14-07-2023, 10:08 AM
The latest news regarding Minister S Iswaran being investigated by the CPIB came as a bombshell. But the equally vexing question in everyone’s mind is why did the Bureau need to seek the “concurrence” of the PM before it commenced a formal probe?
Questions that naturally arise are: Would investigations proceed if the PM did not give his consent? Have there been previous cases when concurrence was sought but not given? Can’t the Attorney-General launch an investigation if he sees wrongdoing regardless of the PM’s views?
Couple this matter with the recent Ridout debacle when questions swirling around Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan renting luxurious government-owned bungalows – one such question being the Ministers making the rental in their wives’ names – have still not been answered.
In case anyone missed it, let me repeat SDP’s call for an independent commission of Inquiry to look into the ins and outs of the matter. The more the PAP resists the move, the more questions it raises in the minds of Singaporeans.
Then, there is the expletive uttered by, of all people, the Speaker who unceremoniously cursed, albeit under his breath, at a fellow member of the House.
Mr Tan Chuan Jin has apologized for his language. But when the Speaker of Parliament displays such contempt for views he disagrees with, consideration should be given to his replacement.
Mr Tan’s deputy, Christopher de Souza, also found himself in a spot of bother. A practising lawyer, Mr de Souza was recently found guilty by the Law Society of assisting his client in suppressing evidence in a case he was conducting. Mr de Souza remains Deputy Speaker pending his appeal of the matter.
Then, there was the instance when Leader of the House Indranee Rajah she, in a fit of pique, raised a file she was holding and brought it down tempestuously during a Parliamentary session. This was in response to the conduct of an MP she considered worthy of rebuke. It was a most unedifying sight to behold.
“Mr Speaker,” she then thundered, “as Leader of the House, I would just like to remind members to conduct themselves in a parliamentary manner. And the tone in which we address one another is important. I would therefore ask Mr Leong to be mindful of that.”
Irony is dead.
Now, back to Dr Balakrishnan. Readers will remember that a couple of years ago, the Minister was caught on a hot mic calling an opposition MP “illiterate”. He later apologised.
These are just some recent instances of the behaviour of PAP leaders. Singapore’s political leadership is obviously not in a good place. Worse, the direction it is taking us is just as troubling.
When a country is ruled by one and the same party for nearly six decades – all this time without an effective opposition – is it any wonder that political decay begins to set in?
Questions that naturally arise are: Would investigations proceed if the PM did not give his consent? Have there been previous cases when concurrence was sought but not given? Can’t the Attorney-General launch an investigation if he sees wrongdoing regardless of the PM’s views?
Couple this matter with the recent Ridout debacle when questions swirling around Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan renting luxurious government-owned bungalows – one such question being the Ministers making the rental in their wives’ names – have still not been answered.
In case anyone missed it, let me repeat SDP’s call for an independent commission of Inquiry to look into the ins and outs of the matter. The more the PAP resists the move, the more questions it raises in the minds of Singaporeans.
Then, there is the expletive uttered by, of all people, the Speaker who unceremoniously cursed, albeit under his breath, at a fellow member of the House.
Mr Tan Chuan Jin has apologized for his language. But when the Speaker of Parliament displays such contempt for views he disagrees with, consideration should be given to his replacement.
Mr Tan’s deputy, Christopher de Souza, also found himself in a spot of bother. A practising lawyer, Mr de Souza was recently found guilty by the Law Society of assisting his client in suppressing evidence in a case he was conducting. Mr de Souza remains Deputy Speaker pending his appeal of the matter.
Then, there was the instance when Leader of the House Indranee Rajah she, in a fit of pique, raised a file she was holding and brought it down tempestuously during a Parliamentary session. This was in response to the conduct of an MP she considered worthy of rebuke. It was a most unedifying sight to behold.
“Mr Speaker,” she then thundered, “as Leader of the House, I would just like to remind members to conduct themselves in a parliamentary manner. And the tone in which we address one another is important. I would therefore ask Mr Leong to be mindful of that.”
Irony is dead.
Now, back to Dr Balakrishnan. Readers will remember that a couple of years ago, the Minister was caught on a hot mic calling an opposition MP “illiterate”. He later apologised.
These are just some recent instances of the behaviour of PAP leaders. Singapore’s political leadership is obviously not in a good place. Worse, the direction it is taking us is just as troubling.
When a country is ruled by one and the same party for nearly six decades – all this time without an effective opposition – is it any wonder that political decay begins to set in?