casino
In the last six months, Member of Parliament for Moulmein-Kallang GRC, Denise Phua, has called on the government to slay two (sacred) cows – one, the elected presidency; and two, gambling.In May, Ms Phua, who has since been appointed Mayor of Central Singapore Community Development Council (CDC), called on the Government to scrap the elected presidency and for it to be returned to a ceremonial role for the head of state.
“If the conditions under which (the elected presidency, Non-Constituency MP and the Nominated MP schemes) have changed,” Ms Phua said in Parliament then, “let us have the courage to slay these sacred cows before they become obese and unhealthy.”
Ms Phua had expressed support for Workers’ Party leader Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied GRC)’s reservations about the power given to the elected President.
“I long for the day of senior statesman who can represent our country as a head of state in the likes of ex-Presidents Yusof Bin Ishak and Dr Benjamin Sheares,” she said, “statesmen who need not slug through yet another political campaigning process that divides the country instead of healing and uniting the people of Singapore.”
Ms Phua, however, does not seem to have followed up on the call by way of drumming up public support or even tabling a motion for further debate in Parliament.
Six months later, on 7 October, Ms Phua has again made another important call – this time for Singapore to “wean itself off the casino industry”.
In an impassioned speech during the parliamentary debate on the second reading of the Remote Gambling Bill, Ms Phua said it was time to “take a bold step and reject gambling, whether remote or on-site.”
“Just as we are bold enough to explicitly stand by principles such as the family is the first port of call for help; that extra marital relationships are not encouraged; we need to express our stand on licensed gambling in Singapore, whether online or via brick-and-mortar casinos,” the Mayor said.
She noted that it has been 10 years since Singapore “made the fateful decision of authorising licensed casino operators for the sake of jobs in an economic recession” and that it is time for the Government to “discourage gambling as an economic or social activity.”
It is left to be seen if Ms Phua will take her call a step further and perhaps launch a public campaign to garner support to convince the Government to wean Singapore off the gambling habit.
Ms Phua will, if she chooses to extend the fight to abolish gambling eventually, face robust opposition, given that in recent months the operator of Marina Bay Sands, where one of the casino is located, has called on the Government to release more land for it to extend its operations.
Ms Phua’s two calls in six months raise the question of how far an MP should go to champion a cause.
Certainly, MPs do work behind the scenes, in quiet ways, to effect the changes they hope to see. And many do this patiently, over a period of time, away from the spotlight.
But this also opens them up to criticism that all they do is to make speeches in Parliament – even flowery or passionate ones – but do not follow through on them.
Examples of these would be Ms Phua’s colleague in the People’s Action Party (PAP), Inderjit Singh.
Mr Singh had railed against the Population White Paper in 2013. However, when it came to the parliamentary vote, he was nowhere to be found.
Similarly, MP Hri Kumar had spoken against the retention of the anti-gay law, section 377a. But when it came down to it, he – like all PAP MPs – had to toe the party whip.
“Many people come to me and say, oh but the PAP you know you have the Whip, and so all of you must vote the same way,” Mr Kumar said at a forum in April. “That’s true. That’s the system we inherited, for party discipline. But nonetheless, you still have PAP MPs giving different views in Parliament.”
That, however, is a rather fatalistic attitude, especially for an MP. In any case, giving “different views” mean nothing if not followed through on.
Thankfully, Mr Kumar’s colleague in the PAP, Christopher De Souza, is not so fatalistic.
Mr De Souza is the MP behind the new Private Member’s Bill, the Prevention of Human Trafficking Bill, which was also introduced in Parliament on Tuesday. The Bill seeks to make it a crime to traffick people, and grants the authorities various powers to deal with such situations.
Mr De Souza had consulted and worked with various groups over the course of more than a year on the Bill.
Human trafficking has always been a problem which the Government denied existing in Singapore, until recently.
Mr De Souza should be commended for going all the way to table a Bill to criminalise human trafficking, even though some may feel the Bill does not go far enough. Nonetheless, it is a start, and the MP deserves a pat on the back.
Will Ms Phua table a motion in Parliament to debate the abolition of the Elected Presidency, or introduce amendments to the Casino Control Act perhaps?
Or maybe she will or should embark on a public campaign to educate and garner support for the two issues she spoke on?
By virtue of her being a mayor – which is a political appointment – Ms Phua’s words will carry extra weight, compared to her colleagues, Mr Singh, Mr Kumar and even Mr De Souza.
Ms Phua’s public campaign, if she chooses to embark on one, will thus draw serious attention.
Otherwise, hers would be nothing more than just two impassioned speeches in Parliament – unless of course she prefers to work behind the scenes, away from the public spotlight.
Even so, she should make it known to the public who can then lend her their support. And going by public sentiments on the two issues, Ms Phua may just get the majority of Singaporeans on her side.
The above article was first published on Fresh Grads
Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

【冠状病毒19】三例入境病例皆从印度返新

本地昨日(9日)新增175名确诊患者,其中三起入境病例与一名社区病例。该三起入境包括一名22岁本地男子,在7月25日从印度返新;而另两名则分别为31岁和36岁的印度籍工作证持有者,于7月26日抵达新加坡。 三人在入境后即接受居家通知,当时皆无症状,均在隔离期间被检测出来。 此外,昨日唯一一例社区病例则为57岁本地女子,因持久性急性呼吸道感染而求医,目前仍与其他病例无关。 至于患者曾到访地点,根据卫生部文告指出,并没有任何新增社区病例曾到访地点。 昨日也有332人出院或离开社区隔离措施,康复人数则达到4万8915人,6027人正接受社区隔离设施,135人住院,无人在加护病房,死亡人数则维持在27人。

数度拉扯狗绳将狗吊起 男子被判罚款1万元

一名男子数度拉扯狗绳,还不断虐待宠物,强行将狗吊起,更勒住狗的脖子,将其压在地面上,种种行为被拍下,被判罚款1万元。 案情显示,该虐待宠物事件发生于去年2月15日晚上10点,以及同年3月9日傍晚6点左右,位于义顺环路第115A座附近,被告为38岁的男子陈鑫,被指对宠物雌狮子狗蓄意造成伤害,目前面临两项动物和飞禽法令指控。 目击者分别在上述地点两度发生虐狗,并使用手机拍摄下来,并通报当时的农粮兽医局(现被已编入国家公园局),同时也上传到网上,引起许多网民的关注,当局也随即进行调查。 据悉,当局执法人员造访被告住家时,又看见被告与其他宠物狗,并确认它们正是视频中的男子与宠物狗。 经进一步调查后确认当天(2月15日)晚上10点左右,被告正与宠物正在散步,突然猛力拉扯狗绳数次,让宠物狗后退一至两米。 被告解释,当时他的狗一直冲向前,而他则称是为了将它拉回来。 不仅如此,去年3月9日傍晚6点左右,被告又再次对宠物狗暴力虐打,先是踢狗的胸膛,再将狗链把它从原本休息的座位上,吊起来距离50公分的地面,最后在将它吊会原本的位置上,更抓着它的颈部按在位置上长达三秒。 对此,被告也称是为了想要让宠物挪动位置,于是很“小力”将狗压着,但时间很短。而检方则认为,事发当时被告都正在使用手机,并没有给予狗狗太多的关注,所以这样的行为并不合理。 检方表示,目前宠物狗已找到新的栖身之地,也没有形成永久性伤势。 针对此事,被告也于昨日下午认罪,被判罚款1万元,并于一年内不得养宠物。 结果宣判后,被告也提及自己是首次养狗,并不知道自己犯错,还询及领养宠物的人是否曾接受事前训练,避免再次犯错。

【诽谤诉讼】总理起诉许渊臣 明年2月15日进行控辩口头辩论

据《网络公民》总编许渊臣代表律师林鼎,在脸书更新信息,已确认控辩双方的口头辩论(Oral Arguments),定在明年2月15日早上10时进行。 他指出,今早(10日)刚接到高庭常务官的通知,控辩双方的口头辩论将在上述日前进行,续由法官林茵倩(Audrey Lim)审理,并开放予民众旁听。 只因一篇文章中,复述了总理弟妹李玮玲和李显扬的指控,总理李显龙提告本社总编许渊臣诽谤。诉讼在今年11月30日进行,一直持续到12月3日。 在上周四完成李光耀生前的私人律师柯金梨供证后,法官指示控辩双方须在一个月内提呈书面陈词,之后有两周时间回复双方陈词。 Lee Hsien Loong v Terry Xu…

警促知情者爆料 青少品尝超市饮料再放回货架惹议

一青年在超市中拿起架子上的饮料品尝后再放回架子上,随后又拿起另一个饮料品尝,视频中还写道“散播新型冠状病毒的方法”,令网民大喊难以接受,抨击应停止这种行为。据了解警方也已经呼吁民众提供资料。 有关视频昨日(2月10)起开始在Instagram 和推特上流传,只见一名身穿白底黑字上衣、背着背包的男少年和友人在超市中逛街时,从超市的冷藏架上拿起一瓶饮料,拧开瓶罐后品尝了一口。   View this post on Instagram   Like, really…