PA Belongs To PAP. Double Confirm??
IS By using the good name of "Deputy Chairman", Mei has worked "faster and better" to make the image of PA and PAP "cheaper"! Is she doing it because she receives CPF Statement every month like her boss Swee Say? [Link]
If the 2 replies from Ooi Hui Mei on behalf of Yam Ah Mee and Lim Swee Say speak volumes of People's Association's "Integrity", it speaks worse of PAP!
Another PA Member, Chan Chun Sing said in ST (4 Sept 2011), "We must remember not to plant stakes in the ground to circumscribe others' actions. We must constantly work to enlarge and defend the common space that we all enjoy today." He cautioned, "Peace and stability not a given. Need to ensure polarisation of beliefs, globalised economy and social media do not threaten harmony." It is a crying shame that he and his keeps flogging the idea that the social media threaten the peace and harmony of Singapore. Why are they so blind to the fact that it's the bullying, the unfairness, the injustice and the fear-mongering created by PAP that's creating the divide! The use of tax payers' money in PA to serve the selfish political ends of PAP is one stark example of the hubris, the bullying and the injustice!
SINGAPOREANS FEAR NO MORE!
For what it is worth, it's good to note that courageous political victims, especially the elders, are no longer afraid to stand up to face their nemesis. I salute Said Zahari, Tan Jin Quee, Francis Seow, Vincent Cheng, Teo Soh Lung and many others who have stated the facts and the ills inflicted upon them. With their revelations in books and videos, Singaporeans are enlightened. That power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely! I also salute Martyn See for his undying effort in waking up Singaporeans with his videos and research in his blog Singapore Rebel.
Where courage is concerned, I also salute Dr Lim Hock Siew [Link]. President Tony Tan has yet to preserve his good name from Dr Lim's challenge. Then again, Patrick's 12-year-NS-disruption has done much to denigrate the President's reputation. Silence to some means consent. To others, silence is the best defence! Just shut the fook up and pray and hope that the social media do not bring it up again.
On 10:13 of this video [Link] we learn from Dr Lim Hock Siew of the "cruel and inhumane deception ... and vindictiveness of the tyrant, Lee Kuan Yew...". With the silence from Lee Kuan Yew and Tony Tan, do we conclude that Dr Lim Hock Siew and hundreds other detainees were nothing more than examples (sacrificial lambs) set forth to frighten righteous citizens from doing right? From articulating (in blogs, coffeeshops, pantry rooms or otherwise) about the injustice, the pseudo-democracy, the decaying 'anything-for-money' and 'sell-your-soul-to-the-PAP-devil' state of sycophancy in Singapore?
Thank goodness, more Singaporeans are no longer afraid to tell it like it is and vote according to their conscience!
feedmetothefish
2nd REPLY OF OOI HUI MEI
I REFER to Thursday's letters ('PA must stay neutral' by Mr Chong Yew Mun; and 'Why are PA's appointed advisers exclusively from the PAP?' by Mr Tan Si An), as well as recent letters relating to the issue of neutrality of the People's Association (PA).
Ooi Hui Mei (Ms)
Director, Corporate Communications
On behalf of Deputy Chairman
People's Association
The Government appreciates the public's interest in the role of the PA and the considerations in appointing advisers.
Our priority is to fulfil the PA's mission of building social capital. PA connects people to people as well as people and government. As a statutory board, it performs its duties in accordance with the policies of the elected government of the day. Like other public sector organisations, the PA is not involved in party-political activities.
To fulfil its mission, the PA and the grassroots organisations gather public feedback to help improve policies and initiatives, and explain government policies and programmes to citizens, so that they can benefit from them. The PA and the grassroots organisations also help to implement government social programmes for social cohesion and social safety nets.
Advisers to grassroots organisations guide them in carrying out these functions. It is not possible to appoint opposition MPs as advisers, because we cannot ask opposition MPs to help the Government to connect better with the people.
Nor can we reasonably expect them to help the Government explain, implement or improve its policies. This is especially true of policies which they oppose, such as restructuring our tax system when we introduced the goods and services tax, and relying on ComCare instead of unconditional welfare.
However, the Government does involve the MP, whether People's Action Party or opposition, when he has a role to play, such as on town council matters and HDB upgrading projects, where the MP has substantial and important responsibilities.
Ministries also keep all elected MPs informed of developments which are relevant to their work, such as change of bus routes or payment of U-Save rebates.
This way, even if the adviser is not the MP, the two will complement each other in serving residents and the community, despite any differences in their political views, principles and philosophy.
Ooi Hui Mei (Ms)
Director, Corporate Communications
On behalf of Deputy Chairman
People's Association
posted by FeedMeToTheFish @ 11:51 PM
14 Comments
Links to this post
14 Comments:
She's not 'building social capital', she's spending it right now, in huge amounts.
Government refers to the
a)legislators (parliament),
b)administrators (civil servants), and
c)arbitrators (judges) in the administrative bureaucracy who control a state at a given time, and to the system of government by which they are organized.
Government is the means by which state policy is enforced, as well as the mechanism for determining the policy of the state.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government
An Opposition Member of Parliament is a legislator.
Hence an Opposition Member is part of the Government.
So the PA (Ms Ooi Hui Mei) is wrong to exclude Workers' Party elected MPs.
LOYAL OPPOSITION
In parliamentary systems of government, the term loyal opposition is applied to the opposition parties in the legislature to indicate that the non-governing parties may oppose the actions of the sitting cabinet (typically comprising parliamentarians from the party with the most seats in the elected legislative chamber) – while maintaining loyalty to the source of the government's power.
The concept thus permits the dissent necessary for a functioning democracy, as the policies of the governing cabinet can be challenged without fear of being accused of treason against the state.
The idea of inquisitorial opposition that held the executive to account emerged in Great Britain.
Source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyal_opposition
Anon 10.05am
As your wikipedia states the govt refers to the "legislators/cabinet who control the states at a given time" and in Westminster parliamentary system
"The position of prime minister, the UK's head of government,[134] belongs to the member of parliament who can obtain the confidence of a majority in the House of Commons, usually the current leader of the largest political party in that chamber. The prime minister and cabinet are formally appointed by the monarch to form Her Majesty's Government, though the prime minister chooses the cabinet and, by convention, HM The Queen respects the prime minister's choices."
PA is legally correct in Westminster parliamentary terms.
Regards
What is puzzling is that they doesn't seem to be aware that their actions has earned them the acclaimed status as the Pariah Action Party of Singapore ?
Whatever little respect that is left of them are being slowly and surely eroded with the passage of time, especially with recent revelations of their possible criminal acts against humanity ?
In fact it is truly amazing that they have chosen to remain so silent that one may almost conclude that these revelations may be the last few hard truths which they certainly fear to unveil ? Otherwise one simply cannot fathom how one 'eager-to-sue' leader can allow all these wild accusations to go unchallenged to scandalise his greatness ?
Very true, the government not just refer to PM and its cabinet.
Ooi Hui Mei (Ms) definitely never majored in Political Science (General) or International Relations (where political science modules still form the foundation). And none in the cabinet majored in Social Sciences. Suggest the newly EP advise PM to ask U Professor to conduct short courses for the cabinet minister (PM included of course) and senior civil servants.
May I suggest that the PAP image to be bigger than PA.
or Create a image that PA is subset of PAP.
@11.39am
ALL "Members of Parliaments" are legislators.
Because ALL Members of Parliament can introduce new legislations for parliamentary vote.
And legislators by definition are members of government.
Therefore, Opposition Members of Parliament are by definition part of government.
All of the PAP Members of Parliament are part of the government.
But NOT ALL of the government is PAP.
Our Executive President (Tony Tan)is a part of the government.
But he is NOT part of PAP (not anymore).
This is why the British work very hard to ensure that the administrators (civil service) part of the government is politically neutral.
Just like our politically neutral Executive President Tony Tan.
Suggested Readings on Politicizing of the civil service:
http://www.amazon.com/Politicization-Civil-Service-Comparative-Perspective/dp/0415700256
http://harpers.org/archive/2007/07/hbc-90000632
Fish,
double confirm PA is subsidiary of PAP.
easier to secure favours if you join either one.
As a resident of Hougang, this issue of the PA, overseeing the CC, being a propaganda arm of the PAP, was already evident since Low took over as MP.
The only reason it was never such a big issue nor debated was probably the lack of a platform for the opposition to mount a large scale public education exercise, with only the Government controlled MSM feeding one sided sanitized information to the public. Most Singaporeans remained largely in the dark.
Now, the internet has given the opposition and it supporters that platform, and wisely enough they seized this opportunity to capitalised on the issue. More Singaporeans are now aware of the perverted system that we have.
The MSM may also have been drawn into the fray just recently, not because they want to, but they are being forced to, to make themselves look more credible by touching on the issue, which they would preferably have kept quiet. Pardon me if I still think they have any credibility left to uphold.
If the ruling party really think that the social media does not influence much of the thinking of Singaporeans at all, they are taking a very big risk and making a very serious mistake.
Aiyoh, how come our Workers' Party MP are not making a issue out of it, or they just let you do the work for them.
Why dont you all stand for election, and right the wrong and wrong the right. Come and stand for election in GE2016, and dont be a tool for the Workers' Party.
Aiyoh, if daft Singaporeans continue to vote for PAP, asking others to stand for election also no use. They may even lose their deposit. Definitely not a cheap thrill.
To right the wrong, daft Singaporeans should do the right thing first by voting more opposition into Parliament, rather than blaming the opposition for doing nothing. Put the horse before the cart, not behind it!
Don't be a tool for the PAP by voting for them and allowing them to stamp on you like an ant.
If the WP MPs did not make an issue of it, the issue coming into the forefront now must have been exposed by the PAP themselves.
If WP Chen did not tell it as it happened, daft Singaporeans would still be in the dark. Guess even with that, some are still obviously in the dark.
hi, your piece on sporeans being dafted again apparently does not exist...
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home