The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chairman Paul Tambyah’s allegations of the Ministry of Manpower (MOM)’s advisory to employers about testing migrant workers for the COVID-19 were “baseless and false”, said the People’s Action Party (PAP)’s candidate Lawrence Wong on Sunday (5 July).

During the NUSS Pre-General Election Forum 2020 on 3 July, Dr Tambyah spoke of the MOM’s advisory on testing migrant workers for the virus that warned employers not to send their workers – who are well – for the COVID-19 testing.

He claimed that the advisory was issued by MOM in February after a cluster of COVID-19 cases emerged at the Seletar Aerospace Park, which has led many employers wanting to send their workers to get tested for the virus.

“They actively discouraged the testing. And then in March, you know, all hell broke loose,” said Dr Tambyah.

Following that, Mr Wong – who co-chairs the Multi-Ministry COVID-19 task force with PAP member Gan Kim Yong – was asked during his interview with reporters at the PAP’s Woodgrove branch about Dr Tambyah’s remarks.

“These are baseless and false allegations,” he replied.

Mr Wong reiterated that the Multi-Ministry task force has always relied on scientific evidence and the advice of medical experts in coming up with decisions.

“They are an integral part of the team, we involve them in all our deliberations, and every time Mr Gan Kim Yong and I hold the press conferences we have the director of medical services (Associate Professor Kenneth Mak) with us,” he said.

Mr Wong also clarified that MOM did not issue the advisory “unilaterally” but it was the doctors and medical experts who had requested MOM to put out the advisory to employers.

“I fully respect Professor Tambyah as a leading expert in his field, but it is very disappointing that he has deliberately chosen to distort the facts just to try and score some political points,” he added.

Netizens supported SDP’s Paul Tambyah’s remarks by citing the ST’s report on the advisory

Meanwhile, a handful of netizens penned under the comment section of the Channels News Asia’s Facebook post – which covered the media interview – citing the Straits Times’ report that covered MOM’s previous advisory to employers to support Dr Tambyah’s remarks.

While others commented that Mr Wong has yet to address why MOM had threatened to revoke employers’ privileges if they send their workers for testing.

 

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

Epic battle over GameStop as ‘nerds’ take on Wall Street

by Daniel Hoffman An epic battle is unfolding on Wall Street, with…

许渊臣针对《防假消息法》表达看法 通讯新闻部发文澄清

上周五,《网络公民》总编许渊臣在个人脸书,针对《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》(POFMA)发表个人观点,提出该法上诉时间程序,在选举期间可能被滥用,限制公民发表言论的忧虑。 《防假消息法》刚在本月2日起生效。自提呈国会以来,就已饱受争议,不仅政界人士,包括国内外学术界、媒体、公民组织等都已对该法提出质疑,例如担忧法案“定义笼统”、部长/执法机关权力过于广泛、以及可能产生寒蝉效应等,反而不利于公民间对公共政策的良性讨论。 依据该法,如部长/指定人士发出更正/撤除内容/文章的指示,如当事者不满可提出上诉,对上诉的审核期限为两日。 不过,如果上诉也被部长驳回怎么办?可以上诉到高等法院。根据《防假消息法》的附属条例,法庭常务官(Duty Registrar)安排审理当事者上诉个案的聆讯日,通常会是第六个工作日后。 对此,许渊臣认为,仅仅是对部长提出上诉、被驳回再申请法庭聆讯,整个申诉过程就至少要耗掉八天(工作日)的时间,而且还未算上当事人收到指示、以及寻求法律咨询、准备申诉辩词所需的时间。 再者,也没有任何指南显示在聆讯后何时必须作出判决。 反观,新加坡选举从提名日到投票,通常仅需时九日。故此许渊臣打个比方,假设有者要在2015年大选前,想针对集体感染C型肝炎事故进行爆料,执政政府会否发出撤文/跟更正指示,要求证实有关消息是确凿的?那么一般选民就没有机会去听一听,到底爆料消息想表达什么。 而且爆料当事人恐怕要走繁冗的上诉程序,要在工作日抽空提交法律文件到法庭。尽管针对部长撤文指示的上诉聆讯首三日免费,但是第四个聆讯日起,就要6000新元的收费。 有鉴于鲜有政府败诉的先例,这些不利因素,可能让一般民众望而却步,似乎足以堵住悠悠众口。 许渊臣对此讽喻,可能将来新加坡的牛津词典会出现一个新词,形同行动党政府“泼马”(pofma’d)了前方障碍,透过限制公民揭发有关部长和政策的负面消息,在选举中取得空前胜利。 《网络公民》英语站也分享了总编的贴文。…

IT professional Nathaniel Koh, lawyer Fadli Fawzi among new WP GE 2020 candidates introduced on Saturday

The Workers’ Party (WP) on Saturday (27 June) introduced its third batch…

SPP express concerns over LTA’s proposed satellite ERP system

Singapore People’s Party release press statement to express their concerns over the…