By Howard Lee
If you have been following the recent chain of events between the government and Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council, you might have mistaken it for a repeat of the AIM/FMSS saga that happened last year.
In truth, it wasn’t.
The latest series of events – the National Environment Agency issuing a summon to AHPETC for allegedly holding an illegal fair, AHPETC and the People’s Association crossing words over a misplaced tentage, an auditor’s statement over the town council’s financial status that drew retorts from the Ministry of National Development – started with barbs traded “at a distance”, mostly with media statements issued.
It then escalated to AHPETC requesting MND to conduct a formal audit, and AHPETC claiming trial over the summon. And the latest: The Finance Minister ordered the Auditor General’s Office to look into the town council’s financial statement.
Unmistakably, the tempo has stepped up, and you might get a sense that the battle lines – at least the political ones – are no longer where they used to be.
It seems not so long ago, following the terse stand off between NEA and AHPETC over the spring cleaning of hawker centres, that Workers’ Party secretary general Low Thia Kiang made no inclination to raise a legal challenge to the Environment Minister. One might believe by this position that WP is adverse to taking legal action to defend itself, either as a matter of principle, to avoid unnecessary cost to the party, or as Low says to maintain “good politics”.
Whatever qualms WP might have earlier have clearly been thrown out the window. Rather than settle the summon for its alleged illegal trade fair, WP’s intention to claim trial indicates that it now no longer intends to let matters rest. It’s open challenge to investigate its financial accounts is now matched with an equally open welcome.
It would be fair to assess that since its win in the 2011 general elections, WP has been fairly patient with the accusations thrown its way, preferring to dismiss them. This non-confrontational approach would have won the hearts of many. Instead, the party seemed inclined to let their grassroot efforts rally support from the electorate, as evident from the many outreach activities that they have conducted on the ground, activities that are seldom reported by the mainstream media.
But ground work is best exemplified by efforts in the wards it runs, and would not be sufficient if WP does intend to expand its electoral footprint to constituents who are only getting its feel for the WP through media reports. Perhaps the WP feels that its reputation is at stake, and sees the need to rectify the situation. Only time will tell if they managed to nip it in the bud soon enough, as the next election is no longer that far away.
However, it is not just a matter of politics. The latest move by the state apparatus, from rhetoric into legal and investigative actions, should also be a clear signal that the state is keen to look into issues relating to how town councils are managed. This is a step, small as it might be, away from the earlier autonomy to the town councils that former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong was keen to implement.
The move might not be all negative. Perhaps it signals the government’s intent to increase the standardisation across town councils, so as to provide a more uniform level of service to all citizens.
Indeed, the public service has an overarching responsibility to all citizens, and need to take actions that serve their interests best. Citizens expect no less.
Likewise, citizens will also expect them to do due diligence and investigate all other areas of potential mismanagement by the town councils. Further investigations should also be conducted on the tentage incident, and looking further back, into AIM, FMSS, and the investment of town council money in toxic funds.
This will give the public sufficient confidence that the law of the land is upheld diligently by our public institutions, without fear or favour.
Subscribe
Login
0 Comments
