Aljunied MP Chen Show Mao has been barred by the People's Association from attending local events in his own constituency
By Cheryl Chan
Contributor
In the past few days, the internet space has been abuzz at news at the barring of Aljunied MP Chen Show Mao from attending a local event in his own constituency. Mr Chen, a first-term MP from the Workers’ Party, was part of a team of five MPs who defeated the incumbent People’s Action Party team helmed by former cabinet ministers George Yeo and Lim Hwee Hua in the May 2011 general election.
In a post on his Facebook page, Mr Chen revealed that he received an invitation to be the guest of honour at a Seventh Month dinner in his Paya Lebar ward. He revealed:
The organizers as in previous years had planned to hold the festivities on a hard court in the HDB estate, but this year were told by the Paya Lebar CCC (Citizens’ Consultative Committee under the People’s Association) that, as a condition for receiving CCC approval to use the venue, they may no longer invite their MP to the event. Future approvals will be withheld from errant organizers. The organizers were profusely apologetic. It pains me that they felt so embarrassed to pass me the news. Regrettably, this is not the first time it has happened since I was elected. See photos of an invitation and retraction from another distraught organizer who applied to use a different venue in the same ward.
The People’s Association, a statutory board funded by taxpayers’ money, has in the past claimed to be independent and non-partisan. However, many believe that the PA is an extension of the ruling PAP, not least because its chairman is Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. There have been various reports of PA resources being used for party political purposes in the past, with discriminatory practices that border on being petty.
For instance, supporters who turned up to attend a rally held by the opposition National Solidarity Party were not allowed to use the public toilets at a community centre during the general election campaign in May.
The fact that such acts are still being carried out at a time when PM Lee and other senior government figures have been calling for national reconciliation and unity smacks of sheer hypocrisy. Singapore is more divided than it has ever been at any other point in its post-independence history, with a once apolitical generation in serious danger of getting carried away with the same partisan bickering that has polarised countries such as Taiwan. However, what the PM ought to realise is that it is not the opposition, but rather, his own colleagues at the PA and PAP who are chiefly responsible for this widening political divide.
That opposition MPs are being stonewalled or blocked from carrying out their duties is, sadly, nothing new in Singapore. In the 1980s, MPs J B Jeyaretnam and Chiam See Tong had to build their own makeshift town council offices because they were not allowed to take over the premises that had been left behind by their defeated predecessors. Low Thia Khiang, the former MP of Hougang, had to conduct his meet-the-people sessions in void decks for 20 years.
The PA's banning of opposition MPs from local events casts doubts on the independence of Yam Ah Mee, its chief executive director
What is really a cause for concern is that the People’s Association seems to have subtly and surreptitiously involved itself in the Presidential Election as well.
Despite claims that the candidates are all meant to be independent and that the President has to be above politics, posters and banners of Dr Tony Tan – the candidate widely believed to be endorsed by the PAP – have been spotted on notice boards and railings owned by Residents’ Committees and Citizens’ Consultative Committees, all of which fall under the ambit of the PA.
Moreover, the Returning Officer for the election is Yam Ah Mee of “chicken dance” fame. Despite his efforts to come across as a kindly and adorably geeky uncle, he is the PA’s Chief Executive Director and reports directly to the PA Chairman, a.k.a. the Prime Minister.
If the powers-that-be in Singapore are serious about national reconciliation, it is time to take politics out of grassroots organisations. You can’t go around telling people to be “above politics” without practising what you preach. Any attempt to subliminally impose your dogmatic political paradigms on the electorate is likely to get ripped apart, with voters being more educated and more sophisticated than ever before.
–
The author is a political correspondent at The Satay Club. She works as an analyst in a leading multinational research firm.
President elected Dr Tony Tan has already spoken on this subject,we can watch the further development from here!
The Star
Saturday August 27, 2011
WP faces seventh month of turmoil
Insight Down South
Seah Chiang Nee
Three months after the opposition Workers Party won the Aljunied group constituency, it found itself facing a new regulatory obstacle of having to find premises for its public functions in its own grounds.
AMONG veteran journalists here, a subject long talked about has been: “If Singa-pore’s ruling party were beaten in an election, could the government takeover be smooth?”
The discussions date back to a generation ago when the population was about 2.5 million – or half what it is now. University degrees were then fewer, and the foreign influx had not yet taken place.
With the limited human resource concentrated on one party, reporters often asked a generation ago whether a non-People’s Action Party (PAP) government could govern effectively.
Of course, the PAP was adding fuel to the uncertainties.
In the 1970s and 1980s, many scholars gravitated towards serving the PAP or the civil service.
They filled top-level posts in the bureaucracy, the armed forces, the police and government-linked corporations.
That being the case, would these elites, who had been beholden to the PAP for so long, switch their loyalty to the new authority and implement its policies faithfully?
And if replacements were needed, would there be enough capable people – virtually in the thousands – who could quickly take over the complex tasks of running the whole country?
Only in few other countries had the governing party controlled so many human resources as Singapore did.
On loyalty, Singapore generally followed the Westminster’s system of government in which the civil service was subservient to the political leadership.
But in practice, a change-over will be something new here which may need some getting used to.
Singapore never had the experience of another ruling party other than the PAP.
These posers – which separate politics from the civil service and distinguish duties from party loyalties – took on new significance last week.
Two non-political statutory boards funded by taxpayers took unusual measures that were viewed – justifiably or not – as joining the political arena in favour of the PAP.
The controversy erupted three months after the opposition Workers Party (WP) won the Aljunied group constituency.
It suddenly found itself faced with a new regulatory obstacle of having to find premises for its public functions in its own grounds.
The Housing Development Board (HDB) inexplicably transferred 26 sites in the constituency to the People’s Association (PA), which then tried to stop the WP MP from attending a public religious function at one place.
(During the May campaigning, former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew warned that if the opposition won, the Aljunied voters would have the next five years to repent their decision.)
The PA runs 28 community centres with over 1,800 grassroots organisations and has more than 25,000 volunteer grassroots leaders spread all over the island.
Ironically, both HDB, which builds public housing, and the PA, which controls community centres and 25,000 grassroots leaders, are non-political statutory boards.
The PA disallowed the organiser of a seventh month religious festival the use of the land, if WP Member of Parliament Chen Sow Mao was invited.
It attributed the rejection to the “no politics allowed” clause in the land use. The PAP MP had been attending such functions without trouble for years.
When the opposition MP was “uninvited,” public anger grew, with people charging the government with using the public service to bully its elected rival.
The Workers Party accused the Housing Board of abusing its power as land owner.
“Public servants should stay out of politics,” was a common cry. The decision was rescinded.
Was it poor political judgment? Many seem to think so. A few, however, believe it was done deliberately to show the public the sort of ultra-constitutional powers the PAP has.
For some time, there had been speculation that the PAP might lose an election possibly in the next five to 10 years unless it could regain support.
The episode has shown how much the political landscape has changed.
If this were to have happened a generation ago, it would have hardly caused a stir.
Firstly, people were then more compliant. At any rate without the Internet, most would not have even heard of the row.
In the PAP’s defence, a party official said that the People’s Association was created mainly for a political purpose, so why all the excitement?
Since the seventh month fiasco, the PA has apparently gone further in promoting the cause of the ruling party.
According to online newspaper Temasek Review, a government critic, the PA has continued to regard the defeated PAP MPs as guests-of-honour in public functions in Aljunied – instead of the WP MPs.
“It is as though the election never took place,” said a cynical resident.
Another felt that resorting to using the civil service to battle the opposition showed weakness, not strength.
Years ago, a top party leader named three institutions as the PAP’s top levers of power – the vast reserves (worth hundreds of billions of dollars), security forces (army and police) and the mainstream media.
“As long as the party controls these levers, it will stay in power in Singapore,” he said. Since then, some things have changed.
The reserves have taken a knocking as a result of poor investment timing and global turmoil.
The influence of pro-government media here has been eroded by the New Media.
On security, the size of the citizens’ army (due to declining birthrate) is a growing concern, while the police force is hard pressed to cope with an over-populated beat.
An immediate victim of the PA saga is former DPM and Finance Minister Dr Tony Tan, a PAP-preferred candidate in the Presidential election being held today.
Dr Tan, considered as the front-runner, has reduced the damage to himself by quickly calling for an investigation to ensure the opposition party was not unfairly treated.
Still some of the anger is rubbing off on him.
It is a bit juvenile to suggest removing or disbanding the PA altogether.
Objectively speaking it still does alot of good for the community.
The Passion Card scheme is something that is widely used because it benefits people.
The PA needs to reform itself from within. It should not be disbanded or destroyed.
Getting rid of the PA as it is today, is a good thing.
The Chairmanship of the PA is by default the PM. This is in the PA act. And the ‘grassroot advisers’ nominated needs the approval of the chairman, giving effectively the control of the grassroots and the PA in the hand of whichever party is in power. Can we not see the danger? No party in power, will give up this control, and use them to it’s advantage.
Please correct me if I have misunderstood the PA Act.
The truth is out!
It was the WP who first started banning the non-political PA from organising grassroots activities in Hougang! They even resorted to such ungentlemanly practices are switching off the floodlights before the event ended, issuing fines and confiscating posters!
Now we know that Low Thia Khiang ran his Hougang Town Council like a dictator runs his personal fiefdom. No wonder he vacated Hougang and fled to Aljunied, and even a 35-year old newbie Yaw Shin Leong managed to poll more votes than the 20-year veteran party leader in Hougang.
I have long suspected that the WP was trying to use populism and PR spin to make themselves look like they were for the people, whereas they were really just trying to advance their sinister and selfish political agenda.
Now we know the truth about who has been politicising the grassroots activities all this while.
You really talk a lot of nonsense! It was the PAP who ran their business in the fashion that you mentioned. WP has made a point by point rebuttal – have you read it or are you simply blind. Your comments are mere whimpering without any logic. “The truth is out” !! Indeed it is, that’s why when there is opposition you get to see the pettiness of the government bodies behavior.
The WP’s account is unverified. There has been another statement released by Desmond Choo and Lim Hwee Hua rebutting Low Thia Khiang’s comments. This is escalating into an all-out war. What is evident is that one of the two sides is lying, as their accounts are completely at odds. I don’t know about you, but I know which side I prefer to trust.
Nani…Nani…
You trusting them does not make them truth.
How’s the job of being the Internet Brigade these day? Alot to do hoh? Do you go by any other nick in any other site? Poor you! Having to live with lying everyday.
The citizens of Singapore must be given the rights to enjoy the PA facilities. Why take the ”divide and rule” approach ?
Wake-up. PA is pro PAP. Just do a check on how many members in the CC, CCC, RC and NC are PAP m,embers. i am not surprised if there are more than 80%. This is something that is not told to the public. I am grassroots leader and was surprised to find out that majority the chairmen are PAP members. So it comes as no surprise that PA is playing politics. If an opposition is elected as a member of parliament for the constituency. he should be the advisor to the CCC, CC, RC and NC as he is the elected MP for the constituency.
PAP created the PA for its own agenda. So PAP does not play fair and PA plays to the tune of the PAP. This has not changed. Get rid of the PAP for things to change for the better
IMO, we can’t get rid of the PA without first voting out the PAP goverment.
As long as they are government, the PA will remain. And they will remain in the same form and structure.
Even if you have 49% of alternate MPs, the PA will continue snapping at their ankles in their constituencies.
But lets not think so far ahead, but strive now, to have a balance in parliament.
There shall be no denial that PA had not handled recent hoo-ha appropriately. Nonetheless, I do not see why can’t a ruling party’s members hold a adviser appointment in PA or GRO committees. If the non-ruling parties member(s) is/are interested to hold such appointment, he/she may send an application to the committee too. I would encourage opposition parties members to join PA though.
The main objective of PA and GROs is always create harmony bonding among residents likewise Kampong spirits and not political exposure or likewise.
I would say according to the PA Act., Prime Minister shall be the Chairman by default whereby he shall appoint the committee members. The committee is not completely form by ruling party members, there are members from private sectors and companies as well.
In my opinion, it is rational as government use this “tools” to cultivate harmony and unity but NOT as political purpose (by PA Act., they cannot). So far I do not see any activities held by PA consist partisanship.
Thomas037, you are really wet behind the ears.
Thomas037
Old Joe is right.
The 7th month organising committees who don’t want to get involved in this kind of politicking should just appoint Chen Show Mao as some kind of ‘adviser’. Then he can attend in his advisory capacity and not as MP. This is what the MIW have been doing all this while, so we have to be smart and beat them at their own game.
We can wake people who are sleeping but cannot wake someone who are pretending to be sleeping. That goes to the population as well. If after all this cowardly, despicable and morally corrupt actions the people do not realize what the ruling party has been doing, and then we will be doomed soon. People need to wake up, I have. This below the belt actions are not in the interest of the people but for party survival. It means that these people do not have the moral integrity and honestly to rule as they put themselves before the people. This episode really makes me wonder what’s happening in the higher places. I have lost believe in the ruling party’s leadership and integrity. It started appointment of family members and cronies in key positions and now they do what they want with impunity and no accountability. I just hope that they have not transferred our reserves like they did the administration of the venues.
Where is the wrongdoing? Why bring the ruling party into this? How does this matter concern the PAP?
The PA is a statutory board that is not part of the PAP. The staff of PA are all civil servants, not politicians. According to the PA guidelines, community and religious activities cannot be used for political purposes. This means that ALL MPs where PAP or WP are not invited. Cynthia Phua is not an MP, she is a grassroots adviser (which is a non-partisan public servant). This is a policy to ensure that partisan politics does not permeate into community and religious events. So, where is the wrongdoing that you allege? Why is Chen Show Mao bringing this up so close to the Presidential Election? Could it be that he is trying to score political points and swing some votes to the SDP-endorsed candidate?
Nani.
were you born yesterday or just pretending to be naive.
When all could comprehend whats happening on the ground,
you continue your bootlicking ways to please your master.
Frankly if you can’t contribute to more intelligent discourse,
you could just keep quiet iso making a fool of yourselves for the world to see
Not true – in PAP wards PAP MPs are appointed as grassroots advisors (e.g. Sitoh in Potong Pasir).
Nani…Nani…
You trying to mix it up to fool people again?
Mdm Cynthia Phua is a PAP member and a losing candidate in the last GE at Aljunied GRC. And you claim that she is a non-partsan public servant? Looking at press report of her acussing MP Chen for politicising this event tells us that she is herself, talking politics, still.
If PA practices is not to invite polititians at their events, then they should not appoint Mdm Cynthia Phua and all her colleauge in the PAP, including the Prime Minister, as ‘grassroot advisors’. And pls don’t try to tell me the Prime Minister is just a public servant. His is a political appointment.
Nani…Nani…being a member Internet Brigade must be tough, right? Especially having to lie, day in and day out.
The more they behave like a bunch of idiots, they will lose big in 2016.
The young educated voters are brave and will kick them out.
Do these educated idiots realise that the PA is funded by taxpayers money and not PAP.
Damn thick skinned, ” I dont know what to say”.
They never learn, every week there is an issue created by them.
“Fixing” the opposition has well and truly begun.
The PM is the Sec-gen of PAP as well as chairman of PA. One vicious circle of cronies and por lampars out to make the residents repent for voting WP.
Pingback: Daily SG: 23 Aug 2011 « The Singapore Daily
Nothing but a pack of lies. The PA does not allow ANY political parties to be invited to such events as they are religious, not political. No political activities are allowed to be mixed with religion including those of the PAP.
No MPs, PAP or opposition, are to be invited to such events. These are the guidelines. Only grassroots advisers may be invited as they are non political but community-based. The posts of MP and grassroots adviser are totally distinct and separate. At the moment, Chen Show Mao is the MP, but Cynthia Phua is the grassroots adviser. Please get your facts straight before criticising. Understand the guidelines and the reasons for them. Thanks.
Nani…Nani…seriously…
Who appointed the PAP MPs and losers to be the grassroot advisors?
Is it the PAP government? If it is, how is it that a grassroot org. funded by taxes, has it’s advisor selected by the government (PAP). Should not the grassroots advisors of the locality be selected by the locals?
Is it the PA and it’s branches of CCs CCCs and RCs? If it is so and historically MPs was appointed, then how can the PA profess to be non partisan, and cannot involve in it’s activities any political persons?
And so the PAP places its member as ‘grassroot advisors’ to give them all the exposure and ‘public service’ to ehance their profile for future election.
@Nani,
It is you who is now dishing out a pack of lies. Who might be the grassroots leader in any PAP held ward? It is the PAP MP. And you consider this non-partisan? That’s the biggest load of hogwash!
It is not the PAP government that appoints the grassroots advisers. It is the grassroots organisations themselves. The grassroots organisation belongs to the PA, which is a non-partisan statutory board run by an civil servant. Yam Ah Mee is not a member of the PAP. Get your facts straight before spouting gibberish like a rabid baboon.
Again, if you believe that, then you’ll believe anything I guess. That’s an even bigger load of rubbish. It appears everyone knows who the grassroots organization is governed by except you!
@Nani,
And speaking of “rabid baboons” you certainly qualify as one, given your repetitious nature of posts on this board!
Who is being repetitive? Every single day, I see you, Liz and a few others repeating the same old stuff about PAP hegemony, PAP ‘masters’, and PAP puppets. I have even been accused of working for the PAP just because I disagree with your unconstructive remarks. Instead of coming here with your conspiracy theories about proxies and puppets, why don’t you actually back up your accusations? Officially, the PAP does NOT appoint any grassroots advisers. According to law, the PA is a non-political statutory board. So, when you say “everyone knows who is REALLY behind the PA”, can you kindly provide some proof? If you can provide proof, even I will be convinced. However, you are interested only in gossip, conspiracy theories and assumptions that are not substantiated. You are insinuating that the PA is just a political tool of the PAP to ensure its own hegemony and dominance. You are also suggesting that the PA is out to make life difficult for opposition parties. It doesn’t matter whether you actually said it out or not, everyone can tell that you are hinting at this. Where is your proof? Why not just come clean and state your true intentions, rather than just making all these vague, unsubstantiated and unconstructive insinuations?
Let me help u get your facts right too –
Re. “Officially, the PAP does NOT appoint any grassroots advisers. It is the grassroots organisations themselves.”
Fact – PAP MPs are BY DEFAULT grassroots advisers. Who are they (grassroots/’small flies’) to appoint their MP as adviser! Neither PAP nor PA nor grassroots need to appoint their adviser. You got it? Opp MPs are by default NOT and CANNOT.
You may find this interesting:
Or this:
PAPMPs canvassing for votes in PA t-shirts, May 2011
Sorry, the last link (PAP MPs/candidates canvassing for votes) is here: http://theonlinecitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/188670_10150173497441383_14440041382_8352198_6479306_n.jpg
So Nani, it appears that others see things clearly as to the actual situation and circumstances on the ground with regards the political scene. The one exception is you….it beggars belief that someone as intelligent as you can fall for this. It’s either you are extremely naive or the social engineering and indoctrination all these years has really curbed your ability to think straight. What a pity…..
Nani…Nani…
Of course everyone knows who is behind the PA. It is in the public domain! Go look up the board of directors of the PA.
You would not admit it even if the evidences were right before your eyes. Becaz you are one of the Internet Brigade ‘sherrifing’ thru these ‘cowboy towns’. (was b4 called lunatic fringe)
Why stop there?
Its not the PAP govt that apoints the Labour chief who happens to be a PAP Minister. It’s the union members.
Its not LKY or anybody that selects LHL as party chief, its
the PAP cadres, members.
Its not the PAP’s fault to arrest the “Marxist Conspirators:
under ISA, its because they are really Marxist Conspirators.
You are really clutching straws to defend the indefensible.
Totally brainwashed
Nani…Nani…
Maybe my prior post was not clear enough for your ‘washed’ brain.
You said it is the PA and it is the grassroot that appoints the advisors.
Now, if the PA and it’s grassroots profess that they are non-partisan and do not allow polititians to attend their events. Then how can they appoint a PAP polititians, whether MPs or losers as their grassroot advisors?
They are circumavigating their own policy by trying to fool us with the so called ‘grassroot advisors’ appointments, knowing that this ‘grassroot advisors’ will attend all their events propagating their PAP ideas and entrenching them in the mind of the locals.
And so the PA, a tax funded gov. agency, is contradicting their own policy in a dubious manner.
Oh Nani,
Heard of the Tripartite system? The Ministry of Manpower, the Singapore National Federation of Employers and the National Trade Union Congress often boast that they work hand in hand to reduce unemployment. Tell all the CCs, CCCs and other RCs to stop flying the PAP flag and fly only our country’s flag. It may then be a beginning of non-partisan representation of citizens’ interests.The Chairman of the PA’s Management Board is Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, the Deputy Chairman is Mr Lim Swee Say, the members include MG (NS) Chan Chun Sing, Ms Grace Fu, Dr Janil Puthucheary and Mr Masagos Zulkifli. You mean the PA is an independent organization without political affiliations? If that is the case, why is Premier Lee, a busy leader is its management committee head? Care to use your head? Even after this you need more proof–go get your head checked.
We are not extremists–we don’t have any political memberships. We care for our country and want progress and success for our nation and its citizens. We want a level playing field– and that is why we participate in this discourse. Maybe the word “fair” does not exist in your dictionary. Cowboys and cowgals also believe in equality and democracy.
Oh God! Nani,
The PA does not allow ANY political parties to be invited to such events as they are religious, not political.
________________________________________________________
The PA is religious! Care to elaborate? Pray what are the temples, mosques and churches come under the PA’s membership? No MPs can be invited? Then why are they always gracing these events? You mean these ministers and MPs are just gatecrashers with too much time on their hands?
The immediate question that comes to one’s mind is whether all these subsequent actions by HDB/PA/CCCs is a follow-up of LKY’s threat warning the Aljunied voters that they will have to repent if they voted for the opposition ?
It seems their reputation is getting from bad to worse. At this rate they are going, they certainly are on their way to achieving the award for the most hated political party in Singapore. Maybe the people will even celebrate and rejoice when it comes to the day of reckoning for their founding father.
The only people rejoicing will be the native born Singaporeans who are not part of the elite. The new citizens (who will outnumber the native-borns in 4.5 years time and the elites) and the elites will just be looking for a new champion (the son?). In 15 yrs time (i.e. 3 election cycles), this champion will be in the form of a Prime Minister who is a new citizen.
They are all a big happy family with the surname PAP.
Is the PA CEO a politically neutral office?
Must the PA CEO declare his political affiliations?
Must a person resign his political party membership first, before becoming PA CEO?
Even town council managing contrators are political as well.
WP party chairwoman told singaporeans recently that the managing contractor engaged by george yeo & company for the old aljunied town council had refused to continue with the contract & just simply jump ship.
Fortunately,WP is able to overcome this situation & ensure that Aljunied GRC residents ae not affected an any way.
This also shows that PAP don’t care a shit about the residents & in fact tried to make sure that Aljunied GRC suffered for not voting PAP.
Everything can be used as political tools by the PAP.
Why blame PAP when WP was not ready to take over the GRC?…Aren’t WP prepared for the WINNING? Aren’t WP planned what to do after WINNING before GE?
Why not? Just tell me why not? Especially when they don’t take responsibility as public servants!
Disgraceful and deplorable conduct.
No wonder Pritam Singh called them a “morally reprehensible” party.
They are out to serve their own interests and have no regard or respect for others at all.
The actions of the PAP, PA, CCC, RC, CC are really and truly disgraceful. No wonder Singapore is so divided. They are dividing Singaporeans in order to serve their own interest. Using veiled threats such as banning honourable MP Chen Show Mao from attending events in his OWN ward. Why are PAP MP not banned from attending events then? Hello hello, please wake up, such tactics work in 1981 but it is now 2011.
We are no longer as daft as you think!