Andrew Loh /

The following is an excerpt from Mr Goh Meng Seng’s blog, Singapore Alternatives. In his latest post, Mr Goh, who is also the secretary general of the National Solidarity Party, weighs in on the controversy surrounding it’s star candidate, Ms Nicole Seah. Ms Seah had solicited for donations to defray the costs of mounting her election campaign. Her usage of her personal bank account for this purpose is at the centre of the controversy.

Here’s an excerpt from Mr Goh’s blog on the matter:

“Under the Political Donation Act, it is LEGAL for candidates to solicit donations under their names. Thus what Nicole has done is legal….

[I] I have full confidence in Nicole and her Marine Parade Team in managing public funding properly. The stakeholders who have contributed money to their funds have the right to know how the funds have been utilized. This is a matter of transparency. This can be done by sending them the details via emails.

However, I think it is totally inappropriate for the members of public to insinuate corrupt practices, intent or misconduct with regards to this issue. It would be unfair to Nicole and her team to suggest that because they have acted within the legal limits. Unless there is any proof of misappropriation of funds, I think such slander is totally unwarranted. I hope the members of public should refrain from making such insinuations.”

You can read Mr Goh’s full blog post here: Singapore Alternatives.

—————

UPDATE: 23 May, 2011:

NATIONAL SOLIDARITY PARTY STATEMENT DATED 23 May 2011

We refer to Nicole Seah’s recent online appeal for donations to a bank account set up in her personal name.

The appeals for donations are made by the Candidates to defray the actual campaign costs that the Party will not pay for. The Candidates have to pay for these themselves. The Parlimentary Elections Act requires each Candidate and his Election Agent to submit a return and declaration of his election expenses. By law, the Candidate must list all the expenses incurred for the election, and every donation accepted by the Election Agent or by the Candidate for the purpose of expenses incurred in respect of the election. This return and declaration must be submitted by each Candidate, not the Party, within 31 days of 9 May 2011. Given the urgency of preparing and submitting the returns before 9 June 2011, the Candidates consider it more practical to collect and account for donations at the Candidate level. Each Candidate making this appeal has set up a separate bank account to receive donations.

The public can be assured that the law requires Candidates to make full declarations of all campaign expenses incurred and all donations received, to the Returning Officer for public record and inspection.


Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Singapore to take on Argentina at National Stadium to mark 125-year anniversary

The Singapore Lions will take on the world number two ranked team,…

加国召回我国制海鲜加工产品,食品局:该产品并未在我国出售

日前被加拿大食品检验局召回的新加坡制的海鲜加工产品,新加坡食品局表示,该海鲜加工产品并未在我国出售。 食品局昨日(4日)发文告指出,加拿大食品检验局(简称,CFIA)近期召回的海鲜加工产品是由两家本地公司生产的“QQ鱼FISH”品牌,其种类包括鱼丸、墨鱼丸、鱼饼等七种产品。 由于产品包装上并未注明可能导致过敏的成分,因此被加拿大食品局召回。 食品局也强调该受影响的产品并未在我国出售,且也指示生产商更改包装标签。 据加拿大食品检验局的网站显示,当局从8月14日起,发出召回通知。截至今日,未接获消费者在使用后出现不良反应的报告。

天平两端如何取舍:剖析外国奖学金和学费津贴议题

作者:工人党前非选区议员余振忠 两日前,教育部长王乙康,在国会回应我的伙伴工人党非选区议员贝理安(Leon Perera)的质询,透露过去10年来,政府为外国学生所提供的奖学金和学费补贴预算,已降低50 巴仙。 目前,对外籍生奖学金和学费补贴的预算加总,为2亿3千800万新元,这意味着,2009年的年度开销可能达到4亿7千800万元。放在过去我国仅有四所政府津贴大学(目前是六所),相较之下,政府在过去支持外籍生,对比本地生开销之百分比,可能比现在还来得高。 自2011年我进入国会起,我便时时刻刻关注、倡议相关课题。此前,我曾遇见许多因学额有限,未能将孩子送入本地大学就读的新加坡人民。许多孩子最终只能前往私立大学或出国留学。 我曾于2011年向国会提呈,希望能够借此获得更多数据。目前有4万1000名本地学生进入私立大学或私人教育机构(PEIs)就读。这些数字还不包括国外就读的新加坡学生,因为政府无法就此追踪流失的学生数据。若两者结合,相信其国外留学与就读私立大学的新加坡学生数据会更高。 4万1000名学生可视为相当高的数字,要知道,新加坡每年准备升学的学生在4万5000到五万左右,这意味着有更多的学生拥有求学襟抱,但碍于学额的限制,只能另寻出路。 无论是就读私立学校或出国留学,其开支都相当昂贵,同时也违背了许多国人的意愿。此窘境一直持续到政府愿意为本地学生开放更多学额而增设另两所大学,新躍大學(SUSS)以及新加坡理工大学(SIT)。 一名于本地大学担任教师的朋友告诉我,他们发现,在政府的奖学金优惠下,外国学生人数正激增,但其表现也无法勉强达到三等荣誉学位( third class honours)。然而,针对外籍生所设立的奖学金开支却相当高,试想若将开支花费在非新加坡人身上,那也应该是将钱花在有素质、有助提升我们教育与经济的外籍生身上。…

对王瑞杰动议“感到不舒服” 官委议员王丽婷、特斯拉弃权表决

官委议员王丽婷和特斯拉博士也参与王瑞杰动议的辩论,他们虽认同议员应维持高标准诚信,惟质疑是否有通过此动议的必要。基于动议无法分项表决,他们只得放弃表决权。 副总理王瑞杰提呈的动议分为两大部分,第一点重申国会议员应维持高标准的诚信和责任感。 第二部分提及此前高庭对阿裕尼后港市镇会诉讼的判决,指林瑞莲和刘程强行为不诚实、有违受托责任,应该回避一切阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会相关的财政事务。 在辩论中,王丽婷先是认同议员需保持高度诚信的原则,但也质疑有关动议的动机,指动议即无法律效益,再者《市镇会法》也已赋予部长权力,可要求阿裕尼-后港市镇会采取必要行动处理不当行为。(参考市镇会法43D项) 在国会讨论法庭诉讼“感不舒服” 再者,他也提及在国会讨论法庭的诉讼个案感到“不舒服”(uncomfortable),再者工人党议员林瑞莲已表明将上诉,故此即便有议员发言免责的权限,仍恐有“藐视法庭”之嫌,干预司法程序。 特斯拉博士提及,此前法庭判决虽指林瑞莲等人,由于无法与前管理公司合作,而未招标即委任FMSS公司管理市镇会事务,有欠妥当;但他指出,根据判决他也未看见有任何证明,当事者是为了个人利益动机这么做。 市镇会实为“政治性的机构”,由民选议员领导,上述动议要求工人党采取行动,动议本身就已涉及政治解决的作用。 故此,尽管他认同议员需保持高道德标准原则, 但以非民选的官委议员身份,去参与表决具有政治意味的动议,同样令他感到不舒服。