Andrew Loh

Yes, we are all appalled. In fact, we are more appalled than the Home Affairs Minister.

Appalled at the “lapses” (if ever there was a euphemism for a screwup, this is it), appalled at the “complacency”, appalled at how our security personnel are so lackadaisical about their jobs.

But most of all, we are appalled that the Home Affairs Minister still has a job.

Responsibility, responsibility, responsibility!

Where is it? Where did it go to? How is it that it can be avoided, side-stepped, blamed on someone else – not once, not twice, but three times!

Mas Selamat Kastari – the number one alleged terrorist in Singapore – the man who escaped from the Whitley Road Detention Centre (WRDC) and is still at large.

Double escape attempts at the Subordinate Courts by two men facing charges for “robbery with hurt”. That is, two dangerous men.

A 61-year old man passes through all checkpoints at the Budget Terminal and gets on a plane — with his son’s passport. One wonders about the consequences if he was not an ordinary man.

All this within a span of 4 months – the last two after Mas Selamat gave the guards at the WRDC the slip in February this year.

Responsibility so far has been laid squarely and conclusively on the shoulders of those “on the ground”, leaving the man at the very top of the security department unscathed, unpunished, and un-disciplined.

Yes, leadership responsibility has been explained away with euphemism, semantics, play of logic and lame excuses about how the lower rungs have not or did not follow operational procedures.

A convenient cop-out by the minister

This is a convenient cop-out, a finger-pointing exercise to save one’s own hide.

Leadership responsibility does not end at operational procedures. It starts with respect that subordinates have for the leader (or not) and ends with the leader having the moral authority to lead (or not).

One question which all these so-called “lapses” raises is this: Does the leader of the department not command such respect and moral authority which would lead to subordinates taking their jobs seriously enough to prevent such “lapses”?

In other words: Are the subordinates’ lack of seriousness due to the lack of moral authority which they, the subordinates, see in their leader?

And if this is so, the leader is no longer fit to lead and must be relieved of his duties and position. This is even more so when the leader, or minister, is in charge of national security, where any lapses have the potential to result in the loss of lives, as in two of the three cases above.

Responsibility, responsibility, responsibility!

It is shameful indeed that when subordinates do their job well, the leader of the department is praised and accolades heaped on his head. Yet, when subordinates fail in their jobs, the same leader or minister lays the blame squarely on them.

Where is the responsibility?

Where is the leadership?

Where is the accountability when one is paid one of the highest salaries on the entire planet as a public servant?

In a statement released to the media on the latest slip-up at Changi airport, Minister Wong said:

Any lapse by any department in the Home Team is a failure which all in the Home Team family must bear. (link)

Honestly and in all seriousness, I do not know what that statement means at all – as far as ministerial responsibility is concerned. I, and I suspect many others as well, wonder what the minister would “bear” for any failures, and how he would do so. The last time I checked, the minister still has his job and in all probability would also receive a substantial bonus for the year, together with his world-class salary.

Real root of complacency

Nah, the complacency is not with the ground troops. The truth is that complacency has its roots with the men at the very top of Government. 42 years of being in absolute control of power has caused this complacency.

We had hoped that we have men in Government who would not shy away from taking responsibility for failures. Instead, we are faced with a situation where accountability has become non-existent because of absolute power.

Singaporeans will call for Minister Wong’s resignation. The media will defend him, for sure, as they did during the Mas Selamat fiasco. The Prime Minister will also defend his minister.

The only people who lose will be Singaporeans, and Singapore, because should someone like Mas Selamat come back for a “return hit” (as Lee Kuan Yew called it), it is ordinary Singaporeans’ lives which will be lost, along with disastrous consequences for the country’s economy.

As for Government responsibility, we are beginning to realize what absolute power can do. The question I’d like to ask is: Will the Prime Minister ask for Minister Wong’s resignation only if or when lives are lost due to such lapses? Is that the bottomline? If it is so, then the Prime Minister should say so. Otherwise, such blatant disregard for taking responsibility can and will only do further damage to the Government’s claim that it is a government of integrity.

As was said in a TOC editorial, at the end of the day, Wong’s recalcitrance is bad for the PAP, but worse for the country.

—————

For the record, courtesy of “Copyman” who posted this on TOC:

Some of MHA’s achievements:

2004 – Huang Na’s killer escaped on toilet break under police custody.
2006 – Tan Chor Jin (One-Eyed Dragon) escaped to
Malaysia, allegedly on a fake passport.
2006 – NKF Richard Yong managed to flee to
Hong Kong.
2008 – Mas Selamat Kastari – toilet break again.
2008 – Two detainees’ attempted escape frorm
Subordinate Court.
2008 – Ng Ting Hwa, the employee who siphoned almost S$2m from his company, fled to
Malaysia when he’s under investigation.
2008 – Gurkhas’ scuffle over salary.
2008 – A retiree unintentionally bypassed
Changi Airport’s security using his son’s passport.

—————

Wong Kan Seng’s elections record

First elections – 1984

Kuo Chuan – 64.55%

Second elections – 1988

Toa Payoh GRC (3 men)

Uncontested

Third elections – 1991

Thomson GRC (4 men)

Uncontested

Fourth elections – 1997

Bishan – Toa Payoh (5 men)

Uncontested

Fifth elections – 2001

Bishan – Toa Payoh (5 men)

Uncontested

Sixth elections – 2006

Bishan – Toa Payoh (5 men)

Uncontested

A span of 24 years, 6 elections.

Contested in only one – 24 years ago

—————–

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

香港反送中:特首林郑月娥宣布建立民间对话平台

香港特首林郑月娥今日(20日)宣布将建立民间对话平台,来加强和社会各界人士的沟通,减少分歧和冲突。 “我们会立即展开沟通平台工作,透过这平台,我希望能够达成相互尊重和理解的对话,试图为香港寻找出路。“林郑月娥表示。 据《香港01》报道,民阵上周日(18日)发起“流水式集会“。 特首林郑月娥今(19日)会见记者时形容,星期日很多市民参与维园集会,大致和平,她衷心希望这是社会回复平静、远离暴力的开始。 “ 香港政府推行《逃犯条例》修订引起极大争议,反修例运动持续不断。 自六月以来,示威者已举办无数次大大小小的示威运动,并坚持提出五大诉求:正式撤回修例;收回“暴动”定性;撤销检控;独立调查,追究警队滥权;立刻实行真普选。 尽管林郑月娥数度委婉表态,形容《逃犯条例》已“寿终正寝”,但仍无法平息怒火。 期间,示威者与警民多次发生激烈冲突,导致民警关系紧张。 近数周来,更将示威运动升级至机场,造成机场大瘫痪,多架航班取消或延误,影响旅客出入境。对此,引起旅客民怨四起,甚至表态不支持反送中示威。 与此同时,周日亦发起示威集会,据大会公布有超过170万人参与集会,欲向香港政府表示仍获得大众支持。部分示威者亦为在机场造成旅客不便而致歉,当天示威仍有警方在现场,但集会结束后,亦和平散场,并无发生任何冲突事件。 示威运动如今闹得沸沸扬扬,亦引起国际社会的关注与参与。社交媒体巨头脸书和推特昨日(19日)各别发表声明,指出他们已移除蓄意和试图在香港散播政治不和的假账号。…

Singtel suffers 1st quarterly loss with Bharti Airtel investment through CECA

It was reported by the media yesterday (14 Nov) that Singtel posted…

Singaporeans aged 21 and above to receive one-off $600 payout in April

All Singaporeans aged 21 and above will receive a one-off payout of…

Mdm Halimah Yacob declared as first female President of Singapore

Mdm Halimah Yacob has been declared by the returning officer at the…