group Chief Financial Officer
(CFO) of Jurong Town Corporation (JTC), which Kuan says has $11
billion in assets, is equivalent to management experience leading a
company with at least $100 million in paid-up capital - one of the
statutory requirements for eligibility.
Secondly, whether he is a person of "good character and standing" -
the other statutory condition.
It is possibly difficult to persuade the public that a CFO of JTC is
not sufficiently experienced, and thus to disqualify him on this
ground would create a credibility nightmare for the PAP and for
future presidential elections.
Having said that, we should remember that the PAP has often enough undermined electoral systems and state institutions whenever their party fortunes were at risk, so if they're not confident that Nathan can win re-election, I won't be at all surprised if Kuan's CFO experience is ruled as insufficient, never mind what people in the street think, never mind the damage it does to already low public respect for the electoral system.
The less nightmarish course would be to disqualify Kuan on the ground that he is not of good character. Hence, the determined effort you see now to dig up dirt on him.
Even if he passes the eligibility test, any dirt unearthed (or any
simple issue spun as dirt) will prove useful in the campaign itself.
Of course, the whole affair begs the question of why we need such
stringent eligibility standards anyway, but I shan't get into this
here.
It is a little ironic that Kuan is being described adversely as
stubborn, sure of himself and so on.
When the elected presidency was first proposed in the early 1990s, the PAP government argued that it was necessary to have a person with enough toughness of character and the mandate from the people to stand up to whichever government of the day it was that wanted to spend the reserves.
"Sure of himself", stubborn even, were what the PAP would have described as necessary qualities in the elected president.
Of course, that was then - when the PAP feared a steady erosion of
voter support that would one day lead to a non-PAP government.
As everybody knew, the elected presidency proposal was meant to be a
second line of defence to stymie the plans of whichever opposition
party might form a government.
As things turned out, the PAP had enough trouble with one of their
own - Ong Teng Cheong, the first elected President, who was to prove
to be too independent of mind.
Now the prospect of Andrew Kuan, someone not endorsed by the PAP,
becoming president over the PAP government must be as comfortable as
eating cacti.
From the panic we see, the prospect is real.
Singapore has only seen one presidential contest before, in 1993.
That year, the government gently persuaded Chua Kim Yeow, a former
auditor-general (a civil servant) to contest the election against
Ong Teng Cheong. Chua was a total unknown.
In his few speeches on television, he lived up to the image we all have of civil servants - dowdy, overcautious, scripted, completely uninspiring.
In contrast, Ong was well known, having been in the public eye for
more than a decade, first as head of the National Trades Union
Congress, then cabinet minister and subsequently Deputy Prime
Minister.
Yet, Chua polled 41% of the vote. Just about everyone (and more) who
had a gripe against the PAP took the opportunity to register his
displeasure.
Now, if we have a Kuan vs Nathan contest, the odds must be too
difficult to call.
Despite having been president for 6 years already, Nathan has no natural warmth with people. He says little and is generally unspontaneous. At 80, age may count against him. But most worrying of all, he is not Chinese.
Kuan is 51, Chinese, and showed up to submit his papers for
eligibility with the former Archbishop of the Anglican Church in
tow.
Immediately, he has the advantage with those voters who prefer
to factor in Chineseness, relative youth and Christianity.
Of course, one can - and should - argue that it isn't good for
Singapore's future that some people still vote along racial and
religious lines. However, it's a reality (among some voters) we
can't dismiss.
Keep your seatbelts fastened. It's going to be a rough ride.
Yawning Bread
Anyway, the President's role is to check on the cabinet and we certainly don't want another of PAP's ally to be doing that job! -
Anyway crap story on the paper about our LHL telling him and his ex-employer to tell abt his character. If he is really unqualified then just disqualify him. No need to talk so much. If PEC qualified him then I think there should be nothing wrong with him liao.
-
If 'goodness of character' is a qualifying criteria, surely nobody in the PAP should be able to stand for presidency?Originally posted by cowpeh:Anyway crap story on the paper about our LHL telling him and his ex-employer to tell abt his character. If he is really unqualified then just disqualify him. No need to talk so much. If PEC qualified him then I think there should be nothing wrong with him liao. -
i think kuan is ex-pap.
-
The Straits Times (Singapore)
August 10, 2005 Wednesday
Singapore
Presidential hopeful may face suit;
Ex-member seeks apology, damages for comments made by presidential
aspirant
Lynn Lee
PRESIDENTIAL hopeful Andrew Kuan's troubles over the time he served on
his condominium's management council grew yesterday.
A former council member has launched proceedings to sue him for
alleged defamation.
Lawyer Chia Boon Teck, 42, served notice on Mr Kuan yesterday through
his lawyer, Mr Edmond Pereira.
Mr Chia is taking issue with comments Mr Kuan made and documents he
circulated at a press conference on Monday which imply that he is
guilty of forgery, Mr Pereira said.
He is asking, among other things, for a public apology, damages and an
undertaking from Mr Kuan never to repeat the comments again.
A lawyer's letter from the firm of Edmond Pereira & Partners was
served by a staff member at Mr Kuan's home some time after 2pm
yesterday.
It was received by one of Mr Kuan's family members, Mr Pereira said.
Mr Kuan could not be reached for comment yesterday. But his principal
election agent, Mr Francis Goh, said that he could not confirm if such
a letter had been received as it was a public holiday.
This is how matters leading to Mr Chia's launch of legal proceedings
yesterday unfolded.
The Aug 7 edition of The New Paper on Sunday reported on the May 2001
minutes of a council meeting of The Tanamera condominium. These
indicated that Mr Kuan was ousted as chairman as members were unhappy
with his management style.
Responding to the article that day, Mr Kuan said certain council
members had tabled a resolution to remove him. That happened after he
made a police report that a fellow council member forged someone's
signature.
The former JTC Corporation group chief financial officer, who now runs
his own business consulting firm, maintained his story at a press
conference on Monday.
Reading a prepared statement, he claimed that he and the condominium
manager discovered that the member forged signatures on three
occasions. A police report was later filed.
Mr Kuan did not name the member when he spoke on Monday.
But he described him as 'a litigation lawyer from a well-known local
law firm' who 'admitted to forging the signatures' when queried by the
management council.
Mr Kuan also said that 'the police had closed the case without
prosecution despite the clear evidence and admission of forgery'. He
then gave copies of the police report to reporters.
The police report contained the names of Mr Chia and his sister, Ms
Chia Lee Kheng.
Mr Chia said he decided to act following a report on Monday's press
conference in the Today newspaper which had his and his sister's
names, and the comments on forgery.
He told The Straits Times last night that he never admitted having
committed any forgery.
The signatures in question related to documents that his sister, who
had an apartment at The Tanamera, asked him to sign on her behalf as
she was working in London at the time.
He said Mr Kuan raised the matter at a council meeting and refused to
accept his explanations.
He added that even back in 2001, his lawyers began compiling material
arising from comments that Mr Kuan allegedly continued to make about
him. But he let the matter rest when Mr Kuan left the council in May
2001.
Mr Chia, like Mr Kuan, is a member of the People's Action Party but
said his current action has nothing to do with the party.
He had served as a grassroots leader in Fengshan until the end of last
year when he decided to focus on his career and his role in the Law
Society.
Mr Chia's lawyers have given Mr Kuan seven days from yesterday to
respond and publish an apology. If not, the matter will go to court. -
From the look of the media going on, it looks like PAP is not going to make the trip to the election so easy. What is with PM Lee asking all these questions as if nathan is the natural choice?
-
http://www.jbjeya.org/JBJ_Press_Statement_Aug_10.2005.pdf
PRESS STATEMENT
I see the Prime Minister has joined in the attack on Mr. Andrew Kuan.
It just reinforces the view publicly held by Singaporeans that the PAP government handpicks its President and will not tolerate anyone else.
When Mr. Ong Teng Chong wrote to the then Prime Minister of his intention to offer himself for re-election, he was told in no uncertain terms that the Cabinet would not support hint. Why- because he had had the temerity to ask for a statement of Singapore's assets.
It looks as though the PAP government will go all out to ensure that only Mr. Nathan is appointed President. He has been a very good President for the PAP government.
The Prime Minister's call for openness is hollow.
Does the PAP claim a record for openness and accountability.
If the PAP government succeeds in keeping out any other candidate to take on Mr. Nathan, the election becomes a farce.
When the Bill for the Elected President was introduced in Parliament, Goh, the then Prime Minister spoke of the need for the President to be elected by the people so as to give him the moral authority.
The PAP government says one thing and then immediately forgets what it
has said and does the very opposite.
J. B. Jeyaretnam
10 Aug 2005 -
the more dirt they dig up on him the more i feel that they have something to hide
-
Mr Andrew Kuan could try joining the oppostition forces like SDP,WP or others if he failed to be a presidential candidate. He may boost up the opposition image as you can see he is rich and help to fund them which uses for their campaign purposes fully and more people may vote for them??
-
He does not have the chance of being a presidental candidate anymore after many people attacked him like the board from his former job JTC and also Hyflux. He will stand the chance anymore already. So sad
-
if he is allow to run, he will still give nathan a good run for his money.Originally posted by gorby107:He does not have the chance of being a presidental candidate anymore after many people attacked him like the board from his former job JTC and also Hyflux. He will stand the chance anymore already. So sad 
-
i do think this is an unfair competition, and the media is biased against its coverage.
first of all, ever since andrew kwan announced he will run for presidency, many "scandals" appear against him, the latest being jtc and hyflux (i dun understand abt hyflux statement, why u can't give a cfo job to him if he declare he want to be a president, does that mean that u dun give jobs to opposition?).
but what abt nathan? news about him shaking hands beginning to appear on the newspapers. the funny thing is there's an article abt nathan learning chinese, as though he want to tell us that he can be chinese if he wants to. and the best part is they are hinting that he may give a speech in chinese on the nomination day.
why aren't the two potential candidiates face the same scrutiny, since they are both running the same job? is it because nathan is endorsed by the pap, so he must necessarily be without faults?
andrew kwan has done the first step by giving us a full resume, should not nathan give us a full medical report about himself, so that he can declare himself fit for running president? -
Agree with you on this.Originally posted by crazy monkey:if he is allow to run, he will still give nathan a good run for his money.
Just see how panicky the gov reacts on a potentially qualified Pres. candidate.
I think the bad-mouthing is prelude to vote winning if not disqualification. They forget that Kuan is PAP member before the Pres. election. They are actually bad-mouthing themselves also. -
Frankly, if the "3 wise men" from the PEC indeed qualify Andrew Kuan on the 17 August, then I do not see there should be any concern to the bad press on Andrew Kuan.
However on th 17 August, if PEC could not find another other candidates to contest with the incumbent, then it is a mockery to the elected presidency because no one else will qualify if the TOP decided against it.
Condolence to the voters of Singapore. -
Those JTC and Hyflux companies are Pro-PAP so they want to support the government which favours Mr S R Nathan and they give a dressing down for Mr Kuan when he annouces he want to contest for the presidential election giving him so much problem to explain and all this could let him not eligible to contest for the electionOriginally posted by garjulie:i do think this is an unfair competition, and the media is biased against its coverage.
first of all, ever since andrew kwan announced he will run for presidency, many "scandals" appear against him, the latest being jtc and hyflux (i dun understand abt hyflux statement, why u can't give a cfo job to him if he declare he want to be a president, does that mean that u dun give jobs to opposition?).
but what abt nathan? news about him shaking hands beginning to appear on the newspapers. the funny thing is there's an article abt nathan learning chinese, as though he want to tell us that he can be chinese if he wants to. and the best part is they are hinting that he may give a speech in chinese on the nomination day.
why aren't the two potential candidiates face the same scrutiny, since they are both running the same job? is it because nathan is endorsed by the pap, so he must necessarily be without faults?
andrew kwan has done the first step by giving us a full resume, should not nathan give us a full medical report about himself, so that he can declare himself fit for running president? -
imagine how embarassing it will be for PAP if he wins.
-
i love to see that!Originally posted by dragg:imagine how embarassing it will be for PAP if he wins.
media, go ahead and condemned him! my vote still goes wif him. -
Wow!!! You are a stauch supporter of Mr KuanOriginally posted by 798:i love to see that!
media, go ahead and condemned him! my vote still goes wif him. -
In fact I think all the political parties should keep their opinion to themselves as this is a democratic election....
-
What election? Game Over liao.Originally posted by tarutaru:In fact I think all the political parties should keep their opinion to themselves as this is a democratic election.... -
is kuan is so bad, why did JTC allow him to stay for 3 years ? they are shooting themselves in the foot.Originally posted by gorby107:Those JTC and Hyflux companies are Pro-PAP so they want to support the government which favours Mr S R Nathan and they give a dressing down for Mr Kuan when he annouces he want to contest for the presidential election giving him so much problem to explain and all this could let him not eligible to contest for the election
... and why must kuan disclose his intention of running for president why working for Hyflux ? its after all a personal decision. Olivia lum shd haf kept her mouth shut. -
If actors can become the Governor of California and the President of the United States, why not Andrew Kuan???