• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

PAP Responds to White Paper

cheekenpie

Alfrescian
Loyal
Now its become Singapore Vs Amsterdam ... score now is 1-1

Government reply is here:http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/pmo/press_release/P-20091111-1

Some highlights:

In 1996, Dr Chee and some of his SDP colleagues made written and oral representations to a Parliamentary Select Committee with fabricated data. The claims made were startling and untrue, like a claim that the Government’s share of total health expenditure had fallen from 40% in 1970 to just 5% in 1990. In November 1996, Dr Chee and his three other SDP colleagues were charged by the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges for “deliberately falsifying data and misleading the public”. During the Committee of Privileges hearings, they continued to evade and prevaricate. Dr Chee and his colleagues were found to have been in Contempt of Parliament and were fined.

61. Mr Chiam See Tong is a clear example of how even opposition politicians value their reputation. When he first stood for election, two PAP ministers made defamatory remarks about Mr Chiam’s law firm and his abilities as a lawyer. Mr Chiam threatened to sue, and after taking legal advice, the two ministers paid damages. Mr Chiam and Mr Low Thia Khiang (the leader of the Workers’ Party) have between them served as MPs for 42 years in Parliament. Neither has ever been sued. They continue to campaign freely, speak freely, both in Parliament and outside it.

72. The Paper has also alleged that there is a violation of judicial independence and impartiality insofar as the administration of matters bearing directly on the exercise of its judicial function is within the power of the executive through the Attorney-General [emphasis added]. The Attorney-General’s Chambers is an organ of the State. It is independent of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of Government. It is headed by the Attorney-General, who is neither a Minister nor a parliamentarian nor a member of the governing party. The independence of the Attorney-General is constitutionally protected. As the Public Prosecutor, the Attorney-General’s duty is to uphold the Rule of Law and to safeguard the public interest.
 

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
middle-finger-vibe.jpg
 
Top