Q & A of 2 (75)

15 Aug 2020

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

Dear Ms Sun,

Has The Situation Changed After GE 2020?

1. The total number of votes casted during the General Election of 10 Jul 2020 showed a swing against the incumbent although a supermajority of seats (83 out of 93) were retained, what do you make of it? The First Assistant Secretary-General of the PAP (People’s Action Party) said “What would investors and other countries think?" if 4 GRC (Group Representation Constituency) and 2 SMC (Single Member Constituency) that the WP (Workers’ Party) was contesting were lost. In contrast, the WP said the risk of an opposition wipeout was real and they needed physical presence on the ground to grow the party.

The atmosphere created by the various opposition parties were conducive for the swing of votes and
I felt a sense of relief when it was announced that the WP won a new GRC.

The WP retained their old constituencies of 1 GRC and 1 SMC for a total of 10 seats won. The losing candidates from the PSP (Progress Singapore Party) who secured the highest percentage votes in the constituency of West Coast GRC accepted 2 NCMP (Non-Constituency Member of Parliament) seats.

The law provides NCMP seats in Parliament if the number of elected opposition candidates falls short of the minimum number of 12 seats. NCMPs have the same voting rights as elected MPs.

2. Why do you think the citizenry continues to give the incumbent a big share of the votes? Are Singaporeans weaned? Most citizens have benefited from the government one way or another, but airing issues as the opposition did give citizens a chance to think about how they wanted to vote. The results showed the more credible a party from the opposition is, the more a person from the party is able to gather votes.

I think there is an undercurrent that the government allows people who are narrow-minded and blind by privilege. Where they give favour to family members, relatives and friends out of self interest, we have the beginning of corruption. Selflessness is the opposite of self interest.

The threat of Covid-19 did not cause a flight to safety as feared. No physical rally, face masks, safe-distancing and other precautions were taken during the election.

The political broadcasts, online rallies and social media were carried out under POFMA (Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act). The new legislation empowered ministers to order amendment of online posts that could harm public interest. However, during the election the power was handed over to civil servants who issued a number of correction notices.

The subject of fake news, which is the new legislation, has been in the news frequently. I have written to the Select Committee during the feedback phase as it relates to my case in Select Committee (27).

3. How bad is the Covid-19 crisis? What will it take? The first cluster was reported in Wuhan, China, on Dec 2019 and has since spread across the world.

A number of vaccines are undergoing trials and countries are in stages of containment.

The Singapore government has begun further easing of restrictions on Aug 2020. A total of $93 billion of which $52 billion is from the country's reserves has been allocated to revive the economy as of Feb 2020.

We begin to appreciate the people who provide essential services, frontline workers and jobs provided by small and medium enterprises.

Governments will have to provide for those affected.

4. When all the election results were out and the PAP announced that the leader of WP will be named Leader of the Opposition, what does it mean? In countries with similar systems of government, the Leader of Opposition draws a salary on top of an MP allowance. The party is provided with staff support and resources and it forms a shadow government to track and take over should the government resign.

It also means citizens may choose between parties instead of second-guessing between candidates. Quality new candidates fielded will be as good as established candidates in contesting constituencies.

5. Has anything changed since your last post Civic Responsibility (72) on 19 Mar 2020? Are you biased against the government? My case is based on evidence. There may be a change in attitude, but the wrongdoings committed were not corrected. It is not for want of trying.

6. Why bring up your problem time and again when it is being ignored? It is a matter of principle. The facts of the case as published in my blog and sent to MPs are sufficient for one to argue for or against. That such a discussion has not taken place showed that the problem has been kept covered. For example, Q & A (75) and Rules, Character and Morals (72) were letters handed to MPs. The two posts amongst others should have a reply.

7. You mentioned in Q & A (75) that officers caused you all sorts of trouble, did they stop? A number of examples this year and I pursued it through emails. One acknowledged trouble caused, one caused delay through several rounds of emails, one returned deductions from my bank account after many rounds of emails and one was on rebate not given after many rounds of emails even when it was substantiated with documents. These were from a bank, a trade union organisation, a transport company and an electricity retailer respectively. All were attempts to make trouble.

Of the electricity retailer, I submitted a complaint to EMA (Energy Market Authority). Although the rebate was set out in two documents and I pointed out the mistake made, the EMA officer did not address the issue.

8. Of an indirect reference, are you being treated as a second class citizen? Sometimes we may accept inequality because of some benefit. At other times, we accept inequality out of need. Sometimes there is unfairness because of group or self interest. At other times, the law or policy is stacked against the weak. My situation is unfair because of the self interest of a group of people in government.

9. What do you wish to achieve this time around? The responsibility is with the MPs. The MP in my constituency could count on state apparatus to hold the case down or she could resolve it once and for all. It could be that she is unable to resolve the problem that an opposition MP would not be constrained to do so. It could also be that the opposition do not have sufficient numbers or power to bring it up for resolution. It could be that officials are powerful and could not be held accountable at this time.

10. Will there come a time? It could happen suddenly because of another similar incident. It could be after a by-election or another general election when there is a change of candidate or party. It could be long after one is dead. It could be never.

11. The PM said at the online Fullerton Rally that Singaporeans should not undermine a system that has served them well, is all well? It did in the past, but for those who knew about my case the system cannot now be trusted unless the case is seen to have been resolved.

12. Rules of prudence and National Day Speeches, what are they and what is the relevance? The PM issues rules of prudence to MPs after a general election and he gives a speech to the nation each year after the national day parade.

Aristotle shows that prudence is the ability to find the truth in practical matters about things that are good and bad for human beings. They must figure out what to do by the strength of their reason. This is a vast area than the guidance provided by the law.

The national day speech is a rally, outlines issues of the years past and the years ahead and shows what the people are capable of. This year’s speech will be held in Parliament instead of an auditorium because of Covid-19. The opening of the 14th Parliament with the traditional President’s speech will be followed at a later date by a debate and the PM’s speech.

PM said that it will be a major speech and there are legislations to be passed urgently. Will the PM make changes to encourage diverse views and flow of ideas?

Freedom of speech is part of being a nation because it allows the government to know how its policies affect the people so that problems may be redressed. The very restricted freedom of speech and the circumstances of my case led the government to suppress the problem over three cycles of general election. Isn’t this how the case has been left unresolved?

Jurisprudence is both law and prudence. Shouldn’t the rule of law and the rule of prudence be applied to the case?

13. What do you hope for? The MP should brief and consult the PM of the problem and give a reply.

This letter is Q & A of 2 (75). In the letter I refer to Q & A (75), Rules, Character & Morals (72), Civic Responsibility (72) and Select Committee (27). All are in my blog.
Could you give a reply?

Yours Sincerely,
hh

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