Singapore — Barely minutes into the first livestream of a Parliamentary session on Monday (Jan 4), a former Singapore diplomat criticized the move, calling it “a mistake”.
In a Facebook post on his own page, Bilahari Kausikan wrote that the move “is a mistake. It will undoubtedly be hailed as a step in the direction of ‘transparency’. But the real effect will not be genuine transparency”....
In his post, Mr Kausikan said that the immediate effect of having the sessions livestreamed “will be to promote playing to the gallery”.
“To think that playing to the gallery will be recognised as such by the general public, is to expect far too much of human nature. In the long run, it will change the political dynamic in such a way as to incentivise a certain sort of personality to enter politics and not the kind who ought to be a political leader”, he added.
The above is reported in theindependent.
Why is live streaming of Parliamentary session not 'genuine transparency'? According to Bilahari, the MPs would be playing to the gallery, meaning they would become actors and actresses in Parliament, trying to put up a fake picture of themselves? This is the assumption of Bilahari, that MPs, including ministers, would think playing to the gallery is more important than presenting what is real, what is the truth?
I think there is another way to look at this. The MPs and ministers would be more conscious and would want to put up their best front, to prove that they are good by being more thorough in their presentations. There would be no room to make mistakes or talk nonsense, as the public would be looking at them and judging them. Would not this for the better than to assume that they would fake to look good?
To simply make an assumption that MPs and ministers would play to the gallery is being too simplistic and a weak argument to claim that this would make Parliamentary session not genuine, not transparent.
Then what is genuine transparency? Have closed sessions like before then edit the parts that are good to be shown to the public? Speaking not in full view of the public would lead to genuine transparency?
I think putting the MPs and ministers under the spotlight is a much better way to ensure that they put on their best and behave in the best way they could and also would impose on them to be accurate and telling the truth.
What do you think?
2 comments:
The world is a stage and everyone of us are actors/actresses.
Bilahari Kausikan, the attention-seeker desperate for attention because he is now in cold storage, is himself an actor playing to the audience - the Power-wielders as well as the Power-bewilders.
By writing in his Facebook page to seek an audience is actually an act of play acting, with whatever hidden motive he may have.
He is not a man of wisdom. Neither is his opinions of any significance or importance to Singaporeans at large, as well as the Power-that-be.
His words should be treated as an old man who is too bored and lonely, getting senile by the day, sprouting nonsensical thoughts dreamed up during his toilet sessions, smelling of bad odor. Nothing else.
Just ignore this past-the-hill, grumpy, senile old man.
Who is this snake and what is he insinuating?
Post a Comment