There are many views on the merits or demerits of the dismissal of Yaw Shin Leong. Some argue that politically it is unwise to risk a hard fought seat in Hougang only to deliver it to the enemy on a platter. A better game is to hold on to the seat, keep it warm and safe till the next GE. This is just another way to play the game. It would also be an option that gives the ruling party the moral high ground, to question the moral standards of the WP and the quality of their MPs. It would be an Achilles heel to be rubbed at the pleasure of the ruling party.
The spread of comments and criticism in the main media and social media is raising the temperature. The WP will be put on the defensive from now on till the next GE and would be ridiculed all over and over again. And they would look very sheepish if they just remain reticent, and looking very helpless.
By dismissing Yaw now, it will take the sting from the attack. They will have a temporary set back of losing a hill but could possibly fight to win it back. What the WP is looking at is further down the road. It is positioning itself as a morally upright party with integrity and respect to challenge the ruling party on high moral grounds. They have won the first battle with Chen Show Mao proving that money is not in their mind. This is a big victory so far.
Holding on to Yaw would greatly compromise their carefully guarded position of high moral and high ethics. In fact they could use this strong position to challenge the ruling party to maintain the same level of moral righteousness which they know would be a tough act to follow. From a defensive position, the WP is now on the attack. And the ball is now back in the PAP’s court. Who is more morally correct? Who can stand tall with heads held high when personal conduct is in question?
The critique will be muted and frustrated that the target for taking pot shots has been removed and nothing to hit at anymore. And the WP’s camp could be lining up targets instead.
Hougang is just a battle, but there is a war to be won in 2016.
2/16/2012
Yaw Shin Leong sacked
The WP has finally taken the unpleasant decision that everyone was waiting for in sacking Yaw Shin Leong from the party for personal indiscretion. Though these are still yet to be confirmed, the rumour mills have reached a point that silence is no longer acceptable and a decision has to be made.
It is a very painful political decision as the precious seat of Hougang is now to be contested again and in any election, the final outcome is uncertain. What is pertinent in this case is that the WP has set a standard of conduct for its members standing for election and to tell the people what the party stands for. It is a party that believes in transparency and accountability and exemplary conduct from its MPs. It expects its MPs to come clean and explain if they have committed any violations. On the part of the party, it does not see a need to explain the nitty details of what, when, where and how. If the MP does not account for his own wrongdoings, the party will dismiss the MP.
This is quite similar to the judicial process. A guilty person will be punished and paid for his crime. There is no requirement for the guilty party to say sorry and explain the sordid details of his wrongdoings. And there is no need for his associates to explain in detail how, when and where the wrongdoings started. However, this is not the final position of the WP and they may come out with the details that they knew.
In the case of the PAP, presumably they will likewise sack their MPs for any misconduct or wrongdoing. They also believe in transparency and accountability and a high moral standard from their MPs. The PAP expects more, as what its Chairman Khaw Boon Wan said, ‘…the Worker’s Party needs to come out clean and clear, as I said, what did the know, what did they know in recent days, and how long did they know such information? And if they knew earlier, why did they still field such a candidate? Because otherwise, you are actually misleading the voters.’
Both parties’ positions are now quite clear and both will be held accountable to the standards they claimed to uphold. And they will be challenged and ridicule for failing to live up to their high standards and principles of moral conduct. As for whether the WP would square up with the PAP’s standard of the party having to explain more, this is still unclear. What is clear is that if PAP MPs are found wanting, the PAP as a party will make an explanation, very close to the party’s position that sorry must also explain.
Let’s hope that no more MPs will be caught in the same shit and no party needs to make any explanation according to the standard defined by Boon Wan.
It is a very painful political decision as the precious seat of Hougang is now to be contested again and in any election, the final outcome is uncertain. What is pertinent in this case is that the WP has set a standard of conduct for its members standing for election and to tell the people what the party stands for. It is a party that believes in transparency and accountability and exemplary conduct from its MPs. It expects its MPs to come clean and explain if they have committed any violations. On the part of the party, it does not see a need to explain the nitty details of what, when, where and how. If the MP does not account for his own wrongdoings, the party will dismiss the MP.
This is quite similar to the judicial process. A guilty person will be punished and paid for his crime. There is no requirement for the guilty party to say sorry and explain the sordid details of his wrongdoings. And there is no need for his associates to explain in detail how, when and where the wrongdoings started. However, this is not the final position of the WP and they may come out with the details that they knew.
In the case of the PAP, presumably they will likewise sack their MPs for any misconduct or wrongdoing. They also believe in transparency and accountability and a high moral standard from their MPs. The PAP expects more, as what its Chairman Khaw Boon Wan said, ‘…the Worker’s Party needs to come out clean and clear, as I said, what did the know, what did they know in recent days, and how long did they know such information? And if they knew earlier, why did they still field such a candidate? Because otherwise, you are actually misleading the voters.’
Both parties’ positions are now quite clear and both will be held accountable to the standards they claimed to uphold. And they will be challenged and ridicule for failing to live up to their high standards and principles of moral conduct. As for whether the WP would square up with the PAP’s standard of the party having to explain more, this is still unclear. What is clear is that if PAP MPs are found wanting, the PAP as a party will make an explanation, very close to the party’s position that sorry must also explain.
Let’s hope that no more MPs will be caught in the same shit and no party needs to make any explanation according to the standard defined by Boon Wan.
2/15/2012
Scroobal the Deep Throat
If anyone can recall the Watergate story that made two journalists famous overnight, the character Deep Throat immediately comes into the picture. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were the two journalists that brought down President Nixon with their investigative journalism with inside stories provided by Deep Throat.
The narratives of Scroobal were compelling and absorbing reading. How much is truth and how much is fiction no one knows. But he came on as someone well informed of the workings of some inner circles of people in high places.
Scroobal has attained recognition and cult status overnight. This will be the most talk about and recognizable name in the world of paparazzi, social and main media. Everyone will be wondering who is this mysterious person. Is he the Deep Throat, the Woodward or the Bernstein?
The narratives of Scroobal were compelling and absorbing reading. How much is truth and how much is fiction no one knows. But he came on as someone well informed of the workings of some inner circles of people in high places.
Scroobal has attained recognition and cult status overnight. This will be the most talk about and recognizable name in the world of paparazzi, social and main media. Everyone will be wondering who is this mysterious person. Is he the Deep Throat, the Woodward or the Bernstein?
Check the interests for your CPF savings
I just checked my CPF statements and found the interest rates for my Retirement Account is 4% but that of my Medisave is 2%. I have just posted an email to CPF for an explanation. I believe it should also be 4% as well.
Please check your CPF statements.
Please check your CPF statements.
A religious Order for Sin City
The rage against infidelity and personal indiscretion in the media continues unabated. Everyone is taking potshots at the transgressors and demanding apologies or confession. Bill Clinton must be quietly telling himself how lucky he is to be living in the US. If he was our President, he could be stoned to death or attacked in public.
This thing about the high expectation for a high moral conduct could be a manifestation that in a paradise called Sin City, there indeed resided many sinless residents. Only the sinless could dare to demand such a high standard of moral behavior from others, to equal theirs.
And soon there could be a call for a higher standard of conduct from civil servants and political leaders. Do not be surprised that they could demand an annual declaration of fidelity and good conduct like the annual non indebtedness declaration. And all new candidates could be expected to sit through a moral test followed by an interview by a board of monks and priests before being accepted to the religious order. And of course the Prime Minister would then be elevated to the position of High Priest of Paradise. Anything less of a perfect personal conduct would not do.
Just a word of caution. When standing on a high pedestal to pass judgement on personal indiscretion, do not be personal. The power of the internet and the right to freedom of speech do not give anyone the right to personal attacks. Let’s restrain and restrict ourselves to policies and issues. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with policies or be disgusted by them. Every policy can be good and bad to different people. Stay clear from being personal even if in Sin City.
This thing about the high expectation for a high moral conduct could be a manifestation that in a paradise called Sin City, there indeed resided many sinless residents. Only the sinless could dare to demand such a high standard of moral behavior from others, to equal theirs.
And soon there could be a call for a higher standard of conduct from civil servants and political leaders. Do not be surprised that they could demand an annual declaration of fidelity and good conduct like the annual non indebtedness declaration. And all new candidates could be expected to sit through a moral test followed by an interview by a board of monks and priests before being accepted to the religious order. And of course the Prime Minister would then be elevated to the position of High Priest of Paradise. Anything less of a perfect personal conduct would not do.
Just a word of caution. When standing on a high pedestal to pass judgement on personal indiscretion, do not be personal. The power of the internet and the right to freedom of speech do not give anyone the right to personal attacks. Let’s restrain and restrict ourselves to policies and issues. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with policies or be disgusted by them. Every policy can be good and bad to different people. Stay clear from being personal even if in Sin City.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)