RC are part of the PA (a government body)
-
ST Forum 17 Jan 07
IN REPORTING on plans to promote community ties among residents of HDB estates, the article, 'Community ties: It's the basics that count' (ST, Jan
, quoted common misperceptions of the Residents' Committees (RCs), raised at focus- group discussions.
The purpose of the People's Association (PA) grassroots organisations (GROs), including the RCs, is to foster active citizenry. As part of the process, they organise community activities, but this should not be construed as their having sole responsibility or a monopoly in holding such activities.
It is to the credit of many individuals and groups that they also do their part in organising activities, jointly with the GROs or separately.
We are delighted that some residents of Block 176 in Woodlands Street 13 hold social and community activities, and not leave everything to the RC.
That RCs are party-political - which is cited by some as the reason they are reluctant to join as members - is a misperception. There is much media and public attention when RC members visit households with their advisers. In contrast, the many frequent visits by RC members on their own, and the good community service they render, do not attract such notice.
RCs are part of the PA (a government body) grassroots network, and thus an extension of the Government. RC members serve in the interest of residents, regardless of political affiliation. Any RC member who takes part in party-political activities does so in his personal capacity.
Recruitment is a challenge for all voluntary organisations. RCs have fared well, with membership of about 11,000 and average growth of 2.6 per cent in the last three years. About 40 per cent of RC members are professionals, managers, executives or businessmen, while more than one third are below 45.
The PA appreciates the efforts of grassroots volunteers in strengthening community ties. We would like to invite more people to join the grassroots movement for on-going leadership renewal and to improve our activities, so as to better serve residents and build a more cohesive community.
Ooi Hui Mei (Ms)
Director
(Corporate Communications)
for Chief Executive Director
The People's Association -
ST Forum 22 Jan 07
I HAVE some questions after reading the letter explaining the role of residents' committees (RCs) by People's Association (PA) corporate communications director Ooi Hui Mei (ST, Jan17).
Firstly, her statement: 'RCs are part of the PA (a government body) grassroots network, and thus an extension of the Government.' What is implied here?
Are RC activities aimed at explaining or disseminating government policies? If the constituency's representative in Parliament is from an opposition party, does the RC work with him/her?
Secondly, does community interaction come under the purview of a ministry?
If I and my neighbours in Simei decide to set up an association to serve the residents' needs, must we inform the RC?
Will the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports object to our registration as a society?
I think it is timely to question the point of having officially mandated RCs and a PA.
Perhaps, Singaporeans are unwilling to form civic society organisations because of the baggage of the past, where neighbourly interaction is made to take place under a government-run body.
Removing such constraints may lead to more willingness by young Singaporeans to organise themselves in ways that improve society, such as forming networks of neighbours.
Such groupings will be more vibrant and motivated, and be more embedded in the online and offline lives of local residents.
Harminder Singh -
ST Forum 22 Jan 07
PEOPLE'S Association corporate communications director Ooi Hui Mei says in her letter that it is a misperception that residents' committees (RCs) are party- political. ('RCs invite residents to join in building community ties'; ST, Jan 17).
After having seen how RCs function for decades, could Singaporeans have come to a wrong conclusion?
Some years back, I attended a number of RC meetings as an observer. I found that many of the issues raised were not the real concerns of residents. They had more to do with ongoing projects or events that offered photo opportunities with MPs or good press coverage.
It takes an inter-estate cleanliness competition for an RC to try and keep the estate spick and span for maybe a few weeks.
When the contest is over, cleanliness becomes the least of concerns. This attitude extends to other issues as well.
Can one expect RC members to have the initiative to tackle the more challenging issues, such as community bonding?
Ms Ooi claims that RC members serve in the interest of residents. But they are entitled to schooling priority for their children, public housing priority and so on. And if one serves long enough, one may receive an award, come National Day.
Will there be any RC at all if these privileges are removed?
(Management committees of private estates function just as well, if not better, without any such privileges.)
RCs are a heaven-sent as they can be the eyes and ears of the Government - giving feedback on areas which need improvement, identifying problems of the elderly and the like.
Despite having been around for almost three decades, the Government has yet to fully capitalise on RCs whose extensive reach into the heartland may just render the Feedback Unit redundant.
Besides a few guidelines pertaining to racial harmony and grants from the Government to address concerns of those less well-off, RCs should be unshackled from politics.
Phillip Ang Keng Hong -
One may not be a member of the ruling party to apply for a job in PA, it is a grievous insult of the intelligence of Singaporeans to suggest that PA, RC do not serve the interests of PAP.
RC members blatantly distribute leaftets of PAP candidates is a fact.
During the last election, we have seen on news reports how an opposition candidate is denied access to CC areas whilst someone from ruling party is inside the premises.
-
During the last National Day period, flags are put up from one end to the other end of the estate. Why ? because they are having a competition among the RC. So whose money are they using now?Originally posted by LinYu:ST Forum 22 Jan 07
PEOPLE'S Association corporate communications director Ooi Hui Mei says in her letter that it is a misperception that residents' committees (RCs) are party- political. ('RCs invite residents to join in building community ties'; ST, Jan 17).
After having seen how RCs function for decades, could Singaporeans have come to a wrong conclusion?
Some years back, I attended a number of RC meetings as an observer. I found that many of the issues raised were not the real concerns of residents. They had more to do with ongoing projects or events that offered photo opportunities with MPs or good press coverage.
It takes an inter-estate cleanliness competition for an RC to try and keep the estate spick and span for maybe a few weeks.
When the contest is over, cleanliness becomes the least of concerns. This attitude extends to other issues as well.
Can one expect RC members to have the initiative to tackle the more challenging issues, such as community bonding?
Ms Ooi claims that RC members serve in the interest of residents. But they are entitled to schooling priority for their children, public housing priority and so on. And if one serves long enough, one may receive an award, come National Day.
Will there be any RC at all if these privileges are removed?
(Management committees of private estates function just as well, if not better, without any such privileges.)
RCs are a heaven-sent as they can be the eyes and ears of the Government - giving feedback on areas which need improvement, identifying problems of the elderly and the like.
Despite having been around for almost three decades, the Government has yet to fully capitalise on RCs whose extensive reach into the heartland may just render the Feedback Unit redundant.
Besides a few guidelines pertaining to racial harmony and grants from the Government to address concerns of those less well-off, RCs should be unshackled from politics.
Phillip Ang Keng Hong -
Without goodies, no RC.
It is simple.
If million poodles is more interested in getting more exposure and currying the chief dog, what do you expect from the lackeys ?
That is what I call leading by example.
The facts is for all to see.
No one is actually "interested" in serving the peasants.
It is another wishful thinking of the blind peasants.
The "civil" "servants" have become your boss.