Tag: Singapore

In this earlier post, I asked whether we are electing MPs or Estate Managers. On the subject of MPs performances in Parliament, much has been written especially in the main stream media (MSM) and on pro-PAP sites on social media about the Worker’s Party (WP) MPs. A common refrain is that they are silent in Parliament and not doing anything to justify their previous election theme of ‘1st World Parliament’ or even to use their words ‘a co-driver.’

The victorious WP Aljunied team from GE 2011. Accusations have been made specifically against them as being underwhelming, under-performing and silent in Parliament. But how accurate is it? Why not broadcast Parliamentary debates like they were in the 1980s and let the public judge for themselves?

But how accurate is this? If you only source from the MSM, pro-PAP sites, or even from comments by certain PAP Ministers (even the PM himself if I’m not mistaken), you’re likely to form that view. But how true is it in reality? A good start would be ‘Hansard’ – the Parliamentary record of proceedings. In it you’ll find that the 7 WP MPs and 2 NCMPs are always raising questions, voicing differences and of course voting for or against Bills. Exactly the kind of duties you’d expect from MPs. If you want to be a little bit biased, then go their webpage or FB pages, and you’ll be able to see that they are far from silent. Unfortunately after the roasting that J B Jeyaretnam and Chiam See Tong gave the PAP back in the 1980s when a lot of Parliamentary debates were televised, sometimes in full or at least the exchanges, this is no longer available. Instead now you get snippets from the day’s sittings, where the bulk of the heavily edited and shortened version is to show PAP Ministers and MPs speaking, even rebutting opposition motions or arguments. The WP MPs are rarely given extensive coverage, sometimes even portions of their speech is so heavily edited that you go away thinking that they were asking irrelevant questions or gave silly replies all the time.

Chiam See Tong and J B Jeyaretnam – the first 2 opposition MPs after independence. They were frequently condemned as being obstructive and destructive because of their hard hitting and searching questions by the PAP top brass. Yet now when the WP employs a less hostile approach, they claim them as ineffective and under-performing. Perhaps it’s time for Dr Chee, Kenneth Jeyaretnam and even M Ravi to be elected so they can get their wish and deal with a far more combative approach.

But to be fair also, 1 can argue that many expected a more aggressive stance from them. They probably pale in comparison to the hard hitting style that Messrs Chiam and Jeyaretnam frequently employed. However we must also consider what exactly is the style that the WP now employs ever since Low Thia Khiang took over control. If you followed Mr Low during his 20 year stint up to 2011, you’d realise that a very confrontational style is not his modus operandi. It doesn’t mean that he doesn’t question or speak but it’s in a more measured and calculated tone. Suffice to say, that’s also what’s happened since 2011. While questions will be asked and speeches made, not to mention votes, it’s not seen as overly aggressive. So it’s kinda funny to see the PAP top brass now trying to chide them for this style when during the era of the 2 giants, they took great pains to condemn that style as being obstructive and destructive. You can’t have it both ways, gentlemen.

WP Chief Low Thia Khiang reiterating his and his party’s position in the House.

Moreover as Low will point out and those with a discerning eye will note, that it’s not the WP’s duty to move policy in the House. They are not a significant opposition, they are not a ‘government in waiting’ with close to a majority. They have never contested more than half the seats ( I think 1/3 would be more accurate). Even this time they are contesting in 1/3 of the seats. The duty to move policy rests with the elected Govt of the day. And it’s not the WP’s duty with just 9 representatives that they must oppose each and every 1 of them. And it’s also not incumbent on them to respond to any call by the Govt to discuss or debate policy. It’s for them to choose and when to choose. As a token opposition, they cannot be expected to oppose or debate each and every item in the House. There’s just so much 9 can do, so much that they can cover or have the expertise to cover without the resources and data which the 80 opposite have.

Once described as a rising star and capable Minister, but after 2011 since he was dropped from the Cabinet – he became the Invisible Man of Parliament. And the PAP wanna take exception at how the WP MPs perform? Yeah right.

But let me get to the main point of this writing – the PAP and their proxies accusing the WP of practically not doing anything in Parliament. Instead they claim it’s their own MPs who are religiously asking hard questions, so much so that we don’t really need an opposition, certainly not 7 elected opposition MPs. So let’s look at some the PAP MPs elected in 2011 and how much they have contributed to Parliamentary debate. I’ll quote a few I can recall offhand, I’m sure there are more. Here’s my list of some of them:

1) Raymond Lim – how many times has he attended Parliament and spoken up? He’s been described as the Invisible Man.
2) Mah Bow Tan – after relinquishing his Ministerial Portfolio, can you remember the number of times he’s spoken up?
3) Goh Chok Tong – I can only recall the 1 time during the 6.9 million White Paper that he spoke up and in full support naturally. How many other times?
4) Wong Kan Seng – the former DPM was described as a bulldog by the PM. Well he’s not even a bullfrog now – more of a silent mouse.
5) Hri Kumar – for his 1st term, he was nearly silent as a tombstone. But he finally found his voice this time – but not to debate much, rather to attack the WP. He’s hardly performed well at constituency level that part of his ward had to be switched with Josephine Teo. And he even complained on how being an MP was taking a toll on family and work life.
6) Zainuddin Nordin – He’s pretty good at quoting from the USA’s founding fathers about democracy on FB. But what about in the House? Heck he won’t even admit or confess whether he voted for Sepp Blatter in the FIFA elections as FAS Chairman. Finally he’s decided to call it quits.
7) Janil Puthucheary – the doctor who proclaimed his medical service is equal to National Service justifying his non-service. How many trees has he pulled up in the House?
8) Finally to be fair on the subject of speaking in Parliament, we must mention Lee Kuan Yew. What exactly did he do during his final term? He couldn’t even attend his ward’s MPS let alone Parliament. He was just placed on the ballot to secure votes in the event of a contest. That’s about it. What he did in the past is irrelevant to justify election as a practically non-existent MP in 2011.

I’m not questioning his past leadership or contributions to Parliament. But what justification was there to field him in 2011 and make the taxpayer’s bear the cost when he was clearly incapable of performing his duties? He should have been allowed to retire and rest in his final years.

Of course there are many more, if you trawl social media there have been several reports on the underwhelming performances of a number of PAP MPs. Or the dumb things they say. Yet the PAP and its supporters have the gall to accuse 9 WP MPs of not doing or saying anything! What makes these 8, I mentioned above different? Were they voted in for a different reason? Were they voted in as MPs or as estate managers and grassroot advisors? In fact it’s precisely because that there are 9 WP MPs and Lina Chiam, that we finally see some PAP MPs attending Parliament a little more often so that they can take turns to attack the WP and Lina Chiam. Yet we still can see the chamber half empty most of the time or some of them dozing off / on the way to dozing off. A majority of them only found their voice, falling over themselves to speak up in LKY’s honour following his death. Yet ‘silence was golden’ and ‘absence makes the heart grow fonder’ for a number of them before/after that.

Tired? Need a place with a lot of empty comfy chairs? Well then Parliament’s just right for you. Then again I might be being a tad unfair. After hearing the same thing being parroted over and over again and worse by Zaqy, who wouldn’t feel sleepy?

So why is it different for them, pray tell? But not for 10 opposition MPs and NCMPs? And you can bet that after this elections, you’ll again see a new set of them playing invisible or doorposts. What exactly did their voters vote for in the 2011 elections? Did they vote for MPs or something else? Because instead of paying $13,800, don’t you think it would have been cheaper if they employed parrots and a cardboard figure with tape recorder attached, to say ‘Aye’ during the vote count?

Source: http://anyhowhantam.blogspot.sg