Elected MP versus rejected MP
Elected MP of Hougang, Png Eng Huat, will have to seek the support and approval from rejected MP, Desmond Choo, for the housing or upgrading programmes for Hougang residents. The former is elected by the ultimate authority of the country, the people, the real owner of the land. The latter is appointed by a political party that happens to be the Govt of the day.
The title of Desmond Choo is grassroot adviser. Is it a part of the govt? Is Desmond Choo an employee of the govt, earning a salary? Why is a grassroot adviser vested with so much authority over a people’s elected representative? Is this the right or correct way of how democracy should be practised?
In a democracy, it is always of the people, by the people and for the people. The Elected MP is of the people, by the people and working for the people. The rejected MP cannot be of the people and by the people. He is an appointee of the govt in a capacity that is neither an employee nor the govt. I am not very familiar with this thing called grassroot adviser. Why must an elected MP, the people’s representative who earns a right to sit in Parliament, have to seek the approval of a grassroot adviser whose authority lies in where?
What is a grassroot leader? An official or unofficial community leader of the people, by the people or appointed by the govt?
This I really cannot understand.