Jason Lee
Watch the video of President Nathan’s press conference at the Istana below.
An Elected President can do more to protect our interests – regardless of whether he is an executive or non-executive president.
I became worried when I first heard and read the excerpts of President S R Nathan’s February 17 press conference which was held primarily for him to explain his stand on the Government’s request to dip into past reserves.
“It’s for the Government in power to determine what needs to be done. I’m not an Executive President … it’s for them to find solutions to our nation’s problems and come up with proposals,” the President said.
The confession that he is not an Executive President cannot be faulted by anyone. That was made clear by then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong in August 1999 when he rebutted several points raised by the late President Ong Teng Cheong during his press conference on July 16, 1999.
Yet, would it be deemed unreasonable if we were to expect an elected President – whose annual salary in 2007 is reportedly more than $3 million – to work together with the Government to tackle the nation’s problems, instead of merely giving his nod to the request to draw $4.9 billion from the reserves to meet these challenges?
Giving his approval to draw the past reserves in view of the “urgency” is one thing. It is, however, a separate issue altogether whether the President had given his approval because he genuinely believes that the Government’s initiatives, such as the Jobs Credit Scheme, would indeed help to save a significant number of jobs.
In short, the key question on the President’s mind ought to be: Would such a move to dip into the reserves be a worthy one?
We have no inkling of how the President views such initiatives since he was reported to have reiterated during the press conference that he was “not here to judge whether these schemes would ultimately work” – although he added that he would have rejected “scatter-brained” proposals.
At the same time, it is certainly not comforting to note that the Finance Minister submitted a formal proposal to the President only on January 20 – in view of the fact that Budget Day was two days away. Was the Government highly confident that the President would certainly agree to their request? If so, why is that the case? What if the President needed more time to make his decision? What if the President decided against such a request at this point in time?
Many issues have arisen from the President’s press conference. On the surface, the press conference seemed to have answered critics who had wondered or questioned how the President’s approval was obtained.
Perhaps, our journalists are more than happy with such a story angle (on the events leading to the President’s approval). But should we not probe further – and ask the President how he sees his ‘non-executive’ role, which he has held for the past decade? Should we not ask him more about his understanding of the various schemes, and how supportive he is of these schemes? Not to forget asking how confident he is that these schemes would succeed. After all, why would he grant approval for the spending of public monies on initiatives which he may not believe in – not withstanding the fact that these initiatives came from the ‘Executive’ Government? Hence, did the President suggest measures to finetune some of these initiatives? The word is ‘suggest’ or ‘recommend’ – since he has no executive powers.
Constitutionally, the President is empowered with veto powers over the spending of national reserves and monetary policies as well as over the appointments of key positions in the Civil Service, government companies and statutory boards. Personally, it would be more reassuring if my President acts to provide more ‘value’ for ordinary Singaporeans like myself – by utilizing more of his ‘powers’, however limited these may be.
Almost 10 years ago, the late President Ong Teng Cheong did Singaporeans and the nation a great service with his revelation of a list of problems he had faced during his 6-year term.
Until today, I still hear critics claiming that Mr Ong had raised those issues probably because the Government did not support his re-election bid. What these critics however fail to acknowledge or accept was the fact that Mr Ong had tested several issues during his six-year term. One such instance came in early 1995, when President Ong referred a constitutional question to the Special Tribunal under the new Article 100 – wherein the Tribunal was asked to consider whether the President could veto a bill to amend Article 5 (2A) and Article 22H of the Constitution.
Let us also not forget how Mr Ong had pushed for the publication of the ‘White Paper on the Determination and Safeguarding of the Protection of the reserves of the government’ which was eventually tabled in Parliament in July 1999.
Why did President Ong initiate these actions, even though he was not an ‘executive’ President?
The answer, in my humble opinion, can be found in one of his campaign speeches when he ran for presidency in August 1993. He said: “My loyalty is first and foremost, to the people of Singapore. It has always been so, and will always remain so.”
I was too young to vote in the 1993 Presidential Election, and of course, I had no opportunity to cast my ballot in the 1999 and 2005 elections. I am also pretty confident that I would not have the ‘opportunity’ to cast my ballot for my ‘desired’ president in the 2011 presidential election – which is just 30 months away.
Not because of the high possibility it could be another walkover, but more because of my personal philosophy that unless I am convinced the candidate possesses some of the late Mr Ong’s traits, I would rather cast a void vote.
Simply because I believe an ELECTED President can do more to protect our interests – regardless of whether he is an executive or non-executive president.
And oh, by the way, do any of our journalists even remember the ‘White Paper on the Determination and Safeguarding of the Protection of the Reserves of the Government’ that was tabled 10 years ago? Has it become a White Elephant instead?
Visit also: http://www.ongtengcheong.com/
———
Video of President Nathan’s press conference:
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Look at Nathan’s sour face, if you believe in “feng shui” , Our golden years have come to the end.
Good article, Jason.. :)
Just a note: The total losses so far is S$91 billion. (Temasek $58b, GIC $33b). This $91b is almost 5 times the Resilience Package, and about 18 times the amount of GST collected annually ($5b per year).
Now, they were saying they did not have enough money to help the poor and so had to raise the GST.
I wonder how many people believe them now.
As regards President Ong, a gentleman by all accounts, it was quite interesting to note that when President Nathan became president, all the questions that Prez Ong had suddenly became non-issues – President Nathan never raised a single issue which Prez Ong did.
When asked for approval to dig into the reserves, did the president ask the government fundamental questions such as how much reserves we have, and the impact on the reserves after the withdrawal ? Obviously not….
To many of us, this president does not look and act like one. He is just there to cut ribbons and look smart.
Many ppl arnd me said so too….look at his achievements….how many does he have??
He sometimes talk a little off track too.
In short, he does not “look” like a president.
Kevin
I vaguely remember sgp gdp around 150billion or there abouts.
assuming 91 billion lost, wow, still got something left. pheeeewww!
As WP MP Sylvia Lim asked in Parliament:
Does the president know how much we have in the reserves? How does the president approve the request if he does not know how much reserves we have?
Of course, the Finance Minister, and now the president himself, has ignored the question.
If the answer was yes, then the next question is how does he know when ex-prez Ong Teng Cheong was told it would take 52-man years for the govt to do the accounts?
If the answer is no, then how can the president approve? What if we had only $20 billion and the president approve the $20.5b Resilience Package? Wouldn’t that bankrupt the country?
All questions will never be answered cos no one dares to ask these hard questions.
I would prefer the President to fine tune the Job Credit Scheme to ensure it is not money lost from the Reserves, to line the pockets of all CEOs / Employers by the millions.
Tripartite arrangement –
Raise Govt cabinet salaries by millions – ok
Raise CEO salaries supported by Job credit scheme – ok
Raise Public assistance allowance by $30 – ok.
At lease, ensure companies apply for the JCS and watch the salaries of the CEOs of these MNC and GLC – eg SMRT – to ensure it does not line their pockets.
Is that so difficult to implement? If the CEO need pay of more than $500,000 then they do not need JCS.
Unless this is a done deal by Cabinet ministers to reward all CEOs of GLcs and MNCs for their years of support? This is the weakest point of this budget.
It was stated in the ST that President Nathan replied in the affirmative.
56 man years have passed?
Woah.
President Ong is someone that i really respect…something that alot of MIW failed to do.a real man who do things that is right rather then following the crowd or dancing to the tune of his master. As the SG of NTUC, he sanction a strike and i think it is for the benefit of the workers unlike LSS, even though it is met with repercussion.
Mr Ong is also a visionary and was also one of the first to push forward the building of our MRT system even though *please confirm for me* it was met with criticism at that time by others due to the high cost, however Mr Ong prove those doubters right.
There are so many stuff to tribute to Mr Ong. Personally i feel that if we take up all the current batch of MIW together and add up their personal traits, will they be equal to a Mr Ong? I doubt so
finally, speaking of non-executive president, so we are paying him more then Obama and he will just leave everything with the executive government? great! i guess that’s why so many people want this job;-p
Andrew Loh is shrewd :
“If the answer was yes, then the next question is how does he know when ex-prez Ong Teng Cheong was told it would take 52-man years for the govt to do the accounts?”
Bravo!
8) President know amount of Reserves? on February 18th, 2009 11.44 am
It was stated in the ST that President Nathan replied in the affirmative.
56 man years have passed?
Woah.
=============
maybe they overclocked the cpu’s and clustered computers to achieve progress ? i also very the impressib they fast fast wan. 52 years just like that!
5) humptinised
we don’t calculate our reserve by minus it from GDP. so don’t get your hope up
and it may be possible to get it done in such a short period, if the get a huge amount of people to work on it…56 man years is by 1 person done in 56 years…so if they put a very large group of people, and it is really large, then i dun see why not
Thanks Jason for this article. I now have a better understanding of our President’s role other than the obligatory appearances during Istana opening days, NDP, PAP festive dinners and minister’s sons/daughters wedding.
13) SZ on February 18th, 2009 12.03 pm
and it may be possible to get it done in such a short period, if the get a huge amount of people to work on it…56 man years is by 1 person done in 56 years…so if they put a very large group of people, and it is really large, then i dun see why not
====================
i concur with your view.
man-hour is nothing but hours of work ESTIMATED.
it then depends whether this is an order of magnitude estimation or something more accurate or precise.
10 man x 1 year effort each = 10 man-years.
50 man x 1 year effort each = 50 man-years.
assuming 50 persons employed to calc, it takes about 1 year.
and better start now, else can take even longer assuming this sort of thingie is directly proportional.
Nathan is just a puppet la, leave him alone, hes so old already. What can an old man at his age do? Against the mighty PAP? If I were Nathan I’d also stay down and collect $3 million each year by doing what PAP ask me to. Easy job rite. Why for go against them? No point in doing that, and better leave it to the opposition. After all, unless the old Lee passed away, there will be no changes to the existing political practices.
#15 ,
your idea is excellent as it can CREATE jobs for retrenched and fresh grad ACCOUNTING Professionals.
extrapolating, why not hire 400 accountants and 1.5 months contract to do the accounts?
400 accountants x 1.5 months work = 50 man-years effort
correction me if am wrong.
So, from the above derivations, it need not take long ?
How to safeguard Singapore’s reserves without any executive powers? Even if there is no executive powers, the President can still exert influence on the Cabinet’s executive role with regards to Budget 2009 by withholding the assent of the bill.
Yet he cannot do so as long as the Council of Presidential Advisor (CPA) decides to act against him. It is possible given that 2/3 of the CPA non-alternate members are appointed by the Prime Minister directly and indirectly.
Why? To prevent the President from having absolute power. Yet is it okay of the Prime Minister to hold absolute power?
Looks like Singapore is going to be like USA; elites & CEOs are super rich; ordinary people are super poor. Singapore elites are even richer than US elites.
Will all the ordinary people in Singapore be sucked dry by our political elites.
President Nathan’s last year salary was S$4.2 million. Why a 84 years old man needs so much money? Is he ordering a crystal jade coffin with perpetual air-conditioning system from India?
insightful piece.
cheers.
singaporeans must be held responsible collectively for their country.
Sometimes I wonder the people in power do not exercise moral authority? And why they are so afraid to go against the grain. And why they just roll over so easily just so they can keep intact their rice bowl and the staus quo.
This incident has once again demonstrated that our dear President Nathan has an entire agender of his own. Well, it is sad for us.
I will always remember our late president OTC for his push for transparency and accountability…. and I do not judge him by how well he was paid, but by his benevolent acts. People will remember these acts of goodwill forever. Your name will go into the good books of peoples hearts.
Dear President Nathan …Please do something ….anything … for christ sake.
why wolly?
we elected 80? odd talents of the ultimate type r?
I hope Jason runs for MP. He will not walk alone.
leakage of news to AFP on losses by GIC.
Is that a breach of secrecy by some parties? Should these people be charged under ISA for crimes committed against our national security?
It reminds me of Tharman flashing flash reports and being charged in court.
We should not allow AFP such numbers, and Asiaone blatantly printing such rubbish.
Too much pay result in unthinking, clutch mentality:- See no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil, just follow and don’t lead otherwise no national burial, no pay increment.
I would prefer the President to fine tune the Job Credit Scheme to ensure it is not money lost from the Reserves, to line the pockets of all CEOs / Employers by the millions. – line pockets (#7)
Corporate tax ought to be raised to pre-crisis levels as soon as this is over.
“It’s for the Government in power to determine what needs to be done. I’m not an Executive President … it’s for them to find solutions to our nation’s problems and come up with proposals,” the President said.
This statement alone speaks volume and it indeed implied the limited veto power that the post is being accorded to. It certainly pays to have your lips sealed. Why rock the boat that carries you?
“It’s for the Government in power to determine what needs to be done. I’m not an Executive President … it’s for them to find solutions to our nation’s problems and come up with proposals,” …oh coincidentally, I always utter this to my friends as well and guess what, I’m not paid $4.2M to say it !
people will only move when they have got nothing to lose.
With so much to lose, who is willing to move???
All these highly paid elites are just probably thinking abt the next paycheck which can finance their own generations to come. In a way, it’s like striking TOTO because they very well know that their next generation may not have such a life changing break.
Makes sense?
Commoners are just not the major stakeholders in governance anymore, the regression of singaporean politics can be viewed as a tragedy. Be it a minor setback, or a major one, is yet to be experienced fully.
Am I so bold to claim we might not even get to vote for our parliament in the near future? Just because we have ‘superior human resource managers’ to help us headhunt for ministers and officials, or so they claimed.
PAP’s contention has always been that it is important to pay high million-dollar salaries to secure top talents for our political leadership. The reasoning is that, if you don’t, these top talents will stay in the private sector, and refuse to join the Government.
Now, after many years of implementing that policy, empirical evidence seems to suggest that the opposite is becoming true. Because of the astronomical salaries paid, these top talents are more pre-occupied with maintaining their positions (and their salaries) than in exercising whatever talents they initially had. Doing their utmost for Singaporeans which may entail destabilizing the status quo is now in direct opposition to their priority of maintaining their wealth.
The glaring political paralysis that results from this conflicted state is enough to demolish the hypothesis of “top money for top talent”. It’s time for the PAP to re-examine old assumptions (or what the sceptical would call old deceptions).
We should select our politicians the same way we hire teachers – only people with passion, dedication and good character will do.
Better not ask too much questions…otherwise may not get state funeral.
See what happend to our beloved President Ong Teng Cheong.
34) smallvoice585
and that is just like the death spiral….they keep trying back the same old formula without thinking of external factor…what work once and create success has nw set the stage for failure
Compare Nathan to Obama.
Why does he need to use a flash card to give a speech?
Mr Ong Teng Cheong did what he felt was right for Singaporean. He will always has our deepest respect among the people. We miss such kind of leader in this difficut times.
26) david on February 18th, 2009 2.37 pm
Too much pay result in unthinking, clutch mentality:- See no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil, just follow and don’t lead otherwise no national burial, no pay increment.
===================
i beg to differ! you have missed the root of the problem.
you and me.
i fell asleep after the first minute..so monotone!
We live in a strange world. One which have not tested some people we elect under extreme conditions, and then honours these same people with exceeding recognition, power and monetary + asset benefits. (I am not asking for us to self inflict ourselves with adverse conditions, when they are not around). Then, only to realise that when they are put real tests (like now), they generate doubts on their capabilities one after another. I will look forward to someone to convince me that we have a robust system to select people to handle this island.
32) smallvoice585 on February 18th, 2009 5.32 pm
i am impressed by your rationale.
but i have a doubt.
leaders come up the policies, eg like million dollar salary (highest in the world).
its the people who give the mandate.
am keen to see how you would rationalise this.
look forward to hear from you.
added to clarify : i meant people give them the mandate to continue executing their policies. Is this correct saying? without the mandate, which policy can continue? is this correct? cheers.
A well-argued piece. I hope the writer sends the article to the mainstream media. Of course they wont publish it, but the editors should feel ashamed by the points raised !
Nice video ?
I hope the reporters asked how much reserves we had to begin with ?
We should not fret as Singapore is so rich to loss billions
Does anyone know if the money we lost is LEAKED out of the Singapore economy? I think we did not want that to happen as what our Minister had said sometime back
Its pretty though for Mr Nathan, he got to release the funds but his not in a position to question how we got here and how the funds are gonna save Singaporeans ??
#43,
but why ask now?
i mean, is it a logical question?
is it a question of public interest?
I mean, if so, wouldn’t 1 of our reporters all this few decades have asked already?
i mean, are they not the most unbiased reporters who are so professional and serve the public with news that is written so fairly and bombastically?
Forgive him..for he knows not what he has done..
He’s used to be told what to do…in ISD, in ST…so even in Presidency…so what’s new? Will a leopard change its spots?
The next time Ng Eng Hen asks if the Workers’ Party can bring down the price of oil, the WP should use President Nathan’s reply:
“It’s for the Government in power to determine what needs to be done. I’m not the elected government … it’s for them to find solutions to our nation’s problems and come up with proposals.”
Perfect.
Dear #40 Peng Jia Xiang,
In my opinion, there are 3 fundamental faults in our political process:
(1) Most PAP ministers and MPs are actually not cut out to be in politics. Most of them are ignorant about politics and what it entails. They are mostly technocrats and professionals who are invited to join the political leadership and they learn their politics only AFTER they are installed in their positions. The end result is that they think like super-civil servants and not like the politicians they are supposed to be. Instead of people with passion and feel for the people entering parliament, people who are successful in their careers are shoe-horned into politics and we just hope for the best. The process is really upside-down.
(2) The whole political culture has become concretized. The system is incapable to throwing up leaders who have really new ideas or fresh thinking. Despite the many General Elections, there is actually NO political renewal in Singapore for more than 40 years. What we are seeing now is the result of political stagnation and boredom.
(3) Singaporeans over the years are too caught up in money-making to get themselves a political education. So in the end, the ignorant are leading the ignorant, and the political process has imperceptibly transformed itself into an ADMINISTRATIVE process.
I really do not know how we can salvage our situation. Unless something “BIG” happens, we will probably carry on this way into the future.
wait smallvoice585, is it a typo or are you the same smallvice585?
what you are saying can be summarize as the death spiral and the only way big or small is change.
how many corporate giants, civilization has fallen due to the spiral?
I see no professionalism, bring in the wrong people for the wrong job, ridiculous. Those talents have better things to do than to dabble in politics (e.g. their own business), its just a TOTAL WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY.
No creativity, its just status quo here, we as commoners are expect to conform to standards that they expect of us – so what do government mean as standards?
Its not really about ignorance in my opinion, its more of apathy here, we already accepted PAP as the dominant party for years. In terms of Conflict theory, we are being lured into the hegemony trap, being made to worship political ‘STABILITY’ and ‘PREDICTABILITY’.
Then again the government can’t cover up every shady issues, and everybody can see the problems, but the real reason why we can’t respond effectively against the government is that we are also the cause of such problems, it takes two hands to clap. So unless some better alternative leadership comes into the picture, I do agree with smallvoice585 and I daresay our situation is as gloomy as it gets.
“My loyalty is first and foremost to the people of Singapore “.
This should also be the pledge of the 82 PAP MPs.
What can we expect from the President ?
It is clear to many of us his position and that of the PAP MPs is a complete farce.
The president was formerly the head of the ISD….a no brainer where his loyalty lies.
Also made easy when this president has been collecting $millions for 2 terms.
……a no brainer who put him there and who gave him the money.