WP people (apologists I would say) keep saying that with only 8 MPs plus NCMPs in parliament, there is little WP could do...Then pray tell, would we expect WP to be able to do anything even with an additional MP from Punggol East? If not, then shouldn't we let other party with better candidate to try and do something instead?
When I question why WP didn't raise the red flag on the AIM issue at first instance last year, they gave me such excuse... there is little they could do with only 8 MPs and NCMPs.
From the AIM saga, it is obvious that both PAP and WP are not interested in protecting residents and voters' interests but in fact, made use of their interests for politicking. Both are equally guilty of that. PAP selling the rights to their own company and then made Aljunied residents to lose the critical asset that they have paid for its development, on top of that, spending additional money to develop another software, is exercising extreme politicking at the expense of voters' interests.
On the other hand, the failure of WP, voted in by voters to be the custodian of the estate management, didn't act to safeguard their interests by suing the previous board of management for compensation, by entering into such contract that compromised their interests. It has said the handing over was smooth last year but only when their management ability was questioned, then they raised this important issue, not to safeguard or recover the residents' interests but only to use this excuse for their inability to deliver. They are politicking as well, without the intention to defend the residents' interests at all.
Both parties should be scrutinized for such adverse politicking which cost residents and voters dearly.
Goh Meng Seng
When I question why WP didn't raise the red flag on the AIM issue at first instance last year, they gave me such excuse... there is little they could do with only 8 MPs and NCMPs.
From the AIM saga, it is obvious that both PAP and WP are not interested in protecting residents and voters' interests but in fact, made use of their interests for politicking. Both are equally guilty of that. PAP selling the rights to their own company and then made Aljunied residents to lose the critical asset that they have paid for its development, on top of that, spending additional money to develop another software, is exercising extreme politicking at the expense of voters' interests.
On the other hand, the failure of WP, voted in by voters to be the custodian of the estate management, didn't act to safeguard their interests by suing the previous board of management for compensation, by entering into such contract that compromised their interests. It has said the handing over was smooth last year but only when their management ability was questioned, then they raised this important issue, not to safeguard or recover the residents' interests but only to use this excuse for their inability to deliver. They are politicking as well, without the intention to defend the residents' interests at all.
Both parties should be scrutinized for such adverse politicking which cost residents and voters dearly.
Goh Meng Seng
