The whole issue appears to be due to a WP member picking up forms for TKL. The allegation is that TKL engineered the entire episode.
Other supporting assumptions are that he is a failure because the PAP did not let him run for MP, he came into mini-bonds yet whilst ...(i am not clear about the allegation here - is it saying he perpetuates mini-bonds whilst he was in NTUC and now defends the rights of mini-bonds holders when he is out of NTUC?...)
.................................
Stand back and see when did this come about. TKL said that if elected, he will influence the investment decisions. Professor Jayakumar warn about imputing roles into the EP.
Alarm bells seem to be ringing as the possibility of TKL standing for election comes about. Questions about the eligibility criteria abound. It was so stringent that no one can apply for years. Now that some can, there is a need to block competition. No matter how much more stringent the criteria is, there will still be TKLs coming forth. Some like the idea of abolishing the EP for now and bring it back when the PAP loses more than 50% of the seats. Why not go for the ultimate: abolish the EP and write it into the constitution that only the PAP can appoint the President.
The truth of the matter is that this is an Elected Office. It is also an Office with limited power. Nonetheless it holds the right to veto spending of the reserves amongst other limited rights. Thus it is a safeguard of the public to vote in whoever they choses, be it President Nathan for a third term, Tan Kin Lian or Tan Cheng Bok.
Can TKL fulfil this role of asking for more information before he vote on the reserves? Yes he can. Will he? Seems like. OTC ask for information. Did Nathan ask for information? Not to my knowledge but then he may already have the information for all we know and that is the reason he is not asking.
Will Tan Cheng Bock ask for information? I do not know him so you might like to answer this question. If you say he will ask for such information, then you have another possibility for EP.
So at least three choices abound, one from the PAP, the other two from TKL and TCB.
Good choices all. Take your pick. That is what privileges in a democracy mean. Being able to choose your representatives in Parliament and now in Presidency.
.............
The allegation that TKL is an opportunist is irrelevant because if true, opportunism does not equate to dishonesty.
If that bothers you, don't vote for him.
Also if TKL is an opportunist, it does not mean that TCB and the other candidate are not opportunists. Or will not become opportunist once they assume the Presidency.
Finally if TKL is NOT an opportunist because the facts are misinterpreted, then you would have denied yourself and others of a good President.
Worse if because of your disbelief in TKL, you now seek to abolish the entire EP.
Other supporting assumptions are that he is a failure because the PAP did not let him run for MP, he came into mini-bonds yet whilst ...(i am not clear about the allegation here - is it saying he perpetuates mini-bonds whilst he was in NTUC and now defends the rights of mini-bonds holders when he is out of NTUC?...)
.................................
Stand back and see when did this come about. TKL said that if elected, he will influence the investment decisions. Professor Jayakumar warn about imputing roles into the EP.
Alarm bells seem to be ringing as the possibility of TKL standing for election comes about. Questions about the eligibility criteria abound. It was so stringent that no one can apply for years. Now that some can, there is a need to block competition. No matter how much more stringent the criteria is, there will still be TKLs coming forth. Some like the idea of abolishing the EP for now and bring it back when the PAP loses more than 50% of the seats. Why not go for the ultimate: abolish the EP and write it into the constitution that only the PAP can appoint the President.
The truth of the matter is that this is an Elected Office. It is also an Office with limited power. Nonetheless it holds the right to veto spending of the reserves amongst other limited rights. Thus it is a safeguard of the public to vote in whoever they choses, be it President Nathan for a third term, Tan Kin Lian or Tan Cheng Bok.
Can TKL fulfil this role of asking for more information before he vote on the reserves? Yes he can. Will he? Seems like. OTC ask for information. Did Nathan ask for information? Not to my knowledge but then he may already have the information for all we know and that is the reason he is not asking.
Will Tan Cheng Bock ask for information? I do not know him so you might like to answer this question. If you say he will ask for such information, then you have another possibility for EP.
So at least three choices abound, one from the PAP, the other two from TKL and TCB.
Good choices all. Take your pick. That is what privileges in a democracy mean. Being able to choose your representatives in Parliament and now in Presidency.
.............
The allegation that TKL is an opportunist is irrelevant because if true, opportunism does not equate to dishonesty.
If that bothers you, don't vote for him.
Also if TKL is an opportunist, it does not mean that TCB and the other candidate are not opportunists. Or will not become opportunist once they assume the Presidency.
Finally if TKL is NOT an opportunist because the facts are misinterpreted, then you would have denied yourself and others of a good President.
Worse if because of your disbelief in TKL, you now seek to abolish the entire EP.
Last edited: