- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead vAlign=top><TD class=msgF width="1%" noWrap align=right>From: </TD><TD class=msgFname width="68%" noWrap>kojakbt_89 <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgDate width="30%" noWrap align=right>3:11 am </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT height=20 width="1%" noWrap align=right>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname width="68%" noWrap>ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"></TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>30132.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>Why PAP MPs are no more but a “wayang” in Parliament
March 15, 2010 by admin
Filed under Columnists, Opinion, Richard Lu
Leave a comment
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/03/15/pap-mps-are-no-more-but-a-wayang/
By Richard Lu
I refer to Miss Chua Mui Hoong’s article ‘No wayang – MPs serve as early warning system’ filed under ‘From the Gallery’ section of the Straits Times of 12 March, 2010.
This article is a shaggy dog story. In it Miss Chua says “MPs play a valuable role in the political process, often as an early warning system on issues simmering on the ground but not yet on the national radar.”
I beg to differ.
ROLE OF MPs IN PARLIAMENT
The main functions of Parliament are lawmaking, controlling the nation’s finances, and ensuring ministerial accountability. By and large, it is the cabinet ministers and the public servants who have direct responsibility for drafting new legislation.
MPs can influence the Government policy by participating in debates in the House and in the Committees where new legislations are being formulated and thereby contributing both substantively and fine-tuning amendments. MPs sit in Committees where Government spending is discussed. They also lobby the ministers. MPs can also introduce ‘private members bills’. Opposition MPs use Question Time in the House to raise issues of concern and bring them to the attention of the public.
SINGAPORE MPs IN PARLIAMENT
MPs are the eyes and the ears of the people. They are voted into Parliament for this purpose and more. In Singapore, 82 of the 84 seats in Parliament belong to the PAP. Because of their overwhelming majority in the House for such a long time – 51 years, the PAP MPs have gone ‘soft’ and lazy and are relatively ineffectual. One only has to watch a session of a Parliamentary debate on TV to be convinced.
The debates are basically dour and docile affairs presented without much detailed research and barest of details. MPs cannot articulate and there is a distinct lack of flair, aplomb (lacking self-confidence) and passion. The ‘cut and thrust’ of debate or ‘off the cuff’ rebuttals and ‘humoring’ of fellow Parliamentarians are largely absent. Too gentlemanly.
MPs rely heavily on their scripted text and reading. Their ‘theatrics’ or ‘wayang’ – prepared questions and answers meant to praise or polish the ‘marbles’ of the ministers are too prevalent in these debates. But in the main, the abysmal quality of debates is reflective of the “poor quality” of the MPs’ persona (many having entered the House courtesy of the open “back door”).
Like the quintessential or arch-type Singaporean, these PAP MPs too are afraid to speak up for fear of retribution (or being dropped) and always want someone else to lead. Hence the “wayang” i.e. questions and answers prepared before hand as evidenced by the scripted text.
Maybe it is the “corruption” of the high MP allowances that keeps these PAP MPs in check – the pervasive “don’t rock the boat” and the “better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt” attitudes.
In the last session, the PAP MPs raised mundane, unexciting and inconsequential issues like cyclists on the pavements, number of steps on overhead bridges (good God, she can count – and up to 67!) and lifts. There was even a nonsensical question raised by a doctor MP asking the Minister of Health how he stays looking young. If this doctor does not know, who would? Many suspect he was merely “marble” polishing.
In the meantime, look at what had happened in Singapore under the MPs’ national radar that had escaped their attention entirely:
1. PRs buying up HDB flats and prices going up to the detriment of Singaporeans;
2. Foreigners imported in Singapore in such alarming numbers (3.6 million) and such fast rate;
3. The fast tracking and making of PRs and citizens;
4. Demand of private homes hitting the roof and these MPs still do not see the bubble being formed;
5. Hospitals and hospices are inadequate;
6. The productivity of the Singaporean workers has dropped and the MPs are not even aware;
7. Older Singaporeans out of jobs due to cheaper, faster and better foreigners;
8. The MRT & buses are choked ;
9. Unsavory behavior of our foreign imports;
10. Stagnant incomes, lower purchasing power, lower quality of life, etc.
The above are just some bread-and-butter issues tugging the heart-strings of Singaporeans that our MPs are so oblivious to. It was left to the vigilant netizens who relentless pursued and cajoled the Government in their postings and the 2 vs. 82 opposition MPs who championed these concerns and raised them in Parliament.
AN EXAMPLE OF THE PAP MP ROT
PAP’s Baey Yam Keng, a ‘back-door’ MP in MM Lee’s GRC, must surely take the cake. In a ‘Meet The People’ session in his Tanjong Pagar constituency at the end of last month, Mr. Baey promised to raise residents’ concerns in Parliament to ‘change’ government policies. Doesn’t he know that this is his basic and sacred duty as a MP? Has he been sleeping all this while?
He did stutter and splutter last week despite reading from a prepared scripted text. And what of the ‘residents’ concerns’ did this joker raised in Parliament? Setting up a food museum! How does MM Lee tolerate such fools? This Minister Mentor is surely not doing his job! MM Lee is NOT even mentoring his charges in his own GRC. Or rather, has he given up as a consequence such low quality inputs?
Where then is the early warning system, Mui Hoong? And look at what were also debated in Parliament recently:
a. $10 million to help migrants integrate;
b. Migrants need not perform NS or they may not want Singapore citizenships;
c. Migrants to join People’s Association;
d. Foreign workers are necessary for Singapore;
e. HDB flats are affordable;
f. Even Ministers asking Singaporeans to be “more realistic” over HDB flats and being tolerant to foreigners.
The old maxim “pay peanuts and get monkeys” is reversed here in the Singapore Parliament. Singaporeans pay TOP DOLLARS for monkey PAP MPs.
FAILURE OF PAP MPs
May I ask Miss Chua Mui Hoong how then do these MPs play a valuable role in the political process and more importantly how do they justify their shameless monthly MP allowances?
In 1990, the Nominated Member of Parliament scheme was introduced. Wong Kan Seng, DPM and Minister for Home Affairs and the then-House Leader, gave a reason for the scheme – the performance of the opposition MPs (there were four at that time) had been disappointing. But I suspect he too was of the opinion that the PAP MPs were as just as guilty of this fact.
Save for the former PAP backbencher Dr, Tan Cheng Bock and now Mr. Inderjit Singh, most of the other PAP MPs must either be from the mute association or the deaf association.
Some of the NMPs, Siew Kum Hong and Chia Shih Teck in particular provided spirited debates. But alas, their terms were not extended leading one to enquire if the Government was sincere in wanting diverse views or once again merely paying lip service.
Singaporeans are such simpletons and imbeciles that MPs can be easily milk them for their astronomical MP allowances and Ministerial pay! It is just taking candies from babies. And we will vote them in again come next election!
Even Abe Lincoln would have approved of this:
“You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can fool Singaporeans all of the time.”
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
March 15, 2010 by admin
Filed under Columnists, Opinion, Richard Lu
Leave a comment
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/03/15/pap-mps-are-no-more-but-a-wayang/
By Richard Lu
I refer to Miss Chua Mui Hoong’s article ‘No wayang – MPs serve as early warning system’ filed under ‘From the Gallery’ section of the Straits Times of 12 March, 2010.
This article is a shaggy dog story. In it Miss Chua says “MPs play a valuable role in the political process, often as an early warning system on issues simmering on the ground but not yet on the national radar.”
I beg to differ.
ROLE OF MPs IN PARLIAMENT
The main functions of Parliament are lawmaking, controlling the nation’s finances, and ensuring ministerial accountability. By and large, it is the cabinet ministers and the public servants who have direct responsibility for drafting new legislation.
MPs can influence the Government policy by participating in debates in the House and in the Committees where new legislations are being formulated and thereby contributing both substantively and fine-tuning amendments. MPs sit in Committees where Government spending is discussed. They also lobby the ministers. MPs can also introduce ‘private members bills’. Opposition MPs use Question Time in the House to raise issues of concern and bring them to the attention of the public.
SINGAPORE MPs IN PARLIAMENT
MPs are the eyes and the ears of the people. They are voted into Parliament for this purpose and more. In Singapore, 82 of the 84 seats in Parliament belong to the PAP. Because of their overwhelming majority in the House for such a long time – 51 years, the PAP MPs have gone ‘soft’ and lazy and are relatively ineffectual. One only has to watch a session of a Parliamentary debate on TV to be convinced.
The debates are basically dour and docile affairs presented without much detailed research and barest of details. MPs cannot articulate and there is a distinct lack of flair, aplomb (lacking self-confidence) and passion. The ‘cut and thrust’ of debate or ‘off the cuff’ rebuttals and ‘humoring’ of fellow Parliamentarians are largely absent. Too gentlemanly.
MPs rely heavily on their scripted text and reading. Their ‘theatrics’ or ‘wayang’ – prepared questions and answers meant to praise or polish the ‘marbles’ of the ministers are too prevalent in these debates. But in the main, the abysmal quality of debates is reflective of the “poor quality” of the MPs’ persona (many having entered the House courtesy of the open “back door”).
Like the quintessential or arch-type Singaporean, these PAP MPs too are afraid to speak up for fear of retribution (or being dropped) and always want someone else to lead. Hence the “wayang” i.e. questions and answers prepared before hand as evidenced by the scripted text.
Maybe it is the “corruption” of the high MP allowances that keeps these PAP MPs in check – the pervasive “don’t rock the boat” and the “better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt” attitudes.
In the last session, the PAP MPs raised mundane, unexciting and inconsequential issues like cyclists on the pavements, number of steps on overhead bridges (good God, she can count – and up to 67!) and lifts. There was even a nonsensical question raised by a doctor MP asking the Minister of Health how he stays looking young. If this doctor does not know, who would? Many suspect he was merely “marble” polishing.
In the meantime, look at what had happened in Singapore under the MPs’ national radar that had escaped their attention entirely:
1. PRs buying up HDB flats and prices going up to the detriment of Singaporeans;
2. Foreigners imported in Singapore in such alarming numbers (3.6 million) and such fast rate;
3. The fast tracking and making of PRs and citizens;
4. Demand of private homes hitting the roof and these MPs still do not see the bubble being formed;
5. Hospitals and hospices are inadequate;
6. The productivity of the Singaporean workers has dropped and the MPs are not even aware;
7. Older Singaporeans out of jobs due to cheaper, faster and better foreigners;
8. The MRT & buses are choked ;
9. Unsavory behavior of our foreign imports;
10. Stagnant incomes, lower purchasing power, lower quality of life, etc.
The above are just some bread-and-butter issues tugging the heart-strings of Singaporeans that our MPs are so oblivious to. It was left to the vigilant netizens who relentless pursued and cajoled the Government in their postings and the 2 vs. 82 opposition MPs who championed these concerns and raised them in Parliament.
AN EXAMPLE OF THE PAP MP ROT
PAP’s Baey Yam Keng, a ‘back-door’ MP in MM Lee’s GRC, must surely take the cake. In a ‘Meet The People’ session in his Tanjong Pagar constituency at the end of last month, Mr. Baey promised to raise residents’ concerns in Parliament to ‘change’ government policies. Doesn’t he know that this is his basic and sacred duty as a MP? Has he been sleeping all this while?
He did stutter and splutter last week despite reading from a prepared scripted text. And what of the ‘residents’ concerns’ did this joker raised in Parliament? Setting up a food museum! How does MM Lee tolerate such fools? This Minister Mentor is surely not doing his job! MM Lee is NOT even mentoring his charges in his own GRC. Or rather, has he given up as a consequence such low quality inputs?
Where then is the early warning system, Mui Hoong? And look at what were also debated in Parliament recently:
a. $10 million to help migrants integrate;
b. Migrants need not perform NS or they may not want Singapore citizenships;
c. Migrants to join People’s Association;
d. Foreign workers are necessary for Singapore;
e. HDB flats are affordable;
f. Even Ministers asking Singaporeans to be “more realistic” over HDB flats and being tolerant to foreigners.
The old maxim “pay peanuts and get monkeys” is reversed here in the Singapore Parliament. Singaporeans pay TOP DOLLARS for monkey PAP MPs.
FAILURE OF PAP MPs
May I ask Miss Chua Mui Hoong how then do these MPs play a valuable role in the political process and more importantly how do they justify their shameless monthly MP allowances?
In 1990, the Nominated Member of Parliament scheme was introduced. Wong Kan Seng, DPM and Minister for Home Affairs and the then-House Leader, gave a reason for the scheme – the performance of the opposition MPs (there were four at that time) had been disappointing. But I suspect he too was of the opinion that the PAP MPs were as just as guilty of this fact.
Save for the former PAP backbencher Dr, Tan Cheng Bock and now Mr. Inderjit Singh, most of the other PAP MPs must either be from the mute association or the deaf association.
Some of the NMPs, Siew Kum Hong and Chia Shih Teck in particular provided spirited debates. But alas, their terms were not extended leading one to enquire if the Government was sincere in wanting diverse views or once again merely paying lip service.
Singaporeans are such simpletons and imbeciles that MPs can be easily milk them for their astronomical MP allowances and Ministerial pay! It is just taking candies from babies. And we will vote them in again come next election!
Even Abe Lincoln would have approved of this:
“You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can fool Singaporeans all of the time.”
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
