For advertisement

Sample

10/13/2009

Low Thia Khiang wrong in LUP

According to Lim Yuin Chien, Press Secretary to the Minister for National Development, Low Thia Khiang was wrong to think that just because he was the MP he should lead the LUP programme. An adviser who is a grassroot leader appointed by the Govt is the rightful person to do so. The details of the all the reasons are in his letter in the ST forum today. Anyone has a different view, politically, constitutionally, administratively or whatever? Would the highly analytical and professional media experts be interested to do an in depth study on this issue by consulting more experts, including legal experts and explain the position from an disinterested angle? Somehow I got this feeling that all the eminent experts will not have any opinion on this issue. I can expect silence. The LUP is a govt programme and how and when a LUP should be launched to benefit the residents should be in accordance to some objective criteria. Whether the blocks of flats are in govt run constituencies or opposition constituencies should not be a factor in the formula for such a programme. The govt is for all citizens. The govt's fund belongs to the citizens, not someone's private savings. Should the criteria for LUP be transparent and made known publicly so that the people know when their flats are due for LUP? Should the priority of an LUP be influenced by lobbying, talking to ministers by MPs or grassroot leaders, or any other subjective factors? I think there must be a standard criteria and SOP in the ministry for such a programme and no amount of lobbying or differential access should be allowed for any precinct to jump queue or be left out of the programme. I may be too idealistic and naive to make such an observation.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

So, the stage has been set and the line has been drawn: LUP is a government programme using the people's money. Therefore cannot be used by any political party, whether PAP or Oppositions, for whatever purposes it deems fit.

Then why did the PAP used it as a carrot during the last two GEs? Isn't that a contradiction of what is now being said by Lim Yuin Chien?


(Remember, during election time the Parliament and the Govt are supposed to have been dissolved. There is then only a caretaker govt in place.)

redbean said...

another question that i was asking myself. if it is a govt project, should it not be handled by a govt employee? are the two advisers govt employees or appointees? whose payroll are they on?

Anonymous said...

Many government departments were privatised liow. No more people lah, therefore need volunteers for FOC.

Anonymous said...

Since they are not elected MPs they surely cannot be Government employees. They are true blue PAP paid appointees.

If they want to use warp logic to explain away their third world behavior, who can stop them? It is up to Singaporeans to see, evaluate and decide.

If after all this they still cannot see the light, well, they really deserve to be screwed, hanged upside down, pushed underwater and chopped to pieces.

To quote many a blogger - Singaporeans deserve the Government they voted for.

Anonymous said...

It is the Emperor or the King that sets the Laws in the Past(in history). Maybe the Local Regime has gone back to the old traditional practice.

Yes, Singaporeans have got the Ruler they voted for.

Dear Fellow Singaporeans: want to wake up or not?

patriot

Anonymous said...

Hey, ho say liao, I am a kuching kurat member of an insignificant RC in the land called the Little Red Dot.

Now I can go about and tell everyone I am part of the LKY or LHL Government. So, don't play play with me, yah.

I have been a member of the very First RC that was formed. And after being a member for more than 30 years, I don't even know or feel like I am part of the government.

If I am considered by the Government as part of the Government, then can I demand for a monthly salary with year-end bonuses like the Ministers and civil servants? Must consult a good lawyer. Shall I go and see Lawyer Davinda Singh for advice?

Anonymous said...

The gov can stop kidding us with their nonsense again.

Why did the gov only use PAP loser ?

Here's why ...

"“I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 1982, Petir"

http://wordpress.filmgrain.com/?p=461


The gov will always use their own pappy !@@

The words of old fart continue to haunt the gov forever !!!!

Anonymous said...

The old fart will haunt the history of singapore forever until his grave is exorcised with rotten eggs and snakes and rats live in it.