• 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 Spin - Vivian humtum the WP and got a knockout blow

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
27,912
Points
113
Party political battle or question of integrity?

By Lydia Lim
The Straits Times
Friday, Jul 12, 2013

SINGAPORE - Minister Vivian Balakrishnan used the phrase "honourable man" twice in the House on Tuesday to describe not a People's Action Party (PAP) colleague but Workers' Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang.

He had far harsher words for WP chairman Sylvia Lim and her fellow Aljunied GRC MP Pritam Singh, who are also chairman and vice-chairman of Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council Council (AHPETC) respectively.

The Environment and Water Resources Minister criticised their conduct in a long drawn-out dispute among AHPETC, hawkers and the National Environment Agency (NEA), over the cleaning of food centres in Bedok North.

The hawkers involved said AHPETC property manager Tai Vie Shun demanded extra payment for the cleaning of the food centres' high areas, even though the NEA requires town councils to carry out and pay for such cleaning.

Ms Lim and Mr Singh's public denials of town council wrongdoing were "false and untruthful", Dr Balakrishnan charged on Tuesday, adding that the real issue was one of "integrity".

The exchange between the minister, Ms Lim and Mr Low took place during Question Time, thanks to a question filed by Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC).

It lasted just over half an hour, during which Mr Singh said not a word.

The exchange was significant in two ways.

First, it was a display of the PAP going on the attack. That was also in evidence on Monday when Minister for Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim took aim at "prominent bloggers" for contributing to confusion during the recent haze crisis.

Tuesday was also not the first time the WP came up against a PAP offensive in Parliament.

Back in May, National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan came down hard on AHPETC's ties to its managing agent and the fees it paid.

Yet the WP seemed decidedly unprepared on Tuesday, while the PAP side came all set for a robust exchange.

Dr Balakrishnan not only marshalled arguments but also produced a dossier of documentary evidence against AHPETC.

The Prime Minister, two Deputy Prime Ministers and the Law and Foreign Minister were also present, listening intently to the exchange.

Throughout, the WP remained on the defensive, lacking fresh arguments to rebut the PAP charges.

Ms Lim and Mr Low's main defence was that it was all a misunderstanding between the town council, hawkers and NEA over quarterly spring cleaning versus annual cleaning.

Town councils are required to clean food centres' high areas only during the latter.

Ms Lim stuck to her guns, saying "it is still the consistent position of our town council that Mr Tai at no time said that the hawkers had to pay extra to fulfil the town council's annual obligation to clean the high areas.

"At no time was this said, I don't think these documents show it either," she said, of the Government's dossier.

The minister, though, would have none of that. Whatever the case, the crux of the issue was that the WP's official had sought higher payments from hawkers, contrary to what the two MPs had asserted, he insisted.

Tuesday's exchange was also significant for the way Dr Balakrishnan attempted to divide and conquer - by casting Mr Low as an honourable politician who does right by those he represents, including hawkers; and contrasting that with the approach of Ms Lim and Mr Singh, whose integrity he called into question repeatedly.

He pressed his point, with some no-holds-barred rhetoric: "Politics is a contest for power. But you know, the key principle when you have power is - don't take advantage of people under your charge, and always be honest and upfront with your people... When a mistake is made, just come clean and say so. But don't cover up. That's why I have not let this go. Because it is not about cleanliness of the ceiling, it is about clean politics."

Turning to Mr Low, he added: "I appeal to you, because I know you to be an honourable man, I appeal to you, go back, do a thorough investigation of what's gone on and what's gone wrong in your town council and put it right."

Whether Mr Low takes up his suggestion remains to be seen. There was no word from him on this on Tuesday night. But given the WP's internal discipline, its leaders may well close ranks under fire from the PAP, which could also win it some sympathy. Personal attacks on opposition politicians have rarely gone down well with the Singaporean public.

How the public responds will also depend on whether they buy the minister's argument that at the crux of the whole sorry episode is a question of "clean politics" and integrity.

[email protected]
 
It lasted just over half an hour, during which Mr Singh said not a word.

PAP Press helping Ms Vivian to humtum PS. PAP wants WP to sue very badly.

WP seemed decidedly unprepared on Tuesday, while the PAP side came all set for a robust exchange.
Dr Balakrishnan not only marshalled arguments but also produced a dossier of documentary evidence against AHPETC.

Viewing the debate, I thought that SL did a formidable job rebutting the false allegations. And Ms Vivian refused to answer her questions. The PAP press reporter must be watching her version of the debate.

Remember, ministers are given preparation time to answer questions as questions have to be pre-submitted a few days before parliament sitting. Vivian can't even debate off the cuff. He kept harping on the same point and not answer the questions posed by SL. SL answered his questions.

The Prime Minister, two Deputy Prime Ministers and the Law and Foreign Minister were also present, listening intently to the exchange.

Ms Vivian wanted to land a good impression for the other fiascos he had made. Well, the truth is that this battle with WP is also another fiasco. A big one too.

Throughout, the WP remained on the defensive, lacking fresh arguments to rebut the PAP charges.
SL answered Ms Vivian's questions and posed questions back at him ...is that defensive? Isn't that a rebuttal?


The minister, though, would have none of that. Whatever the case, the crux of the issue was that the WP's official had sought higher payments from hawkers, contrary to what the two MPs had asserted, he insisted
.
And Ms Vivian played bodoh by ignoring the context ...those statements were made in the context of the discussions of SPRING cleaning, NOT ANNUAL cleaning.

Tuesday's exchange was also significant for the way Dr Balakrishnan attempted to divide and conquer
And Ms Vivian failed miserably.
 
Even prostitutes would have been embarassed by the manner of the Braddel Road brothel's reporting.
 
Let's assume for the moment that the WP screwed up on this one. The general impression is nevertheless that VB is making a mountain out of a molehill. If people go into situations in an antagonistic mode the outcome will be this kind of misunderstanding. It is obvious the NEA and head of the hawkers association are no friends of the WP. Why did the press blow up this issue and practically ignore AIMGATE which is a much bigger matter ? The WP is right not to take VBs bait. Settle and move on. This is not an integrity issue.
 
Let's assume for the moment that the WP screwed up on this one. The general impression is nevertheless that VB is making a mountain out of a molehill. If people go into situations in an antagonistic mode the outcome will be this kind of misunderstanding. It is obvious the NEA and head of the hawkers association are no friends of the WP. Why did the press blow up this issue and practically ignore AIMGATE which is a much bigger matter ? The WP is right not to take VBs bait. Settle and move on. This is not an integrity issue.
ya, man! ...

hawkers oni interested dat prob is solved quikly so dat dey can continue 2 make a living ...

whereas dat yog-overspending burger is oni interested in i-win-u-lose ... he has totally missed ze main issue ... typical useless sinkie mentality ...

tis oso shows dat dat yog-overspending burger cant c big peekture but oni focus on wanting 2 win petty n peripheral quarrels ... juz like a petty sinkie woman ...
 
.............

it is obvious the white scums and braddell road brothel are deliberately leaving out lackey ngkk and the hawker association roles, lumped every1 together as "hawkers" to implicate the individual hawkers who are the ones that suffered the most

wp should have pointed this out.
 
Lets say WP is the guilty one in this case. What is the cost? A few K maybe. Dont talk about honesty & integrity shit. How much did YOG budget wasted using public money?
So which incident has more significance?
 
Don't talk cock about honourable man here

- does an honourable man tell the poor off if he want to eat in restaurant?
- does an honourable man overspends 200+ million dollars then avoid acounting for it
- does an honorable man hid behind the hawker centre issue and mismanage the dengue mosquito crisis?

Honourable my balls VB. Yes your father is so proud of you betraying your faith joining the devil. May the devil bless you with more millions.
 
Honourable my balls VB. Yes your father is so proud of you betraying your faith joining the devil. May the devil bless you with more millions.

Aint that the truth.
Ive worked with many local bosses before. The only blot & regret in my life is working for an indian. I rather get bitten by a cobra & die than to work for one now.
Btw, your avatar is brilliant. Where can i find one of those?
 
[video=youtube;pVEeLn8W9GU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVEeLn8W9GU[/video]
 
[video=youtube;pVEeLn8W9GU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVEeLn8W9GU[/video]

Vivian, this picture is for you. :oIo:

KLJW.jpg
 
The public thinks VB should divert his energy into fighting dengue than to waste time politicking over some issue that had already been resolved.
 
What kind of parliament debate this minister did?
Never answer SL question, but focus only on one point... "Asked for payment or not?"... which was answered by SL at least 3 times over 36 minutes period.

Very foolish and petty one.
 
The public thinks VB should divert his energy into fighting dengue than to waste time politicking over some issue that had already been resolved.

The public thinks Vivian should have been fired by pinky eons ago after his how much do you want and YOG fuckups.
 
Back
Top