An issue of right and popular

Sin Boon Ann shared some of his thoughts and angst for being an MP and having to make decisions that border between right and popular in an article in Today paper. He quoted the issue of building rental flats in his ward and the conflicting demands of his constituents to want to keep things as they are and not wanting the negative aspects of rental flats in their midst. Sin Boon Ann’s right in this case is about doing something that is necessary as against something that is popular. The building of rental flats in an estate is unpopular but right in the context of meeting the needs of people who can only rent. It is like locating a funeral parlour or crematorium in an estate. They have to be located somewhere if there is a need for it. Not your estate, then someone’s estate. I don’t thing the conflict between doing something right and popular is that big a problem. Why doesn’t he discuss about doing something which is right to the govt but not right to the people? Something which the govt think is right but the people don’t think so, or worst, affecting the people’s right? One good example is the people’s money in the CPF. The govt may think that it is right to keep the people’s money under all kinds of excuses, minimum sum, CPF Life, Medisave etc etc. What about the people’s right to their money and how to use and when to use their money? Don’t the people have any right or say to their money? In this case there is the people’s right versus the govt’s right on what is the right thing to do. Would Sin Boon Ann or any MP want to share their concern, views or misgivings or conscience prick on this issue? Just because the govt think that this is right, the right thing to do, it does not mean that the people also think so. And this issue is much more serious than the siting of rental flats.


Wally Buffet said...

To be fair to Sin Boon Ann, as a back bencher, things happening within his constituency is something he can do something about and not national issues. National issues require unequivocal consensus and there's always the party whip.

In the case of the rental flats being built in his estate, the community has a vested interest in the matter nothwithstanding that the HDB is the landlord. People invested in the leasehold property because of the location mostly and suddenly one day, you find that a block of rental flat is being built right in front of yours, obstructing the view and feng shui not even mentioning that the usual "suspects" would be occupying those rental flats. Rental flats, which are heavily subsidized should be sited away from matured built up areas. If you want a cheap rental flat, it is right that you should walk further to the market or other amenities. Economic "laws" we are always conditioned to follow.

With such huge payments for a new HDB, medical expenses and medical insurance premiums, education etc. any talk about how one can have total control over his CPF balance is moot.

Anonymous said...

I thought the PAP is known for bragging that they care only in making decisions that are right, and not because they are popular.

Why the hell is Sin Boon Ann bothered about being unpopular, so long as they are right.

Another example of double talk.

Anonymous said...

To be whipped into conformity and compliance just don't sound right.

Anyone with leadership quality should have a working mind of his/her own. Leaders must be able to lead, be answerable and to ability to be independent, caring and dependable to his people.

So far, in our history of independence, all the PAP Parliamentarians love the whip more than the people.

Is it not so?


Anonymous said...

Oops; my apology!

One sentence of my above post should read 'Leaders must be able to lead, be aswerable and have the abilities to be independent, caring and dependable to his people'.

Please do pardon me.

Yours truly: patriot

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

In the present context when the opposition is practically non existence, our leaders should use this opportunity to show their leadership, take position that they feel strongly about, feel their conscience and champion the causes of the people.

They can be more compliant when there is a stronger opposition presence when taking sides are more important. At this point, they have the luxury of being able to score their own goals without overturning the apple cart.

Unfortunately they are not doing it. What's the point of rationalising about right and popular or right and wrong? Oops, the latter is not even worth considering.

Anonymous said...

Now, they must make it sound that they are always making difficult decisions to justify their hefty allowances. More increases in allowance are on the way and you can bet on it, so must make the job sound extremely difficult.

Funny, top leaders in power in other countries never seem to talk about difficulties in ruling despite their meagre remuneration. For example, China's Hu and Wen are beset with all kinds of natural disasters lately and are seen right in the middle of the disaster zone. Is their job easy? What about Thailand's present PM? Is his job easy too?

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The Chinese leaders are having it so much easier. The Chinese citizens are less fuzzy and less demanding.