- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,634
- Points
- 0
NSP chief should know that there is such a thing called 'designated donation'
I refer to NSP's secretary-general's response to Nicole Seah's fund-raising method (Link: Nicole Seah's fund raising).
I am particularly disturbed by his comment, "It would be technically tedious for us to differentiate between funding meant for the Marine Parade team if donations are made to the party's bank account. Besides, financial reporting for the party will be very complex if every team or individual candidate utilise the party's bank account for their fund-raising activities".
I am surprised that NSP's secretary-general does not know that there is such a thing called 'designated donation'. A designated donation is one which's use is stipulated by the donor at the time of the donation, where the donor express wish to designate the contribution to a specified use. Which means that in the case of Nicole Seah and the team that contested in Marine Parade, the donor could write out a cheque or give cash direct to NSP, but designate it to the expenses the team at Marine Parade incurred for campaigning in Marine Parade GRC.
People join political parties because they believe besides other things, that the party they join will help to protect their integrity or the public's perception of it. Even more should the party do to protect the individual, if they stood as a candidate on the party ticket.
For political parties, to not help its candidates protect their image citing 'technical tediousness and complexity', is pure let-down. People join political parties precisely because they need help in manoeuvring through technical tediousness and complexities of the electoral process.
I also think that NSP's chief has too quickly slammed the people who have questioned Nicole Seah's solicitation of donation as "slander". NSP should not shy away from scrutiny of the public; the same scrutiny they have asked the public to cast on PAP.
Although I am not trained in law, I do believe that it is perfectly alright for candidates from NSP to solicit funds to defray the cost of election expenses under their own names. But even if the whole process of fund-raising by the politicians in their own name is conducted in a totally transparent manner, there is still this issue of perception by the public.
Sometimes, it is this perception that becomes the hardest to manage. And in my opinion, NSP as a Party could have done more to support its members, especially its candidates from the last General Election.
http://www.raviphilemon.net/2011/05/nsp-chief-should-know-that-there-is.html
I refer to NSP's secretary-general's response to Nicole Seah's fund-raising method (Link: Nicole Seah's fund raising).
I am particularly disturbed by his comment, "It would be technically tedious for us to differentiate between funding meant for the Marine Parade team if donations are made to the party's bank account. Besides, financial reporting for the party will be very complex if every team or individual candidate utilise the party's bank account for their fund-raising activities".
I am surprised that NSP's secretary-general does not know that there is such a thing called 'designated donation'. A designated donation is one which's use is stipulated by the donor at the time of the donation, where the donor express wish to designate the contribution to a specified use. Which means that in the case of Nicole Seah and the team that contested in Marine Parade, the donor could write out a cheque or give cash direct to NSP, but designate it to the expenses the team at Marine Parade incurred for campaigning in Marine Parade GRC.
People join political parties because they believe besides other things, that the party they join will help to protect their integrity or the public's perception of it. Even more should the party do to protect the individual, if they stood as a candidate on the party ticket.
For political parties, to not help its candidates protect their image citing 'technical tediousness and complexity', is pure let-down. People join political parties precisely because they need help in manoeuvring through technical tediousness and complexities of the electoral process.
I also think that NSP's chief has too quickly slammed the people who have questioned Nicole Seah's solicitation of donation as "slander". NSP should not shy away from scrutiny of the public; the same scrutiny they have asked the public to cast on PAP.
Although I am not trained in law, I do believe that it is perfectly alright for candidates from NSP to solicit funds to defray the cost of election expenses under their own names. But even if the whole process of fund-raising by the politicians in their own name is conducted in a totally transparent manner, there is still this issue of perception by the public.
Sometimes, it is this perception that becomes the hardest to manage. And in my opinion, NSP as a Party could have done more to support its members, especially its candidates from the last General Election.
http://www.raviphilemon.net/2011/05/nsp-chief-should-know-that-there-is.html
Last edited:
