Lee Hsien Yang has asked Singaporeans in a Facebook post on Sunday (5 July) whether they want Parliament to be a “stepping stone” for those who already hold senior positions in government-related entities to move to a higher office, thus perpetuating the People Action Party’s “natural aristocracy”.

Mr Lee, a member of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) opined that while opposition candidates need character and courage, those standing on a PAP ticket do not.

Mr Lee, who is also the son of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew said that the preparedness of the alternative parties’ candidates to speak out fearlessly for the needs of  fellow Singaporeans is “contrast to the monochrome of PAP candidates” for whom “entering the political arena appears like a career step”.

“Standing for the opposition needs character and courage in a way that standing on a PAP ticket does not.  It demonstrates a willingness to sacrifice for our country.  Alternative candidates have often been victims of unfair treatment, character assassination, and dissuasion from frightened family and friends. These candidates step forward to seek justice and equality for all.  They have chosen to speak out because they are concerned for the future of our country.

“Contrast this to the monochrome of PAP candidates.  For many, entering the political arena appears like a career step.  They are supported by a huge machinery, have the benefits of makeovers and the prospect of a parachute into Parliament on the coat-tails of a Minister.”

He said, “Do we really want Parliament to be a mere stepping stone from a senior position in the SAF or civil service or some government-related body to higher office? Have paper qualifications and years of ‘grooming’ created better or stronger leaders? Has the PAP system enhanced the performance of our 4G leaders?  Do we want to perpetuate the PAP’s ‘natural aristocracy’?

“PAP MPs can generally expect smooth careers, some into Cabinet and other very highly paid political positions, others with directorships and various other positions.  Given party expectations and obligations, and the party whip, they rarely speak up in Parliament to question issues of importance and they predictably vote as the party directs. For them, entering politics looks like a calculated career move rather than a sacrifice or service,” Mr Lee asserted.

As compared with PAP MPs, Mr Lee said that Dr Tan Cheng Bock has always been his own man and is a rare MP who exercised independence of mind.

He went on to talk about how the alternative parties spoke up for Singaporeans and help to create transparency and accountability.

“Opposition MPs will question unpopular policies.  They will fight any attempt by the PAP to raise GST.  They can question outrageous ministerial salaries and conflicts of interest at Temasek and elsewhere.  They will continue to question oppressive laws that silence rights to free speech and public assembly.  Speaking their minds and tenacious questioning is how they will protect us from abuse of power and help create transparency and accountability. “Ownself check ownself” does not work.

The Workers Party MPs ferreted out how $22 billion of stimulus spending for the Covid-19 pandemic is actually loan capital.  They challenged the Constitution amendments on how we elect our President. The list of issues they have spoken up on is extensive: the government’s population white paper, corruption in GLCs, HDB leases, MRT breakdowns, our CPF, spending on foreign students, the Administration of Justice Act, the Prevention of Harassment Act and POFMA.”

Mr Lee concluded his post by stressing the need for accountability.

“For accountability, we need our elected representatives in Parliament to be willing to speak up and uncover the truth behind the PAP’s claims. We need them to be our voices and our vote in Parliament. Have your voices actually heard in Parliament. Vote for the opposition,” he said.

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Online users ask why they could be called up by police as witness if they shoot a video of a public incident

These days, it has become a common sight to see people quickly…

缺乏处理野生动物案件经验 害虫管理协会:将加强培训

依据过往的数个实际例子,新加坡害虫管理协会坦言普遍上,业界缺乏应对和处理野生动物的经验。因此,当局承诺,会增加这方面培训,加强业界的能力。 新加坡害虫管理协会(SPMA)发言人于周日(9月13日),在回应《亚洲新闻台》询问时指出,他们从过去的事件中察觉到,当局在处理野生动植物方面缺乏足够知识。“我们会正面接受建设性的批评。若有问题,我们会尽力解决;若能力不足;我们亦会作出必要的改善和培训,以提高能力。” 在该协会网站上,所列出的害虫防治公司超过50家。 该协会有此发言,皆因上周三在社交媒体上流传的捉蛇视频中,捕蛇人将蟒蛇从水沟取出后并没有妥当处理。野生动物救援组织关爱动物研究协会(ACRES)批评捕蛇人过于冷酷,罔顾动物福利,踩着蟒蛇并将它用力拉扯。 而在去年一月,另一家害虫管理公司的职员在乌节路董厦外捕捉一条三米长的蟒蛇时,也遭受批评,甚至成为了头条新闻。前农业食品兽医局也因此介入调查,确保相关职员并没有错误对待蟒蛇。 国家公园局(NParks)在受询时表示,将会调查所有有关处理不当的反馈,并促请民众在涉及受伤、陷入困境或被困野生动物案件时,应该直接致电动物应急中心(Animal Response Centre)。当局也表示,会和公务管理公司合作,以处理相关的案件。 害虫管理协会指出,在处理如蚊子或蟑螂等害虫的案件较多,而在处理涉及野生动物方面,如蛇、巨蜥和野鸟上,会员公司的经验则稍有不足。无论如何,该协会强调会从错误中吸取教训,而公众安全仍是他们的首要前提。

“法律不问琐事”? 范国瀚陈两裕    因脸书贴文被控藐视法庭

法律有句名言“法律不问琐事”(拉丁语:de minimis non curat lex),意即法律不过问对社会、他人财产、性命安危构成威胁和损害的事项。不过,在我国就有社运人士,却因为一则只有33个赞的脸书贴文招惹官司,在司法(保护)法令下,被提控藐视法庭罪。 总检察署高级政府律师在本月17日,在针对社运份子范国瀚和民主党副主席陈两裕的公开审讯时,认为脸书贴文是否构成藐视法庭,取决于一般民众如何诠释该贴文内容,而不是依据作者原意图。 范国瀚是在今年4月,于脸书的贴文称,马来西亚法庭处理政治个案比新加坡司法更独立,而被总检察署指控藐视法庭。有关贴文也转载新闻:“《当今大马》挑战反假新闻法违宪”。 随后,新加坡民主党党要陈两裕在脸书为范国瀚抱不平,指出总检察署的举措,更加证实范国瀚的批评所言不虚。结果也同样被控藐视法庭罪。不过,至今两人都仍未撤下被指藐视法庭的贴文。 2016年司法(保护)法令自去年10月生效,上述两人“抢了头香”,成为该法令生效以来首两位被指控藐视法庭的个案。 高级政府律师Francis Ng声明,范国瀚“没有可想象的理据”去挑出新加坡司法独立性的问题,范的言论等同向一般民众影射在马国进行的宪法挑战,若发生在新加坡必然败诉,是因为这里缺乏司法独立性。 “范国瀚是在质疑新加坡司法系统的公正与廉洁度。”…

在空军基地附近使用无人机 男子被判罚款2000元

一名男子因在未经允许下,在空军基地附近使用无人机,而被罚款2000元。 37岁的被告陈俊延(译音,Ed Chen Junyuan)今日(4日)被控涉嫌在巴耶利峇的空军基地五公里范围内驾驶小型无人机。 据悉,陈俊延今年6月,在网上购买了一架0.36公斤的DBPower无人机。6月26日晚上,他与朋友戴秒生(译音)前往榜鹅附近地区,他家对面,一同驾驶无人机,其中一架无人机被巴耶利峇空军的航空Aeroscope 系统发现,一名休班的空军军官也随后接到警报,表示两人正在驾驶无人机,便开车前往该地,随后两人被捕。 检察官认为在该地驾驶无人机对航空安全有严重的后果,并描述陈俊延是如何操作无人机,强调新闻此前已不断提醒无人机操作者必须要在使用前进行检查,应罚款3000元以上。 但辩方则辩称,此事并未对任何人造成实际的伤害,而且该无人机仅飞行5至6分钟,并没有显示其速度,因此应减轻罚款500至1000元以内即可。 若在未经许可之下,进入空军基地5公里以内,一旦罪成,将可罚款至高两万元。再犯者将会被罚款两倍以上,即四万元,并可能被监禁15个月以上。 另名被告戴秒生,亦被指控数项罪行包括操作0.43公斤的无人机逾越64米高的限制高度,据悉,其驾驶高达431米左右。目前案件仍在处理中。