SG 'Grassroots
Adviser': a Title born of Moral Ineptitude and a Conspiracy of
Deceit.
Going by reports/ blogs in recent years such as 'How PAP
uses taxpayer-funded grassroots for political gain'
"It spent a total of $320 million last year.. PA’s chairman is none other than the Prime
Minister [p.archive]. In PAP
constituencies, PA always appoints the elected MP as the adviser.
But in opposition wards, PA appoints the PAP candidate who
lost in the last election, not the opposition
MP" [G Giam, 10Oct2009], '‘Adviser over MP’
raises many questions' "PAP MPs are appointed as
advisers to the grassroots organisations in their wards by the
People’s Association (PA). In the two
opposition wards, the PA picked the PAP candidates who contested
but lost in the wards in the last two polls as the grassroots
advisers." [ST, 22Oct2009][alt link], followed
by 'Town Council Act (CAP 329A) states clearly that Govt
must work with Town Councils (run by MPs) to implement
LUP' "It is a joke that.. Mr Shanmugan’s ministerial
colleague has refused to obey the Town
Councils Act by choosing not to work with Hougang Town Council and
even has the audacity to TWIST the facts by claiming that 'it is
the role of the grassroots advisers to implement the LUP' ..
when it was stated NOWHERE in the Town Councils Act that the LUP
has to be carried out by the grassroots advisers!
From beginning to end, there was no
mention of the words 'Grassroots advisers', 'People Association' or
'PAP losing candidates' and so how did Mr Eric Low come into the
picture at all? " [TR, 29Oct2009][alt link], one
would be unwise not to wonder why under the direction of successive
PAP Prime Ministers, the PA has settled upon awarding titles of
'grassroots adviser' upon partisan premise: PAP MPs in the case of
elected ones, but PAP loosing candidates as in the case in
opposition held constituencies.
Has the Prime Minster of Singapore hijacked the PA, a statutory
board, turning it into his own private fan club? Is the Prime
Minister aware that he shouldn't pervert the high standards of
conduct that the Singapore Civil Service strives to abide by, such
as: "Remaining completely neutral in all political matters and
matters of public controversy, Refraining from using their official
positions to further their private interests" [link: psd.gov][p.archv]
Isn't the imposition of such partisan prejudices upon the
operations of the PA contrary to the statutory board's Vision,
Mission, and Role which are included clearly clearly in the
government directory [link][p.archive] as : "The People's Association is
a statutory board promoting racial harmony and social cohesion,
nurturing leadership, providing community services and outward
bound training and facilitating communications between the
Government and the people. The mission is
to promote active citizenship and multiracial harmony, connect the
citizens for community bonding and volunteer work, provide
affordable access to life-skill and lifestyle activities, and to
bring people closer to one another and to the
government."
In regard of the concept of the 'government', readers would be well
advised to understand the concept of 'Separation of
powers' [wiki]: "The separation of powers is a model for
the governance of a state. The model was first developed in ancient
Greece and came into widespread use by the Roman Republic as part
of the unmodified Constitution of the Roman Republic. Under this model, the state is divided into branches,
each with separate and independent powers and areas of
responsibility so that no one branch has more power than the other
branches. The normal division of branches is into an
executive, a legislature, and a judiciary. ..."
Wikipedia also elaborates the term 'Government' at
[link] as "Each successive government is composed
of a specialized and privileged body of individuals, who monopolize
political decision-making, and are separated by status and
organization from the population as a whole. Their function is to
enforce existing laws, legislate new ones, and arbitrate conflicts
via their monopoly on violence. In some societies, this group is
often a self-perpetuating or hereditary class. In other societies,
such as democracies, the political roles remain, but there
is frequent turnover of the people actually filling the
positions. In most Western societies, there is a clear
distinction between a government and the state. Public disapproval
of a particular government (expressed, for example, by not
re-electing an incumbent) does not necessarily represent
disapproval of the state itself (i.e. of the particular framework
of government). However, in some totalitarian regimes, there is not a clear
distinction between the regime and the state. In fact, leaders in
such regimes often attempt to deliberately blur the lines between
the two, in order to conflate their own selfish interests with
those of the polity."
It is thus perhaps the fault of the PAP, in it's profligate drive
towards maintaining political hegemony to view parochially, the
definition of 'government' thus perverting the original purported
role of the PA, from one of building the community into that of
cementing PAP political hegemony- a siphon of subvention for PAP's
partisan grassroots activities and a wedge to hijack the
relationship between an opposition MP and his constituents.
I think that the PAP, in its unscrupulous efforts at fixing the
opposition ('PM Lee says countries worldwide respect and
admire Singapore's proven system' [YouTube/@1m10s]), has besides discrediting itself
for fouling the integrity of the civil service, also very much
betrayed the right of each and every Singaporean to seek
independent and diverse political representation through democratic
elections.
Quoting 'Grassroots Organizations should stay
non-partisan' [TR, 03Nov2009][alt site]: "..Using the PA as a vehicle for PAP candidates as
grounds to gain political capital so that they may fight their next
battle with more goodwill, the governmental risks costing itself
the position of Singapore as a Parliamentary Democracy; and put
Singapore in par with communist states like Cuba, China and North
Korea."
Singaporean's can understand the consequence of such.
May Singaporeans remain united, free and happy.
May the pursuit of hegemony be abandoned, may the precepts of
democracy and balanced debate be advanced and prevail.
Majulah Singapura.
~ "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you
did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for
me.'"-- Matthew 25:40 (NIV)
Rgds, love and God bless,
B.C.
End-notes/ References:
- 'Separation of powers' [wiki]: "The separation of powers is a model for
the governance of a state. The model was first developed in ancient
Greece and came into widespread use by the Roman Republic as part
of the unmodified Constitution of the Roman Republic. Under this model, the state is divided into branches,
each with separate and independent powers and areas of
responsibility so that no one branch has more power than the other
branches. The normal division of branches is into an
executive, a legislature, and a judiciary. ..."
- 'PM Lee says countries worldwide respect and admire
Singapore's proven system': "Suppose you had 10, 15,
20 opposition members in Parliament...I'm going to spend all my
time thinking what's the right way to fix
them, to buy my supporters
votes, how can I solve this week's problem and forget about next year's challenges?.. "
[CNA:03May2006][YouTube/@1m10s]
- 'Singapore ministers set for million-dollar pay hike': "...'If we don't do
that... corruption will set in and we will become like many other
countries,' Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean was quoted as saying in
the Straits Times last week." [Reuters5Apr2007]
- 'Upgrading should be a separate issue from the General
Election': "We are concerned about the linking of
public housing upgrading and estate renewal programmes to electoral
support for the PAP in a constituency. The prioritization of upgrading programmes should be
based on sound criteria and be kept a separate issue from the
general election.." [petitiononline.com]
- 'How PAP uses taxpayer-funded grassroots for political
gain': "The People’s Association (PA), ..Like all other stat boards, it receives a yearly
grant from the government to run its programmes and cover
operational costs. .. It spent a total of $320 million last
year. However unlike most stat boards, whose chairmen are usually
the permanent secretary of the parent ministry or some other senior
civil servant, PA’s chairman is none
other than the Prime Minister [pict]. The de facto leader of all the CCCs,
CCMCs, RCs and NCs in each constituency is known as the “adviser to
the grassroots organisations (GROs)”. This adviser is appointed by
PA, presumably with the nod of its chairman, the Prime Minister.
In PAP constituencies, PA always appoints
the elected MP as the adviser. But in opposition wards, PA appoints
the PAP candidate who lost in the last election,
not the opposition MP" [G Giam, 10Oct2009].
- '‘Adviser over MP’ raises many questions':
"PAP MPs are appointed as advisers to the grassroots
organisations in their wards by the People’s Association (PA).
In the two opposition wards, the PA
picked the PAP candidates who contested but lost in the wards in
the last two polls as the grassroots advisers."
[ST, 22Oct2009][alt link]
- 'Town Council Act (CAP 329A) states clearly that Govt
must work with Town Councils (run by MPs) to implement
LUP': "It is a joke that for some strange reasons or
another, Mr Shanmugan’s ministerial colleague has refused to obey the Town Councils Act by choosing not
to work with Hougang Town Council and even has the audacity to
TWIST the facts by claiming that 'it is the role of the grassroots
advisers to implement the LUP' through his press secretary
when it was stated NOWHERE in the Town Councils Act that the LUP
has to be carried out by the grassroots advisers!
From beginning to end, there was no
mention of the words 'Grassroots advisers', 'People Association' or
'PAP losing candidates' and so how did Mr Eric Low come into the
picture at all? " [TR, 29Oct2009][alt link]
- 'Grassroots Organizations should stay
non-partisan': "By appointing PAP candidates as
grassroots advisers in Opposition held wards, the government is
effectively bringing partisan politics into governmental
institutions. Using the PA as a vehicle
for PAP candidates as grounds to gain political capital so that
they may fight their next battle with more goodwill, the
governmental risks costing itself the position of Singapore as a
Parliamentary Democracy; and put Singapore in par with communist
states like Cuba, China and North Korea." [TR, 03Nov2009][alt site]
- 'Civil servants– no longer politically
neutral?': "The question which arises is: should civil
servants be involved in a political party and participate in its
activities?" [TOC, 27Feb2011]
Disclaimer/ disclosure: the author is currently not a member of any
political party and this piece is written on the basis of personal
opinion only. All rights reserved.