TOC Editorial

One day after Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong asked the Ministry for National Development to review the PAP town councils’ sale of an important software to a PAP-owned company and town council governance in general, he asked the President to call for a by-election in Punggol East SMC.

A conspiracist might say that the by-election completes the PAP’s answer to the simmering AIM controversy; announce a review to assure Singaporeans that any impropriety will be surfaced and addressed, then distract Singaporeans with the spectacle of a probable multi-cornered by-election. A conspiracist might even say that would explain the PAP’s choice of an obscure colorectal surgeon as its candidate in a high-risk by-election, since he is but a sacrificial lamb, a side dish to the main course that is the distraction from AIM.

But we at The Online Citizen are not conspiracists. Instead, at heart, beneath the crusty cynicism bred by disappointment after disappointment in the PAP over the years, we are optimists.

We are optimists who believe that we can be the change we want to see for Singapore. We are optimists who think that our collective voices can make Singapore a better place for all. We are optimists who hope, nay believe, that the PAP government fundamentally want the best for Singapore and Singaporeans, even if it sometimes employs disagreeable methods that diminish us all.

The PM has asked the MND to review the AIM contract. Many have pointed out that the potential lack of independence in such a review, and the potential for conflicts of interest given that the MND is helmed by a PAP minister. Ironic, given that that is precisely the problem with the AIM contract.

In the spirit of optimism, and in keeping with the stated goals of ensuring transparency and maintaining trust in the system, we call for the Auditor-General’s Office to participate in, if not to take over leadership of, the review.

We call on the review team to publish its findings and report to the Permanent Secretary of MND, immediately upon submission and without any edits. And we also call on MND to publish all relevant documents in question, from the town council minutes documenting the discussions and decisions made, to the tender document itself, to the proposal by AIM and the contract signed with AIM.

These measures will allow Singaporeans to assure themselves that no stone was left unturned, and no questions left unasked and unanswered; that there was neither fear nor favour in the questioning and the findings; and that there has been no political interference in a probe of the politicians themselves.

In short, we call on the Prime Minister, Minister Khaw Boon Wan, the MND Permanent Secretary and everyone else involved, to do what is in their power to ensure that the review is independent and transparent. After all, if the ultimate objective is to maintain trust in the system, then the worst thing that can happen is for the MND review to be seen as a white-wash – because then the cynicism and distrust will spread from the PAP town councils, to the civil service itself.

But that is not all.

The Prime Minister has rightly ordered a review of the AIM contract, and a fundamental reconsideration of the nature and role of town councils; timely, in light of some of the more curious assertions made by PAP MPs such as Mr Baey Yam Keng. But the Prime Minister, Secretary-General of the PAP, has said nothing about the companies owned by the PAP itself and any business dealings between PAP-owned or controlled companies and PAP town councils other than this AIM contract from 2010.

If Singaporeans are to trust in the system, we have to know the full extent of these dealings. Reviewing this AIM contract alone will not be enough to build oor restore trust. Not when we now know, from AIM chairman Chandra Das himself, that AIM had dealings with PAP town councils even earlier. Not when the PAP, alone of all the political parties interviewed by TODAY, declined to disclose how many companies it owned (the other parties all did not own any). Not when it is this very conflict of interest that the MND probe is supposed to investigate.

So TOC also calls on the PAP to clearly spell out to Singaporeans, in full detail, how many companies it controls or owns today and that it has controlled or owned in the past, what these companies did, who benefited from their operations, and what business dealings they have and previously had with PAP town councils and government agencies.

The famous American jurist Louis D. Brandeis said: “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” It is only by shining a great big spotlight into every single aspect of the tender process that led to the contract with AIM, and into the business dealings of PAP-owned or controlled companies; by over-disclosing to the public instead of under-disclosing; by showing that there is nothing hidden and nothing to hide, that Singaporeans can once again believe in the integrity of the system and trust the system.

The Government and the PAP must do all these things. Because the alternative would cause a corrosive erosion of trust and a rising tide of anger, which would certainly not be in the best interests of Singaporeans.

We want to believe; help us believe.

 

You May Also Like

Start Now – Rethinking Volunteerism

the following is a media release from Start Now's upcoming event 'Rethinking Volunteerism':…

S’pore courts “ought to play a larger role in protecting minority rights”: law prof

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Tuesday emphasised the need for Singapore’s…

Putting S’pore on lockdown “a very extreme measure”, not necessary if multiple lines of defences tightened, says National Development Minister Lawrence Wong

Placing Singapore under lockdown is currently “a very extreme measure” at this…

林鼎:举证责任在诉方梁实轩无需答辩 诉讼展延下月30日陈词

总理李显龙提告时评人梁实轩的诽谤诉讼,于本周二开始在高庭公堂审理。 在聆讯第二日(7日),诉方传召专家证人潘光俊(Tuan Quang Phan)博士,希望能说明诽谤性贴文的流传度。总理李显龙亦身着粉红衬衫和灰色西服出庭旁听。 梁实轩在昨午选择不出庭供证。他的代表律师林鼎认为,梁并没有供证的必要,举证的责任应在原告李总理身上,且大多事项都可透过书面陈词解决。 林鼎也形容诉方的指控是轻率(frivolous)、无理取闹(vexatious)和侮辱人的(abusive),辩方不会参与举证。有鉴于辩方不供证,案件也展延至11月30日,在法庭陈词。 林鼎在前日盘问李显龙。林鼎也指方式总理也承认未有直接证据,例如梁实轩转发相关贴文的截图。当时,林鼎质问是谁举报梁分享帖文时,李总理表示不记得了。林鼎因此指出,鉴于针对其委托人的诽谤诉讼的严重性,李总理的理据实在是“令人难以接受”。 不过, 总理首席辩护律师文达星在昨日则抗议梁实轩选择沉默,也指对方没办法为自己辩驳。 文达星强调辩方选择不答辩的理由“虚假”(contrived),诉方立场明确。他指责梁实轩的诽谤行为不仅限于转发不实报导,还包括在诉讼程序后,仍吸引民众关注有关诉讼、让民众注意到有关报导的冒犯内容。 林鼎则回应,他是在征询当事人同意后,决定辩方无需答辩,同时这也是因为起诉人的诉讼,是毫无根据和可笑的,且这无关乎勇气,而是不愿助长起诉人的目的,污染“正义的泉源”( pollute…