Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TOC
- Thread starter RonRon
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
Aiyoh, the three m&ds not dealing with facts meh?
There must be an misunderstanding - these are PAP MPs dah, not WP or SDP deh.
Aiyoh, the three m&ds not dealing with facts meh?
There must be an misunderstanding - these are PAP MPs dah, not WP or SDP deh.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,634
- Points
- 0
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
SINGAPORE: Member of Parliament (MP) for Ang Mo Kio GRC Inderjit Singh said he is disappointed with the comments of fellow MP Seng Han Thong on Indian and Malay MRT staff, but is assured that he is not racist.
He said in his 17 years working with Mr Seng, he has never sensed any racism in what he says and does.
Mr Inderjit said he has worked closely with Mr Seng, not just as a fellow MP, but also as members of the same GRC team in Ang Mo Kio.
He said he drew from experience that his colleague is not racist.
Mr Inderjit shared his thoughts on Facebook on Saturday (24 Dec), in response to a netizen who asked for his views on the outcry over comments by Mr Seng in a TV programme, BlogTV.
In the Channel NewsAsia programme telecast on Monday, Mr Seng had said: "I noticed that the PR mentioned that some of the staff, because they are Malays, they are Indians, they can't converse in English well enough."
His comment drew ire from netizens, who perceived it as suggesting as SMRT staff failed to communicate with commuters during the two massive service disruptions last week because of their ethnicity.
Mr Inderjit agreed that Mr Seng's comments were "uncalled for" and are "not fair to the minority races."
He said even if Mr Seng was stating what he had heard, as a public figure he should have been more discerning and mindful of the multi-racial fabric of Singapore society.
In an interview on Saturday afternoon with Channel NewsAsia, Mr Inderjit said the issue should not deter MPs from making off-the-cuff remarks.
"We should just be conscious of what we are saying and try to say what we feel without fear. I don't think MPs will be deterred, but I think all of us will be sensitive to issues that have been raised by the public and so we'll try our best," he said.
Mr Seng had apologised on his Facebook page, saying: "I made a regrettable mistake in my language, which may be misconstrued as me saying that people speak bad English because of their ethnicity."
He explained that the remark was made in the context of a larger discussion about how to improve the current problems with the mass rapid transport system.
-CNA/ac
SINGAPORE: Member of Parliament (MP) for Ang Mo Kio GRC Inderjit Singh said he is disappointed with the comments of fellow MP Seng Han Thong on Indian and Malay MRT staff, but is assured that he is not racist.
He said in his 17 years working with Mr Seng, he has never sensed any racism in what he says and does.
Mr Inderjit said he has worked closely with Mr Seng, not just as a fellow MP, but also as members of the same GRC team in Ang Mo Kio.
He said he drew from experience that his colleague is not racist.
Mr Inderjit shared his thoughts on Facebook on Saturday (24 Dec), in response to a netizen who asked for his views on the outcry over comments by Mr Seng in a TV programme, BlogTV.
In the Channel NewsAsia programme telecast on Monday, Mr Seng had said: "I noticed that the PR mentioned that some of the staff, because they are Malays, they are Indians, they can't converse in English well enough."
His comment drew ire from netizens, who perceived it as suggesting as SMRT staff failed to communicate with commuters during the two massive service disruptions last week because of their ethnicity.
Mr Inderjit agreed that Mr Seng's comments were "uncalled for" and are "not fair to the minority races."
He said even if Mr Seng was stating what he had heard, as a public figure he should have been more discerning and mindful of the multi-racial fabric of Singapore society.
In an interview on Saturday afternoon with Channel NewsAsia, Mr Inderjit said the issue should not deter MPs from making off-the-cuff remarks.
"We should just be conscious of what we are saying and try to say what we feel without fear. I don't think MPs will be deterred, but I think all of us will be sensitive to issues that have been raised by the public and so we'll try our best," he said.
Mr Seng had apologised on his Facebook page, saying: "I made a regrettable mistake in my language, which may be misconstrued as me saying that people speak bad English because of their ethnicity."
He explained that the remark was made in the context of a larger discussion about how to improve the current problems with the mass rapid transport system.
-CNA/ac
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,634
- Points
- 0
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
K Shanmugam Sc:
“There are 3 points that I will make:
1. What did SHT actually say ?
2. Was the TOC article accurate ?
3. Is SHT a racist ?
What did SHT say ?
1. There has been a lot of response, to what people believe SHT said. That response is entirely understandable, if indeed he had said what has been attributed to him. Unfortunately, what has happened is that a significant part of what has been attributed to SHT is false.
2. SHT heard over the radio what an officer from MRT had said – essentially suggesting that the poor language skills of Chinese, Indian and Malay drivers who worked with SMRT was part of the problem, in the inadequacy of the response. SHT disagreed with this comment. On TV he referred to this comment and in essence made the point that the language skills of workers should not be blamed and that broken English can be accepted (meaning that broken English would have sufficed for effective communication). The real problem, according to SHT, was that the drivers had not been given adequate training. The problem lay with management and not the workers.
3. This is what he said. The meaning is clear enough. The key point is that SHT referred to the MRT officer’s statement in order to rebut it, to say that he, SHT, disagreed with it.
4. The mistake SHT made was that he misquoted the MRT officer and said that the officer had referred to Indian and Malay drivers when in fact the officer had referred to drivers of all three races. SHT could also have explicitly disagreed with the view (which he thought that the MRT officer had expressed) that the Indian and Malay drivers had poorer language skills. SHT has since apologized for the error he made.
Was the TOC article accurate ?
5. The TOC headlined its article : “ MP Seng Han Thong : SMRT’s unpreparedness also due to Malay and Indian staffs English language inefficiency”
6. This is quite false. It attributes to SHT the very opposite of what SHT had said. The article does not say that SHT was quoting what an MRT officer had said, and the article does not say that SHT quoted it in order to disagree with it. Instead it says ( both in the headlines and in the text) that he in fact said the above.
Is SHT a racist ?
7. My colleagues and I have known SHT for many years. He is not a racist. He works hard on the ground and helps everyone. It is quite unfair to label him as a racist. If he had indeed made the comments which have been attributed to him, then I would have come out to say that that is completely unacceptable.
Conclusion
I hope we can deal with this matter on the basis of facts and not on the basis of a false statement which has been quite wrongly attributed to SHT.”
K Shanmugam Sc:
“There are 3 points that I will make:
1. What did SHT actually say ?
2. Was the TOC article accurate ?
3. Is SHT a racist ?
What did SHT say ?
1. There has been a lot of response, to what people believe SHT said. That response is entirely understandable, if indeed he had said what has been attributed to him. Unfortunately, what has happened is that a significant part of what has been attributed to SHT is false.
2. SHT heard over the radio what an officer from MRT had said – essentially suggesting that the poor language skills of Chinese, Indian and Malay drivers who worked with SMRT was part of the problem, in the inadequacy of the response. SHT disagreed with this comment. On TV he referred to this comment and in essence made the point that the language skills of workers should not be blamed and that broken English can be accepted (meaning that broken English would have sufficed for effective communication). The real problem, according to SHT, was that the drivers had not been given adequate training. The problem lay with management and not the workers.
3. This is what he said. The meaning is clear enough. The key point is that SHT referred to the MRT officer’s statement in order to rebut it, to say that he, SHT, disagreed with it.
4. The mistake SHT made was that he misquoted the MRT officer and said that the officer had referred to Indian and Malay drivers when in fact the officer had referred to drivers of all three races. SHT could also have explicitly disagreed with the view (which he thought that the MRT officer had expressed) that the Indian and Malay drivers had poorer language skills. SHT has since apologized for the error he made.
Was the TOC article accurate ?
5. The TOC headlined its article : “ MP Seng Han Thong : SMRT’s unpreparedness also due to Malay and Indian staffs English language inefficiency”
6. This is quite false. It attributes to SHT the very opposite of what SHT had said. The article does not say that SHT was quoting what an MRT officer had said, and the article does not say that SHT quoted it in order to disagree with it. Instead it says ( both in the headlines and in the text) that he in fact said the above.
Is SHT a racist ?
7. My colleagues and I have known SHT for many years. He is not a racist. He works hard on the ground and helps everyone. It is quite unfair to label him as a racist. If he had indeed made the comments which have been attributed to him, then I would have come out to say that that is completely unacceptable.
Conclusion
I hope we can deal with this matter on the basis of facts and not on the basis of a false statement which has been quite wrongly attributed to SHT.”
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
It is very telling why SHT never thought the Chinese had any problems and only thought that the problem was limited to Malays and Indians, even if he was recalling faultily what the SMRT spokesman had said.
To me this is symptomatic of a kind of Pavlovian reflex conditioned by years of being close to the Old man and his stereotyping over the last 50 years. Personally, I think that the Malays and Indians may have had academic problems in school, but I have never really thought that they spoke English worse than the Chinese. Look at Chinese MPs like Teo Ho Pin, Seng HT, Lim Swee Say, Yeo Guat Kwang and compare them with Halimah, Zainal Abidin, Zaqy and their Indian counterparts. Who speaks better in English and gets understood better?
It is very telling why SHT never thought the Chinese had any problems and only thought that the problem was limited to Malays and Indians, even if he was recalling faultily what the SMRT spokesman had said.
To me this is symptomatic of a kind of Pavlovian reflex conditioned by years of being close to the Old man and his stereotyping over the last 50 years. Personally, I think that the Malays and Indians may have had academic problems in school, but I have never really thought that they spoke English worse than the Chinese. Look at Chinese MPs like Teo Ho Pin, Seng HT, Lim Swee Say, Yeo Guat Kwang and compare them with Halimah, Zainal Abidin, Zaqy and their Indian counterparts. Who speaks better in English and gets understood better?
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 90,778
- Points
- 113
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
Don't forget ex mps like Yu-Foo and the rhyming twins ang mong seng and ong ah heng.
What SengHT and who he was supposed to be quoting said is actually hogwash. From my personal experience, the reverse from what they were saying is generally the case.
Don't forget ex mps like Yu-Foo and the rhyming twins ang mong seng and ong ah heng.
What SengHT and who he was supposed to be quoting said is actually hogwash. From my personal experience, the reverse from what they were saying is generally the case.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2010
- Messages
- 3,985
- Points
- 0
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
Well.....how about an interview(spoof) of Miss Reese Low(lol what a name) by the Noose. It is a fair assessment of how Singaporeans speak and their lack of communication skills. This is the reality such as what sometimes one comes across here in SBF.
Well.....how about an interview(spoof) of Miss Reese Low(lol what a name) by the Noose. It is a fair assessment of how Singaporeans speak and their lack of communication skills. This is the reality such as what sometimes one comes across here in SBF.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 18,719
- Points
- 0
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
The way I read it, SHT is retained as MP under AMK GRC because he'd be most likely to lose YCK SMC after the punch up and burn up incidents. He's retained because PAP doesn't want anyone to think that they can kick out any MP they don't like by violence.
PAP doesn't give in to violence. That image and message must be maintained and that saved SHT's MP seat. SHT knows that too, that this would be his last term before being retrenched quietly later. That's why he become so audaciously vocal since the end is nigh anyway. Inderjit knows that too, that's why he's trying to score even more brownie points by being even more vocal against one of his own GRC team member.
The way I read it, SHT is retained as MP under AMK GRC because he'd be most likely to lose YCK SMC after the punch up and burn up incidents. He's retained because PAP doesn't want anyone to think that they can kick out any MP they don't like by violence.
PAP doesn't give in to violence. That image and message must be maintained and that saved SHT's MP seat. SHT knows that too, that this would be his last term before being retrenched quietly later. That's why he become so audaciously vocal since the end is nigh anyway. Inderjit knows that too, that's why he's trying to score even more brownie points by being even more vocal against one of his own GRC team member.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 37,364
- Points
- 113
Re: Law Minister said the 3 PAP m&ds MP should deal the SHT's issue with facts not TO
Base on what Shenanigan's said, oops! I mean Shanmugam, SHT did not offend anybody, TOC & the rest out there, are liars. Why doesn't SHT rubbish TOC & the rest out there, instead of apologizing or even writing on social media? As the saying goes, "there is no smoke, without a fire"? Shouldn't Shanmugam on behalf of SHT issue a warning to TOC & make them apologize & threathen to sue?
If Honour is what we are talking about?
Base on what Shenanigan's said, oops! I mean Shanmugam, SHT did not offend anybody, TOC & the rest out there, are liars. Why doesn't SHT rubbish TOC & the rest out there, instead of apologizing or even writing on social media? As the saying goes, "there is no smoke, without a fire"? Shouldn't Shanmugam on behalf of SHT issue a warning to TOC & make them apologize & threathen to sue?
If Honour is what we are talking about?
Last edited:
Similar threads
