Opposition parties mutiny against Chiam See Tong

[Goh Meng Seng]

Then why did Chiam say he will remain SDA member even if SPP pulled out? I believe SDA has an "MP remains member of SDA at all costs" clause like the SPP or to a lesser extent the NSP. Do they have the same for officer bearers?

Technically speaking, it is illogical to have such a clause because membership of SDA could only be in the form of parties, not individuals.

If it is a party with individuals as members, it is also illogical to have such a clause because it would mean the lost of control of members who become MPs... i.e. there will basically be no party discipline to speak of.

A political party may have an additional clause that balance the equation. i.e. the party could only sack an MP by holding an Extra-ordinary Congree Meeting/Conference to censure party MPs who have gone astray and sack them during that sitting. This is different from empowering the CEC or the key leaders like Chairman/President or SG holding the power of sacking party MPs. NSP has amended its constitutions to add this additional clause so that valuable assets like MPs would not be subjected to sacking by any individuals or just CEC only. Only a proper Congress meeting with proper attendence could do that.

This also means that MPs are still subjected to disciplinary actions by the Party if necessary.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[cass888]

Technically speaking, it is illogical to have such a clause because membership of SDA could only be in the form of parties, not individuals.

In SPP, an MP cannot be sacked. I'm sure Chiam would have done the same in the SDA constitution given his experience in SDP and would have made some exception to the "no individual members" rule.