A recent article on asia1.com. Comments made in a balanced and logical manner. Grassroots leader takes issue with Workers' Party
Jan 24, 2006
The Straits Times
I REFER to the Workers' Party (WP)'s General Election manifesto that included a call for the abolition of the current grassroots system, which the party claims is the 'eyes and ears' of the People's Action Party (PAP) Government.
Although two Cabinet ministers, Dr Ng Eng Hen and Mr Khaw Boon Wan, have since challenged the manifesto, as has the Prime Minister, as a serving grassroots leader I wish to categorically rebut the WP's contention about grassroots leaders, as it has done a great injustice to the many volunteers, especially those with no political affiliations or ambitions but just a simple desire to do their small part for the communities nearest and dearest to them.
This point in the WP's manifesto shows that it is out of touch with the ground. I see this as a big challenge for the party, which I have always secretly hoped would produce more 'Low Thia Khiangs' to awaken the PAP from its complacent stupor of unrestrained governance.
While it is true that grassroots leaders in the residents' committees and citizens' consultative committees are appointed by government Members of Parliament, the fact that we are volunteers means that we need not be subservient, and would speak up if necessary.
And indeed speak up we do because, unknown to the WP, many grassroots leaders are not yes-men or women, but had challenged the authorities, including our MPs - sometimes emotionally - on policies that would affect our wards.
If grassroots leaders are deeemed the Government's 'eyes and ears', they are also the mouths, but of the communities we serve, a case in point being the 'white elephant' saga involving Buangkok MRT station.
Just as those involved had been reprimanded, the WP should know that there are many other grassroots leaders who had been covertly ostracised for 'being too vocal' in their criticisms.
Honestly, as grassroots leaders, we have our frustrations because we are often the first to be ticked off by residents for failing to meet their needs. But if one is genuinely interested in wanting to help, one will shrug it off and move on.
Thankfully, the number of new grassroots leaders who dare to speak out has grown too. This is reflected in the many direct e-mail messages to the Prime Minister whenever we feel that a government policy requires further tweaking, such as the issue of foreign talent, the setting up of casinos and ageism, which is unjustified because technology today allows even the old to compete with the young so long as physical power is not the issue.
To further illustrate the point that grassroots leaders do not swallow everything that is told to them by the Government, I take this opportunity to rebut Health Minister Khaw's point that those who use the roads more often should pay more road tax than those who use them less ('From water to foreign degrees'; The Sunday Times, Jan 22).
If this is true, why then are owners of cars beyond 10 years old made to pay more in road tax when they have already paid for their new COEs and have had their cars mechanically tested annually - in fact, more frequently than new cars?
Paul Wee Kian Nghee
Chairman
Cantonment Towers
Residents' Committee
Tanjong Pagar Constituency http://www.asiaone.com/st/st_20060124_366852.htmlTwo points that stood out in his letter.
(1): Just as those involved had been reprimanded, the WP should know that there are many other grassroots leaders who had been covertly ostracised for 'being too vocal' in their criticisms.By his own admission, grassroots discourages freedom of speech, even at committee level, and those 'deemed' too 'vocal' are singularly reprimanded.
Is that any good for an open society? Isn't that stifling the potential and creativity for RC members to help the residents? We are constantly encouraged to think 'out of the box', develop and nuture new ideas, yet with such conservative discouragement and reminders of 'big brother is listening', is it any wonder why Singaporeans have 'devolved' into a apathetic lot?
Re-structuring or re-organising RCs and CCCs can only serve to IMPROVE channels of communication, re-creating an independent body devoid of links to ANY political party, to ensure that a 'resident's FIRST' directive is meticulously implemented.
(2):If grassroots leaders are deeemed the Government's 'eyes and ears', they are also the mouths, but of the communities we serve, a case in point being the 'white elephant' saga involving Buangkok MRT station. The actions of a select few within the RCs in the case of Buangkok MRT was duly noted and applauded. Yet the underlying message sent out by the govt reflected the negative consequences of 'freedom of expression'. Ultimately, all that we remember of that incident ( or will remember in years to come) is that our boys in blue handed out verbal warnings to those involved.
If anything is to be learned from this lesson, it's this: any form of expression however creative and amusing, even ultimately harmless, will be clamped down HARD as long as the ruling party DEEMS it a political statement.
Still it is pleasantly surprising to note that there are people like Mr Paul Wee, who despite actively working in such a capacity, has not been blind to his surroundings.
Still he might like to review the fact that despite direct emails and correspondence reaching the PM's office, all of the letters of contention regarding the
'issue of foreign talent, the setting up of casinos and ageism' have yielded a brick wall and zero significant inroads.
