- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 2,086
- Points
- 83
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.
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.
