So the issue of the PA and the Opposition MPs as grassroots advisers is getting more and more ridiculous, especially now that Dr Janil Puthucheary responded to YahooSG with some strange statements again. You can read the entire Yahoo Article for the background. I've got so many questions that once again, I wrote an email. And am eagerly anticipating a respond.
####
From: Kie Zin Teng
Date: Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:52 PM
Subject: Questions regarding your statement to Yahoo Singapore
To: Janil_Puthucheary@prpg-grc.sg
Dear Janil,
On the assumption that Yahoo Singapore (http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/singaporescene/pa-explains-why-opposition-mps-cannot-grassroots-advisers-161613082.html) quoted you correctly, I have a few questions regarding your respond to Yahoo on the issue of PA's insistence that Opposition MPs cannot serve as grassroots advisers to Singaporeans. I note that the PA does not distinguish between Singaporeans who voted for PAP and against PAP.
You were quoted as saying that..
Date: Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:52 PM
Subject: Questions regarding your statement to Yahoo Singapore
To: Janil_Puthucheary@prpg-grc.sg
Dear Janil,
On the assumption that Yahoo Singapore (http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/singaporescene/pa-explains-why-opposition-mps-cannot-grassroots-advisers-161613082.html) quoted you correctly, I have a few questions regarding your respond to Yahoo on the issue of PA's insistence that Opposition MPs cannot serve as grassroots advisers to Singaporeans. I note that the PA does not distinguish between Singaporeans who voted for PAP and against PAP.
You were quoted as saying that..
The PA is "linked to government policy" and the grassroots adviser has to believe in the overall thrust of the government's approach. "People who implement and operationalise these policies cannot oppose them. You simply can't have a situation where the adviser does not support the implementation of these policies," he noted. Opposition MPs fundamentally oppose the government and so would not always be in support of its policies and programmes, he said. "Even if they did support policies such as anti-dengue and active ageing programmes, it is possible that they could oppose methods of implementation of these policies," he added.
My first question is why is there an assumption that Opposition MPs fundamentally oppose the government? Could you please explain this to me beyond a mere sweeping statement? Opposition parties are named as such because they run against the incumbent party. And in many countries in the world, and soon in Singapore, the government of the day will have members from opposition parties. So one cannot say that Opposition MPs fundamentally oppose the government, because one day, they will be part of the government. Perhaps the term "opposition" misleads many to think that the role of Opposition MPs is to "oppose"; it might be better to replace the term "Opposition Parties" with the names of specific parties. For example, will you say that "Workers Party MPs fundamentally oppose the government"?
Secondly, are you saying that every single member in the PAP support and believe in the overall thrust of the government's approach, in every single policy? Your statement seems to imply so. I recall from the debate about having casinos in Singapore as one such incident where I did not see every member in the PAP supporting the government. Hence your implied assumption here, again, cannot hold true.
You claim that it is possible that Opposition MPs could oppose methods of implementation. The fact of the matter is, it is possible for anything on earth to happen. Using the word "it is possible", makes everything possible - it is a truism. It is also possible that at some point in the future, some people who implement and operationalize the policies could oppose them. Not saying that it will happen, but it might happen. So my third question is, is it not possible that Opposition MPs will fully support the implementation, or even suggest better ideas so that these policies will be better received? Why are you only looking at one side of the coin?
This leads me to my fourth question. If these policies are for all Singaporeans, and the PA serves all Singaporeans, and not just PAP voting Singaporeans, should the grassroots advisers not be from all walks of life, including fellow Singaporeans who happen to also take the role of Opposition MPs? Unless of course you mean to say that they are not Singaporeans. While I am certain that you are not saying that, but selectively excluding Opposition MPs, it might give such an impression to the public. One might as well ensure that nobody in the PA have voted for the opposition, no?
I look forward to your sincere clarification, and trust that you will take time to reply to this.
Sincerely,
Scott
Secondly, are you saying that every single member in the PAP support and believe in the overall thrust of the government's approach, in every single policy? Your statement seems to imply so. I recall from the debate about having casinos in Singapore as one such incident where I did not see every member in the PAP supporting the government. Hence your implied assumption here, again, cannot hold true.
You claim that it is possible that Opposition MPs could oppose methods of implementation. The fact of the matter is, it is possible for anything on earth to happen. Using the word "it is possible", makes everything possible - it is a truism. It is also possible that at some point in the future, some people who implement and operationalize the policies could oppose them. Not saying that it will happen, but it might happen. So my third question is, is it not possible that Opposition MPs will fully support the implementation, or even suggest better ideas so that these policies will be better received? Why are you only looking at one side of the coin?
This leads me to my fourth question. If these policies are for all Singaporeans, and the PA serves all Singaporeans, and not just PAP voting Singaporeans, should the grassroots advisers not be from all walks of life, including fellow Singaporeans who happen to also take the role of Opposition MPs? Unless of course you mean to say that they are not Singaporeans. While I am certain that you are not saying that, but selectively excluding Opposition MPs, it might give such an impression to the public. One might as well ensure that nobody in the PA have voted for the opposition, no?
I look forward to your sincere clarification, and trust that you will take time to reply to this.
Sincerely,
Scott
No comments:
Post a Comment