CCC logo

By Andrew Loh

CCC logo
CCC logo
When the Citizens’ Consultative Committees (CCCs) were set up in the 1960s, it was with noble intentions – first “to rally support among the people for merger with the Federation of Malaya”, and later “to fight against Communism, and facilitate communication between the people and the government.”
In its current form, CCCs (said to be the “apex body of all grassroots organisations”) have more civic roles.
According to the People’s Association’s “Rules and Regulations” for CCCs, it is stated:

The functions of the Committee are:
 (a) to promote good citizenship among residents in the Constituency;
 (b) to disseminate information and channel feedback on government policies and actions from residents in the Constituency;
(c) to lead and co-ordinate projects and activities at the constituency and national levels; and
 (d) to recommend to the Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) to provide amenities and facilities in the Constituency.

There are several things you notice about these rules and regulation, in the context of what has transpired between the National Environment Agency (NEA), the Bedok Reservoir-Punggol CCC, and the opposition Workers’ Party (WP) town council, Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) in recent months.
The first thing is that there is no mention of the term “town council” at all in the set of rules and regulations pertaining to the CCCs.
The second thing you notice is that the functions and purpose of the CCCs are civic in nature, rather than political, unlike its purpose in the 1960s.
Now, take a look at the roles and functions of town councils, as laid out in the Town Council website:

“Town Councils were formed in 1989 to empower local elected representatives and residents to run their own estates. With the formation of Town Councils:
“Residents can participate in decision-making and local estate management (e.g. by joining the Grassroots Organisations, giving feedback on estate matters).”

And:

“Elected Members of Parliament (MPs) are empowered to lead Town Councils and decide on local estate management matters.”

So, it would thus seem that the two – the CCCs and the town councils – have markedly differently roles and purposes.
However, with the victorious win of the WP in Aljunied GRC, Hougang SMC and Punggol East SMC, the role of the grassroots, including the CCCs, seem to have been politicised by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) Government.
The current legal battle between the NEA and the WP is but only the latest skirmish which has thrown light on this – with the NEA prescribing that AHPETC must obtain the support of the chairman of the Bedok Reservoir-Punggol CCC as one of the mandatory conditions in considering AHPETC’s application for a permit to hold a community event.
And the AHPETC has to do this even though the event would be held within the public area which it is empowered to manage by the Town Councils Act.
Despite repeated attempts by the lawyer for the WP in court to seek the reasons why this was necessary, the answer has not been forthcoming from the NEA.
Further, the mysterious removal of the term “town councils” from the application form as one of the entities authorised to hold such community events only adds to the accusation that the Government is playing dirty.
Again, attempts to seek answers to why the term was removed have been met with stonewalling by the NEA lawyer.
To add credence to the accusation (or to not unjustified rumours) that the particular CCC in this case is “playing politics” is the fact that the chairman of the CCC is a PAP branch chairman, Victor Lye.
Mr Lye thus wears two hats – chairman of the CCC and chairman of the political party’s branch in the area.
Can one reasonably expect him not to see things through politicised lenses?
victor lye2In mid-September, Mr Lye posted several pictures on his Facebook page taken during his walkabout in the Bedok Reservoir area of a wall where some concrete had apparently fallen off.
Mr Lye wrote: “There were no barriers or signs to indicate that someone was looking into it. Am told the Town Council is responsible for such works. Perhaps some signage to explain the works will go some way to allay residents’ concerns.”
Many members of the public pointed out to him that there have also been similar incidents in PAP-run areas, and that the blame for this particular incident should not be placed on the WP town council because it was obviously a HDB workmanship issue.
These postings, however, seem to have been deleted on his page, and only one photo remains. (See here.)
What is noteworthy, nonetheless, is how Mr Lye had – together with his companions – posed in front of the exposed wall for a group photo, with even one of them smiling.
It does make you wonder why Mr Lye would do this – if he was truly concerned, would he not quickly contact the HDB and the town council and get the necessary done, for the sake of residents’ safety, instead of posing for a group photo and then apparently use it to score political points?
What is also curious is whether Mr Lye was acting as the chairman of the CCC or as chairman of the PAP branch.
From the photo, Mr Lye seems to be wearing a PAP t-shirt.
But that is exactly the point – when does one act as a grassroots chairman and when does one act as a PAP branch chairman?
How does anyone distinguish the two?
But the issue is this: the grassroots, through such shenanigans by the ruling party is in serious danger of losing the trust of the people.
From its noble beginnings to bring the government and the people closer, it is now being used for selfish political reasons and exploitation.
It is not only undesirable and regrettable, more importantly, it diminishes the work of those who have genuinely stepped forward to serve and who give of their time selflessly to the community.
Singaporeans – and grassroots volunteers themselves – need to demand that the ruling PAP government stop making use of the grassroots organisations for political ends.
The CCCs were never set up to oversee what town councils, which are run by elected Members of Parliament (MP), do.
The grassroots organisations, run by unelected volunteers, are supposed to complement the work of elected officials, and not to stymie them.
Nowhere in the People’s Association’s own Rules and Regulations is it stated that the CCCs are supposed to be the watchdogs for the town councils, let alone be given powers to approve or “support” town councils’ community events.
By what authority are CCCs given such powers?
One minister just days ago urged Singaporeans to embrace “a democracy of integrity and deeds.”
Indeed, let those who have been elected by the people be respected, and not be subjected to unfair and dishonest political manoeuvring.
The CCCs’ purpose is a noble one.
Please do not let them be used for selfish, partisan, and short-term political goals, and in the process tarnish the good work of many hundreds and thousands of volunteers.
It will serve no one.

Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

DPM Teo responds to ST's article, said ministers cannot avoid taking responsibility for making the required decisions on public interest

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean has issued a statement in response to…

Food stall worker washes shoes in basin at stall

IN a short clip of what appears to be the desserts and…

尚穆根 :定期进行打击卖淫活动 已屏蔽202非法卖淫网站

迄今为止,警方与资讯通信媒体发展局已屏蔽了202个非法卖淫网站。 周二(5日)内政部长兼律政部长尚穆根回应裕廊集选区议员拉哈尤・玛赞(Rahayu Mahzam),有关政府打击非法网络活动的问题,表示政府采取多管齐下的策略。 当局除了“定期”封锁非法卖淫网站,警方也会定期进行打击行动,遏制非法卖淫网站,包括利用各种网络平台操作的卖淫网站。例如警方去年11月就与中国公安部门联手打击跨国色情网站,共201人被逮捕。 尚穆根表示,“内政部在打击非法卖淫活动一向采取严苛的立场,事实上,本月亦正在商讨修改《妇女宪章》,加强打击力度。” 据本社日前报导,由于“住宅妓院”的数量攀升,《妇女宪章》(Women’s  Charter)提出修改,屋主在租房前必须审查租客身份,若将房子出租作“妓院”所用,均属违法行为,除非屋主能够合理证明自己并不知情。 其他修改还包括试图转移业务到海外,以逃避法律人士、若在境外透过网络或应用程式为本地提供性服务,亦被视为犯罪,初犯与惯犯均处以更重的刑期与更高的罚款,可达最高7年监禁和10万元罚款。 身为义顺集选区议员的尚穆根,也强调政府应加强教育与宣导网络使用的责任与安全性,例如鼓励公众举报任何犯罪可疑活动,通过电话、i-Witness、或直接到警察局报警。 此外,就是7月份刚上路的数码媒体和信息通识框架(Digital Media and…

我国骨痛热症稍有下降 渔港逾20工友相继染病

我国骨痛热症病例虽然在上周有下滑的迹象,自8月9日至15日共累积了1341起病例,但是在裕廊渔港就出现了五个黑斑蚊滋生地点,且一个月内有超过20名工友相继染病。 国家环境局的文告显示,第33周的骨痛热症累积了1341起新病例,比起第32周的1668起新病例少了327起,但是仍然维持在四位数。 然而,当局在裕廊渔港发现了五个黑斑蚊滋生处,包括在水沟、水桶盖和帆布下,而该区一个月内也有逾20名工友相继染上骨痛热症,他们多为居住在渔港临时住宿的马来西亚籍员工。 对此,环境局将对相关单位采取对付行动,而新加坡食品局也加强了灭蚊措施。 据悉,这些染病工友中,有者甚至被感染了两三次,而且他们都是受到两国防疫措施影响而被迫留在本地,并获得当局批准,在渔港的临时住宿居住。 新加坡鱼商总会指出,在陆续传出病例后,渔港的喷雾次数已经有所增加,从原本的每月一次改为每周一次。商会指出,当地居民都有在保持卫生,但是黑斑蚊滋生或受到天气影响,而变得比较快。因 据环境局数据显示,渔港路和惹兰德榜截至上周五,已经累积了29起骨痛热症病例,其中最近两周就有11起病例。 当局致力于减少蚊虫滋生地,然而截至上周,我国骨痛热症病例已经累积超过2万5000起。 因此当局除了加强和市镇理事会的合作,也敦促民众,尤其是居住在蚊症黑区的民众采取三项保护措施,即在家中黑暗部位喷洒杀虫剂、常常使用驱虫剂,以及穿长袖衣和长裤。 此外,当局也发布了两个教育短片,指导民众如何在家中喷洒杀虫剂,以及住在蚊症黑区的居民,若独自在家中看到蚊子,该采取的措施。