Debunking (72)

29 Nov 2019

Ms Sun Xueling
Blk 308B Punggol Walk
#01-364
Waterway Terraces 1
Singapore 822308

Dear Ms Sun,

Debunking

1. You spoke to me while I was about to register for your Meet-the-People Session (MPS) of 25 Nov 2019, which is also the date of my letter Rules, Character & Morals (72) handed to you. You would not bring up my problem to Parliament and gave reasons in the general. Here I reply to you in the particular.

2. First, officers from the government did not reply to the various mistakes made. I showed that in No Full Reply (78) of 5 Aug 19 where I posed the mistakes made next to the replies I received from the officers. I showed your petition writer documents in the letter where the officers went wrong.

To bring home just one issue: The senior assistant director reference to Section 15(15)(e) for disallowing refund was incorrect because it required an application to be made on the occurrence of events as listed in 2012 CPF Act. No such application was made.

3. Second, I do not see why the mistakes cannot be brought up in Parliament when these were not corrected over the years. When I reported mistakes made by officers, department heads did not respond to the mistakes but allowed the same group of officers to reply to my queries. Their replies were always as if no mistakes were made.

However what you said to me was the officers had replied, but I have refused to accept their replies. The officers would have to produce letters and emails written to me on each issue to prove that they had in fact replied to my queries. I have shown that they have not replied to my queries in No Full Reply (78).

For a recent example, after my email Request 3 (72) of 21 Oct 19, you requested HDB to provide background on Item 1 to 5 of the email. What was their reply? Their reply could decide whether reporting to Parliament is required.

4. In Item 1 of MP's Responsibilities (72), there is nothing to say the problem cannot be brought up in Parliament and everything to say it should.

Item 1a) states the three loyalties and “there is no doubt of the order in which they stand under any healthy manifestation of democracy”.

Item 1b) states the MP’s job involves listening to “complaints, reconciling opposing viewpoints, explaining party or government policy to citizens and citizens’ views to party and government, getting action out of the government on problems of constituents, and examining how the government uses or abuses the power it exercises on behalf of the people”.

Item 1c) states the integral role of parliament is to “check on the actions and policies of the Government” and “make the Government accountable for its actions and allows the public to listen to a spectrum of views and opinions to find out how decisions affecting them are made”.

It is the same in Item 4 of Rules, Character & Morals (72), the pronouncement by PM that the People’s Action Party (PAP) “must never, ever be afraid to do what is right for Singapore” and by DPM that the PAP does not hide from “difficult truths” and “As the party in power, it is our responsibility to ensure the integrity of the system in Singapore. We must, and have taken a clear stand on this matter of principle”.

5. MPs are afraid of officers taking offence by a report in Parliament.

I therefore made it a point to ask petition writers to write what I wanted to say to the MP before speaking to the MP, but most petition writers would not allow me to do so. On one occasion when a petition writer did, another petition writer took over later to question me why I asked the MP to give a reply.

6. I have only one written reply from you from the eight times that I wrote to you asking for the problem to be brought up in Parliament. This was the reply to my email Request 3 (72) in Item 3 that you did not follow through. I attended six of your MPS but were only able to speak to you three times. At this rate the problem may not be resolved.

Summaries of mistakes are Summing Up (72), Explanation (72), No Full Reply (78), Request 3 (72) and Rules, Character & Morals (72).

Item 9 in Summing Up (72), with reference to emails of 3 Mar 19, 14 Mar 19, 24 Mar 19 and 31 Mar 19, is long and detailed but Item 1d) in Rules, Character & Morals (72) is short.

Summaries of situations are Q & A (75), Resolution (72), No Fair Play (12) and MP’s Responsibilities (72). These are about governance.

A concept known as credulity defined in an extract in MP’s Responsibilities (72) describes the type of situation I am in.

7. The problem is a group of officers in Item 3. The solution is by way of Parliament in Item 4. The complaint is Item 6.

8. Please let me know, after this email and the letter handed to you, whether you could bring up the problem in Parliament.

Yours Sincerely,
hh

cc
Mr Lee Hsien Loong
Mr Heng Swee Keat
Mr Teo Chee Hean