On Saturday (19 October), the People’s Association’s (PA) grassroots adviser, Chua Eng Leong, for Eunos ward took to his Facebook to hit back at Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh over what Mr Chua refers to as “unsubstantiated comments” about the delay in the completion of a barrier-free-access (BFA) ramp at Blk 108 Bedok Reservoir Road.
Mr Chua – who was part of the People’s Action Party (PAP) team that lost to WP in Aljunied GRC during the 2015 General Election – stated that Mr Singh’s allegations are “politically divisive and factually inaccurate”, and he decided to respond to it in order to maintain a “level of accountability” to the people of Singapore.

He was referring to Mr Singh’s Facebook post on Tuesday (15 October) where the opposition MP said that the BFA ramp was only opened to the public, seven years after it was first proposed. He noted that the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) has been waiting for documentation and additional pipe diversion to be completed before receiving approval to open the BFA for resident use.
Mr Singh also highlighted that the government allocates about S$40 million to all Town Councils around Singapore for community improvement projects. However, for projects to be funded, MPs have to raise them to the Grassroots Advisers for consideration, which can be challenging as the losing PAP candidate are appointed as Grassroots advisors in opposition wards like Aljunied and Hougang.
As such, Mr Singh asserted that the PAP is “divisive” and have “double standard” when it comes to how certain process operate in opposition party.
He also pointed out that the project took years to complete when it should have only taken months.
“How many senior citizens, immobile, and yet others recovering from episodes such as debilitating strokes could have benefited from this facility earlier, but for how the PAP determines the People’s Association operates in opposition wards. Other proposals by opposition MPs for the community are commonly ignored by the People’s Association,” Mr Singh lamented.
In response to this, Mr Chua clarified that the BFA ramp is only one of the many community improvement projects by the People’s Association Citizens’ Consultative Committees (CCC) in Aljunied GRC and Hougang SMC.
Therefore, Mr Chua urged the public to look at other projects undertaken by the CCCs like “the covered linkway for BFA ramp at Blk 118 Hougang Ave 1 and the linkway from 409 to Blk 460 at Hougang Ave 10, which have been conveniently ignored by Mr Singh”.
Mr Chua also said that Mr Singh’s allegation that the completion of the BFA ramp was deliberately delayed as it was mooted by the opposition was “unjustifiable” since the project was also proposed by the Eunos CCC.
“I should also add that the truth of the matter is that the BFA Ramp was concurrently proposed by the Eunos CCC and definitely not proposed only by the Aljunied Hougang Town Council (AHTC) which Mr Singh seems to be alluding to. Considering this BFA Ramp was proposed by Eunos CCC, why would Eunos CCC delay the project,” asked Mr Chua.
He continued, “Regardless of whether a project is proposed by the AHTC or the Eunos CCC, the Eunos CCC and the PA would ensure the seamless completion of the project once the necessary approvals have been granted. Any insinuation that there was a delay in the completion of the BFA Ramp because it was a proposal mooted by the opposition party is therefore unjustifiable.”
Additionally, Mr Chua also revealed that the funding for the ramp and other community improvement projects were secured in September 2016, and the construction for the ramp commenced in December 2018 and it was handed over to Town Council this month.
The grassroots adviser also mentioned that the contractors “did ask for extensions of time” which is “part and parcel of constructions works”.
“Nonetheless, it is important to highlight that the BFA Ramp, like all other CCC projects were completed within a reasonable period of time once the underlying issues were resolved,” he wrote.
Separately, Mr Chua also said that it’s “politically mischievous” for Mr Singh to say that the proposals raised by MPs are usually ignored.
“In fact, Mr Singh had acknowledged in 2015 that 17 of AHTC’s proposed projects were accepted. Even proposal, whether from MPs or from the CCCs, must be scrutinized and prioritized carefully, with accountability in how we justify and award such contracts,” he said.
He added, “In any event, regardless of whether it is the People’s Association, the CCCs or the opposition MPs, I believe there should be no distinction drawn when serving our fellow Singaporeans and we must not forget our promise to the people, which is to serve them with our hearts.”
On the subject of accountability, Mr Chua also sarcastically noted that accountability is a responsibility of all parties to the people of Singapore, including those “parties (who) have been found to be in breach of their fiduciary duties”.
Earlier this month, the High Court found Workers’ Party (WP) Aljunied GRC Members of Parliament (MPs) Pritam Singh, Sylvia Lim and Low Thia Khiang liable for damages against the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) and the Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council (PRPTC).
Referring to this case, Mr Chua said that he has “received queries from numerous residents about what the incumbent town council has done for them over the course of these past 8 years”.
“Instead of engaging in an online debate, I urge everyone to remember our priority is to our fellow Singaporeans and we should focus on accountability to them and not debate on a completed BFA Ramp, which is but a mere red herring,” Mr Chua wrote.

Mr Singh responds

A few hours after Mr Chua’s Facebook post went online, WP’s chief responded on the same social media platform.
He said that he was glad that the “CCC finally engage this issue, albeit only after things have to go to public”. He also noted “repeated emails, requests for answers have gone unanswered and ignored, over many years”.
Mr Singh revealed that in the heat of the previous general election, the PA openly said that they have approved a few of the Community Improvement Project Committee (CIPC) for AHTC, which includes the two for Eunos.
“So naturally, my attention would be fixed on why one of the two projects in Eunos had taken seven years to be finally completed. There has been no news from the PA on the other proposal for Blk 633 to 635, in spite of repeated reminders,” he wrote.
He also stated that now he understands that the BFA ramp was “concurrently proposed”. Hence he asked “why was there a delay” given that the funding was secured in 2016.
“If funding was already secured in 2016 (putting aside the fact that it oddly took 3-4 years to secure funding, especially since the MND allocated about $40m each year for CIPC projects), I cannot find a substantive reason for the delay in Mr Chua’s long post below,” he said.
On top of that, Mr Singh also questioned if “a seven year wait for a proposal to come to fruition the norm in PAP wards where taxpayers monies are also used to fund CPIC projects?”
Although Mr Singh agrees with Mr Chua that “every CIPC proposal must be scrutinized and prioritized with accountability”, he also hinted that Mr Chua can perhaps “share some numbers so the public can understand how much was allocated to the Aljunied CCCs” after the opposition party took over the division in 2011, compared with the average for CCCs in all other constituencies.
“If the difference is stark, maybe the Aljunied CCCs would raise their hands and acknowledged the elephant in the room?” he said.
Mr Singh also added, “Mr Chua contends that the BFA ramp is a red herring. He is wrong. It is a metaphor – A very powerful metaphor for the double standards when it comes to CIPC funding in opposition wards.”
In a reply to Mr Chua’s move to bring up the findings discovered by the High Court on the AHTC case, Mr Singh said that he “fully expected some reference in any reply to my original post to the ongoing Court case”. However, he said that the will not be commenting on it as the matter still remains before the courts.
In the end of his post, Mr Singh suggested that the “Aljunied and Hougang CCCs and elected opposition MPs in the ward sit down together to develop a protocol on how CIPC proposals should be handled in opposition wards so as to ensure equity in disbursement of taxpayer dollars and efficient execution of CIPC projects?”
“I will be happy to be a part of the solution,” he said.

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

New Naratif editor-in-chief Kirsten Han calls out The Straits Times for reproducing "propaganda" China Daily articles

Editor-in-chief of Southeast Asian journalism platform New Naratif Kirsten Han has criticised The…

非礼后跳河逃被捕 男子今被判监禁五日罚款2500元

印裔男子非礼女教友后被发现,在警方追捕下跳进梧槽人工河内,试图逃避追捕,但万万没想到警方也跳下河将他逮捕。被告被指在喝醉期间骚扰他人,违反《酒类控制(消费与供应)法》,以及对警方使用辱骂言语,违反《保护免受骚扰法》,于今日(3日)被判处5天监禁,以及罚款2500新元。 该名27岁男子拉杰(译名,Rajendran Prakash)于去年9月29日,领工资后到布吉士买醉。在喝得醉醺醺当下,便开始触摸和强抱一名女教友,同时还戳柔女教友的手臂,令女教友非常不舒服和震惊。 当天被告的行为却被一名男教友看在眼里。男教友表示,他当时正在露德圣母堂做祷告,却听到一阵喧闹。他转头一看发现被告正在对女教友做出不礼貌的行为,并劝导被告离开,但被告却不听劝,持续跟踪女教友,还表现出无赖的行为。 另名男子介入帮忙,发现被告身上有股强烈的酒精味,在男子还未来得及反应时,被告便向对方赏了巴掌。基于自卫,该名男子最终被摁倒在地,并要求他要自重才肯放手,被告也答应。 男子随后向牧师告发,并通报警察,警方在接获通报后立刻前往。然而,在警方到场后,被告疑似不想被警方逮捕,便展开戏剧性的追捕行动。 被告在不顾及任何危险之下,跳入梧槽人工河内,试图逃避追捕。该河约3米深,深度达胸口,他在跳下河后,警方随即展开救援行动,但他拒绝警方丢给他的救生圈。 警方在事后表示,被告明显喝醉,而且还三番四次潜入水中,试图移到另一个水渠。 警方勇跳河救援被告获网民无数赞 当时,救援警方由于担心被告的安危,在不管三七二十一之下,跳入河内将被告救起,随后该名警官Desmond Heng自己识水性,而当下决定穿着制服跳河,是为了要让被告知道他是一名警官,请求他配合救援行动。 被告在跳河后,也随即引起许多路人的围观和拍摄,视频此前在网络遭广传。另名警官Caleb…

Increasing number of unemployment & layoffs in Q2

In the newly released statistics of advanced labor market for the second…

港发起“勿忘初心”大游行 警民冲突再度爆发

昨日(1日)香港示威者在港岛与九龙区发起三大游行,虽然均均获得警方不反对通知,但仍无法避免爆发警民冲突。 警方向示威者发出催泪瓦斯驱散示威者,集会也被迫提前一小时结束。 综合媒体报道,该游行分成三大集会包括早上在港岛区的“孩子不要催泪弹”,从爱丁堡广场集合一路到政府中部东翼前地;中午则有“感谢美国保护香港”游行,则由中环遮打花游行到美国驻港总领事馆,最后返回遮打花园。 下午则是“勿忘初心大游行”,由尖沙咀钟楼沿着梳士巴利道,到红馆,惟游行至下午被警方镇压。 据大会称,游行人数达38万人。 其中规模较大的是下午在尖沙咀的“毋忘初心”游行”。 据《法国国际广播电台》(RFI),大批市民下午3时在尖沙咀文化中心一带聚集,游行至红磡香港体育馆,重申五大诉求,并要求解散警队。 示威者在游行期间高喊“光复香港,时代革命”与“解放香港”,而警方也开始向千名示威者发射催泪弹,结束了区议会选举前后一段香港难得平静的日子。 《路透社》报道,该地区商店已早早关门,避免被警方投掷催泪弹。 当示威者游行至九龙海滨地区时,警方开始投掷催泪弹,包括一些老年人和携带动物的人,也逮捕了数人,该场集会也在下午5点左右被警方宣布终止。 警方随后通过脸书发表声明称,由于有数百名“暴徒”在尖沙咀梳士巴利道近帝国中心一带聚集,当中有“暴徒”投掷多枚烟雾饼,造成公众恐慌,要求立即停止违法行为。 尖沙咀“毋忘初心大游行”发起人Swing于下午7点会见媒体,解释发起活动原因,是希望在区议会小胜后,唤回香港人的初心--“五大诉求,缺一不可”。…