PILOT : Capt Goh PR status revoked

last SG · 2004-03-11T03:16:21+00:00

Give me some time, and I will dig out the reference site for your consideration.

nismoS132 SG

i wouldn't say he was out to doom SIA, no one wants to lose his own job. but we can be sure that he doesn't want to be a singaporean.

1 reason i can think of for not putting his own name in the petition is because it wouldn't look nice if future employers found out about it.

socrates SG

I am apalled by the fact that LKY can get his hand on so much information even before the meeting. I believe he had conducted thorough studies into the private lives of the people involved in this matter. He can even tell whether his daughter is comfortable studying in Australia or not... Now I am wondering if he is conducting studies on people that had expressed their views freely here...

I don't know how you all feel by is getting PR of other countries really that "unloyal" ? Can we really classified singapore citizens with PR status of other countries as bad sheeps ? Does getting PRs while maintaining his own citizenship indirectly mean one cannot be a leader of union or leader of a society in Singapore ?

Viper52 SG

NOTHING is private from the paranoia of the system, socrates.

As for PRs being loyal or disloyal, you might want to refer to the following thread: Singaporean talents leaving...

Atobe SG

If you are an elected Member of the Committee, and if you DO NOT hold the same views as that of the other members of the Committee, will you still act in concert with the general membership to act against those who are more compliant with the SIA Management ?

In the PAP, EVERY SINGLE PAP Member of Parliament is required to follow Party Politics, and to suppress their own conscience in representing the Singapore Constituents who gave them their VOTES, and will follow the PAP Leadership to pass the Legislations that will act against the Singapore Citizens.

At least at ALPA-S, Democracy is being practised that allow some differences in opinions, as was mentioned in my postings at 'SIA Girl Letter' - http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=71129

It is truly a shame that SM LKY being supposedly a World Class Statesman, and supposedly to be an Intellectual of the First World, is using Third World Politics to bring a Pilot Union in line, and making them bend to his personal will.

It is shameless that the State Security Apparatus is used to dig up the simple family affairs of Capt Ryan Goh, and the findings being dragged into the open to suit his own defination of what Politics should be.

If Capt Ryan Goh's PR status is now being questioned, then those other Singaporeans who hold the US Green Card, and PR status in one or more countries will also open themselves to question by the various Host Countries.

Atobe SG

PAP MPs that are being polite but making speech that are actually nothing but 'Double Speak', and refusing to say the issues as they are seen.

Yet Straits Times reporter try hard to glorify their daring stunt, which will surely be followed by Ministerial rebuttal to complete the wayang.

Are the MPs truly speaking for the Singapore Electorates that vote them into Parliament ?

SIA-PILOTS' DISPUTE: WHY DID SM HAVE TO STEP IN?
Veteran MP voices disquiet felt by some
But Tan Cheng Bock is confident that it is no reflection on the ability of younger ministers to manage difficult issues
By Lydia Lim

IT TOOK veteran MP Tan Cheng Bock to say aloud what has been on people's minds over a bitter dispute between Singapore Airlines (SIA) management and its pilots.

Why did Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew have to step in?

And what did it say about the younger ministers' ability to manage such issues?

Speaking in Parliament yesterday, the Ayer Rajah MP admitted raising a sensitive issue, but said he had to do so because of the 'disquiet' he sensed among Singaporeans.

He also wanted to lay to rest doubts over the younger leadership's ability to handle such crises on its own.

Mr Lee met members of the Air Line Pilots Association-Singapore (Alpa-S) two weeks ago to sort out the union's differences with management. Both sides agreed to mend fences and rebuild trust.

The Senior Minister had stepped in personally after the pilots ousted Alpa-S' leadership last November, a move that the Government read as the start of a confrontational stance in industrial relations.

Dr Tan said: 'Now one question that has been asked is, why is the Government interfering in this matter? Should this not be thrashed out by the management and the union?

'Why do we allow foreigners to sit on the union executive committee? What if a similar or even a more serious issue involving, say, a pilot strike were to happen in the future and there is no Lee Kuan Yew to crack some heads?

'I think these are legitimate questions being asked.'

But Singaporeans should not lose sleep over how the younger ministers would fare without Mr Lee, he was quick to add.

He himself had no doubts about their ability to manage crises. 'You watched how our new leaders handled Sars, the Asian financial crisis, and how they are managing our economic downturn.

'They have the confidence, they have the ability and we should support them,' he said, the emotion in his voice evident.

Mr Inderjit Singh (Ang Mo Kio GRC) also spoke, on Monday, about the direct involvement of 'very senior ministers' in the affairs of state-owned companies like SIA and PSA Corp.

Unlike Dr Tan, he spoke from the perspective of a businessman who has long objected to the Government's dominant role in the economy.

'In both cases, we see very senior ministers getting directly involved, despite the fact that both companies already have supposedly very strong management teams and boards.

'This is not a good signal and is not in line with what the Government has been saying about its role in managing companies owned through its investment arms,' he said.

He also criticised another minister who 'jumped the gun' to suggest publicly a transport companies merge.

'Both companies are listed and it should have been their own decision,' he said.

claudetnt SG

once again we bear witness to LKY’s success formula – Divide and Rule. Interesting to watch how Mok and his men are going to react! Must say that todate, Ryan Goh have still not stated his case fully.

Atobe SG

If you do not know how to read the TWO posts of 11 March 2004 on Page 1, no one can help you.

Me ? PAP supporter ?

Turning this into 'Young PAP ministers are OK' thread ?

Where did you learn to read what your eyes see ?

Viper52 SG

Capt Ryan Goh submits appeal against PR decision

Govt receives appeal of SIA pilot who was told his PR would be revoked after he was named as the instigator in Alpa-S ouster

By Rebecca Lee

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/singapore/story/0,4386,239943-1079215140,00.html?

SINGAPORE Airlines pilot Captain Ryan Goh, who has been served notice that his permanent resident status will be revoked, has appealed against the decision.

The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) yesterday confirmed that Capt Goh, a Malaysian citizen, has made representations against the Controller of Immigration's intention to revoke his PR status

On Friday, the ICA told Capt Goh of its intention to cancel his entry and re-entry permits, which are necessary for PRs here.

It was doing so as the Home Affairs Minister decided that Capt Goh was an 'undesirable immigrant' as specified by Section 8(3)(k) of the Immigration Act.

Capt Goh, 43, who has been a Singapore PR since 1981, was singled out by the Government as the 'instigator' behind last year's ouster of the executive committee of the Air Line Pilots Association-Singapore (Alpa-S).

The pilot, who declined comment when contacted, was given up till yesterday to say why his PR status should not be revoked.

Separately, the Manpower Ministry (MOM) has decided to allow three foreigners to sit on the executive council of Alpa-S, after its president Mok Hin Choon said he was shorthanded and needed them to help run the show.

It sent letters of approval to Captain George Howard Park and First Officers Srihari Vaidun and Viswanathan Nachiappan, who were elected in December but, according to the Trade Union Act, have to obtain the MOM's written approval to become union leaders.

They are all Singapore PRs.

Capt Park, a Malaysian who has been living here for 30 years, was delighted with the news.

'They don't have any doubts as to the credibility of my stake in Singapore. I'm here to stay for a very, very long time,' he said.

Capt Park, whose wife and daughter are Singaporeans, said he will consider taking up citizenship at a 'conducive time'.

'The letter of approval states very specifically that efforts to take up Singapore citizenship ought to be considered in the long term,' he said.

Similarly, First Officer Srihari Vaidun, an Indian national, said: 'I'm very happy that my application was approved. I hope to contribute to the union in whatever way I can.'

wuming78 SG

i realli dun feel comfortable when i first saw this news. mabe the timing is simply poor. after the SM meeting the union and all, and publicly taking him to task, next thing we noe, the minister of home affairs thinks hes a harmful element to our society.

thought we all thought we knew wat he did long b4 this - at the time when the upheaval occured? y din the minister thought his PR was to be revoked then?

Viper52 SG

Just a interesting angle, if by holding a PR of another country, or having properties overseas, constitutes a "fall back" position to escape to should Singapore fail, as SM has suggested, then might I suggest, for the sake of good governance of Singapore, EVERY leader of Singapore, starting from the Perm-Secs of the Ministries UP TO the Ministers of the Cabinet themselves, be audited by an independent external agency for overseas Permanent Residency status, as well as foriegn assets and interests. After all, going by the SM's logic, theres nothing stopping them from having from having an "escape clause" should they muck up Singapore, is there?

Yup, like THAT'S gonna happen.

wuming78 SG

my guess is they already haf been, and they r prob closely monitored daily.

Viper52 SG

Again wuming78, are we watching people with different standards here? Isn't that statement just a tad presumptious?

Besides, who is watching? And who are watching the watchers? A lot of people here have already said, a government should ultimately be answerable to the people. Can we say that for ours?

wuming78 SG

hm. i cant comment cos i dun haf sufficient knowledge. do u? my previous statement is presumptious. and i made it based on watever little knowledge i haf of the ppl up there and whoever manages them.

Viper52 SG

Exactly! I don't. And thats the problem with the system here isn't it? At the end of the day a democratically elected government is supposed to be accountable ultimately to the people who voted them into office, but as have been asked several times here, is that the case in Singapore?

It doesn't help when people are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt without question, especially on something as serious as this, which supposedly can make of break Singapore (SM's words not mine).

Which brings us right back to the question: Do we judge to Ruling Party and the Opposition with the same standards, and if not, why not?

wuming78 SG

hm.. interesting question.. brings to my mind the time when the late president ong teng cheong went public wif his experience as the president when his term was ending and he was contemplating a second term.

but what would u see as the government showing accountability to the public? accountability in wat sense? monetary? others? how shud they do it?

Viper52 SG

Precisely! The Ruling Party is unwilling to follow through on the original promises it made when it came up with the Elected President's Bill, stonewalling and playing games President Ong's attempts to fulfil his duty as stated by nothing less the the Consitution of Singapore by getting a clearer picture of the state of Singapore's Reserves (otherwise known as the People's Money) so he could effectively be the 2nd of the "Dual Keys" to the Reserves. And after he failed in his attempt, the Consitution was quietly re-written to make sure that the elected President will not be able to make another attempt to gain a clearer picture of Singapore's Reserves.

Well where can we start? For starters, the GIC and Temasek Holdings can open the books to public scrutiny, since the fact is that they (especially GIC) are using money that come directly from Singaporeans to conduct their activities. It might be arguable for Temasek's case, but until their books are open, we'll never know.

There are uncountable other areas, but if you consider that something full employment data for Singapore is kept classified supposedly for "national interests" (although what interests the Manpower Minister was strangely ambiguous) one can only see where the problem begins.

wuming78 SG

i guess to the ruling party and personalities in it, their view is tt: as long as we deliver our promises, and ensure singapore's survivability and competitiveness and maintain our stds of living etc, (most of these r tied to economic well being, not really quality of life) they do not haf to show and tell everything they do - in the name of national interest or simply cos they noe best.

this can be used on the older generation who trust the ruling party almost completely for how they haf transformed this nation, but this does not work for the younger generation who havent had the same experience.

recently temasek holdings announced they wil be more open with their accounts and all tt? hope its a first (and not last) step in the right direction. but o cos we wil be interested to noe wat happens to our reserves too.

i haf quite alot of confidence tt the government is not corrupt and not mis-using funds, although they r not doing a real good job in their PR and showing accountability (they may be accountable, but not showing as such). the veil of secrecy should perhaps be lifted. they need not be so defensive all the time. i think singaporeans r mature enuff to noe more.

Atobe SG

It was - and remain - disgusting when the news broke that Capt Ryan Gohs PR status is being revoked, especially when this came soon after the sheer arrogance of SMs display of his seemingly omni potential knowledge of Capt Ryan Gohs private plans.

It is disgusting behavior coming so soon after a supposedly amicable meeting that SM had with ALPA-S that was supposed to have resolved the SIA Management problems with ALPA-S.

What is the purpose of making Capt Ryan Goh bend onto his knees to beg for a review of his PR status that is being revoked ?

Is there a hidden agenda and purpose in going to this full length of display of complete power in dictating a persons future ?

Is there no moral obligation of the Government towards a PR, who has given the best part of twenty years of his life contributing to the Profitability of SIA, and without any bad records on the scale of the SIA accident in Taipeh Airport ?

This matter sucks as much for Singapore Citizens, whose own Birth Right to be a Citizen is withdrawn if he stays away from Singapore for more then ten years.

Was Singaporeans consulted when this piece of Legislation was passed in Parliament ?

Did the Members of Parliament, who are supposed to represent the Singaporean Electorate, perform their roles with their conscience fully switched on, or have they sold their souls to the rule of the PAP's Political Interests ?

On the point of ownership of foreign properties, the GIC and Temasek have bought large stakes in overseas assets, and have even gone into joint ventures in ownership of real estates in UK, France, Germany, USA, China, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan.

See the thread 'Temasek Holdings'.

If Capt Ryan Goh is accused of preparing an escape route simply on the basis of his ownership of foreign property, should we see the massive investments by GIC and Temasek as a back door escape route for the Elites from the Ruling Party ?

There certainly is enough to spread around, as only these few Elites are the ones who know where each assets is located.

Lingos SG

Is this true?

Viper52 SG

Lingos, I might be wrong, but I believe that the government "reserves" the right to do so.

Which IMO, is totally ludicrous that they're giving themselves this kind of power.

« Previous Page Next Page »