Andrew Loh
The question of how the President approved the Government’s request to use the reserves was brought up in Parliament by Mr Low Thia Khiang, secretary-general of the Workers’ Party. Charging that the President’s second key “unlocks automatically” when the Government asks for it to be unlocked, Mr Low and other MPs asked for more transparency in the deliberations of the President and the Council of Presidential Advisers.
However, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, in reply, explained the principles for seeking the President’s approval instead:
First, a government should only draw on past reserves in very exceptional situations, for example, when external events or crises pose a threat to Singapore’s economy or society. Second, the measures to be funded should be of a temporary nature.
The question of what steps the President took, or the process and reasons by which the President approved the Government’s request to use the reserves is left unanswered.
Mr Tharman instead explained that “this is a system that relies on trust in the individuals who are in charge, including those appointed to the CPA and the Elected President.”
He further asked:
Do you trust them? Have they made decisions wisely? Has the government been acting responsibly?
The question thus remains: What were the President’s reasons for approving the reserves, and what process did he go through to approve it?
Below is an excerpt from the report by Channel NewsAsia:
“The concern arises over the way the 2—key system operates. It seems the 2—key system operates simultaneously at the same time. When the government key says “unlock”, the other key unlocks automatically,” said Low Thia Khiang, MP for Hougang.
Mr Tharman said: “This is not a ’wayang’ (show)… The point is: the President, advised by the CPA (Council of Presidential Advisers), makes an independent and careful judgement on the government’s case.”
MP for Tampines GRC, Irene Ng, said: “Can I ask the minister whether the process can be refined and improved further so that in future we can make the process more transparent — that the public knows that the institution of the President is one that is strong, and that it can exercise an independent turn of the key.”
Inderjit Singh, MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, said: “What’s missing is the process that the President took after he got briefed by the government. If we could get a sense of what they discussed and what process they went through to decide, then this may clear many of these questions.”
But Mr Tharman said: “I’m not sure why it is relevant. At the end of the day, this is a system that is different from Norway and Australia, where as much detail as possible is provided.
“This is a system that relies on trust in the individuals who are in charge, including those appointed to the CPA and the Elected President. Do you trust them? Have they made decisions wisely? Has the government been acting responsibly?”
————
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
“Do you trust them? Have they made decisions wisely? Has the government been acting responsibly?”
While I trust them completely, I wonder why people still need to question the process? I mean we should continue to trust and trust based on past performance right? But What To Do? the questions have been asked.
I think our wise credible leader has brought up a great point or question to think about – should we all not just TRUST and TRUST? why spend the effort to question? Just based on Past Performance can continue to trust and trust. Past Peformance as indicator for future performance. To me, feels like more Efficient system. Trust is enough. Like this More Good Years as we MOVE ON to great heights.
Believe me, I am not trying to DO US IN by suggesting we trust. I mean, Trust is earned already right? So, why question how the key was turned? I mean our Revered and Credible president was ELECTED by the PEOPLE am i right or not? That is what is mentioned on paper some where right?
Singapore is so 1st world! All 1st world nations must be so impressed liao. Look at the kinds of leaders we have.
If Singaporeans trust our leaders, then, there shall be no need for elections, parliamentary debates and all the other political processes.
And Minister Tharman should not proved his seriousness by quibbling “This is not a wayang…..”. But he appeared liked an actor…….., wonder what he was trying to prove.
patriot
Dear People,
Allow me to answer Mr Tharman clearly – NO – I do NOT trust people blindly. You will have to prove to me that you are worth trusting.
Best Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
This brings up the awkward role of the President.
The guess he must rely of the parliamentary process…. the papers submitted and deliberated in Parliament.
I am not sure if he has the power to say “You guys are all clowns” …let me me get an independent opinion from someone else?
But even if that’s what he felt…how could he?
Mr. Tharman, whoever say this is a “WAYANG”? We need not to have ministerial calibre to understand the adverse situation we are in now. Why is it so difficult to provide a straight forward answer on the process of approval and make it more accountable and transparent?
“TRUST” is a big word and should not be use sparingly. If this country sacred reserves withdrawal are based on “TRUST” alone, why the need to have an Elected President???
Please remember the RESERVES were built by all contributing Singaporeans.
The president must be trusted.
The council must be trusted to read through the parliamentary speeches and will put relevant changes to this job credit scheme where necessary.
We all await the independant report from the council.
Thank you. I hope Mr Lui passes this message to our Dear President.
The truth is most people do not trust outsiders (other than family members) easily, they are just to lazy to do anything as they know under current system, they are courting troubles than anything else if they blow the whistle.
Take for example, supposedly independent professionals like financial auditors are not trustable anymore, just look at Enron, Citiraya, ACCS, Satyam, Madoff’s ponzi scheme, and many more. Do not believe these auditors did not smell anything fishy during their course of work. They simply turned a blind eye to it because they were benefiting from the system.
One of many pitfalls of Capitalism.
At his(President) age (advanced), he should not be tasked with such an important and difficult responsibility.
It will not be easy for an old man, regardless if he is assisted, to look and study into an untested scheme, born out of the brains of three young scholars.
The opinions of some of the financial experts and economists here should provide some clues. But, let me say something not nice but true here, that is, the many experts that have appeared in Channel News Asia Programme were way off the marks most of the time; very unreliable so to say.
And to digress a bit, no geomancer anywhere in the World has forecasted a global meltdown in their predictions.
patriot
The act is that Singapore is a stage where the current powers stage their wayang – and is so glaringly evidenced by Tharman trivialising it.
We dont even trust the ballot box (why shouldnt they agree to allow independent foreign observers to monitor our elections when was asked about it ).
Indeed since they are so smug, why dont they have the balls to agree and accept international independent monitors.
About the key – the President holds only a duplicate key !!
Madoff was able to carry out the $50 billion ponzi because many highly successful and prominent people trusted him. If your money was not accepted by him you are a nobody in the community. CEOs of businesses are capable of concealing vital statistics from their auditors.
Same with the PAP. If we keep on trusting the PAP running the country without any credible opposition in parliament, the day may come when the next elected government find out that our national coffer is empty.
When Chiam S T questioned in parliament about the profits made by HDB when Tay C W was the ND minister he was angrily shot down by LKY. The intimidated Chiam replied, ” If you say so, so be it.”
The PAP makes no mistakes. You must trust them. Should we?
Reading the Straits Times, actually I am shocked the Preseident and his council were given only 1 week to give in-principle approval of the need to drawdown the reserves.
Now with the hindsight of the budget debate, and the call of MPs (both PAP and opposition) I hope the President will put up more targets that companies need to meet to qualify for Job Credit.
If it goes fully as Finance Minister planned without any KPI – my trust of the elected President and his Council will be misplaced.
I’m more shock of the unprofessional way Mr Tharman answered the questions. Wayang? I thougth they said Singlish is bad?
And not sure why the questions are relevant? I’m not sure if Mr Tharman is relevant if he does not understand the importance of deliberation in decision making. He should be fired!
Dear ALL,
I like to suggest that in this extra ordinary times,
it is the Best Time to Engage the APATHETIC Majority
to get them interested to voice up on social issues of all types.
Social means you and me and community.
For a start, I like to suggest :
1. get them to watch every news on TV , radio and newspaper.
Then, Compare the FACTs information available on the web like youtube, TOC and the other good blogs too many to name them all. I am sure, they will come to a CONCLUSION and realise the need to be un-Apathetic.
2. Each of us , when ever convenient or possible, pose a question on social issue to strangers or colleagues. Like ask them, are you aware of this or that news or issue? Did you catch the Parl Debate? What is your views on this or that ? ask them to take a poll.
I am sure these steps among others will end APATHY for most. Of course, like anything, there is no 100%. some will continue to live in their shell or well.
“You Either Die a Hero, or Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become the Villain”
Nuff said.
But Mr Tharman said: “I’m not sure why it is relevant.” He is not sure, but i am sure the people who ask this know the relevance…
“At the end of the day, this is a system that is different from Norway and Australia, where as much detail as possible is provided.”
Mmm, so that why we have lack of transparency, and details on TC investment, cos our system is different and things can be hidden?
If cannot trust, have a third key in future.
when a boyfriend ask his girlfriend about why a certain deed is done, she simply asked back, “do you love me?”
Trust? What an absurd, unprofessional answer. The whole purpose of Parliament is to hold the Executive accountable by asking questions about its workings. To tell Parliament and Singaporeans to “trust” the Executive is to undermine the checks and balances built into the system.
Unlike OTHER countries, ours is a first world SYSTEM that relies on trust in individuals. That’s why some elite individuals are paid more and are given freedom to govern. Unlike the bureaucracy that plagues OTHER countries, our government is efficient and has a good track record. The system works. Change in the system would lead to disaster. Our elite cannot work under transparency. They and their policies cannot stand up to scrutiny. :>
Although when someone who have past proven track record,
says for example, a pilot says to the other pilot, the plane has been flying well, no need maintenance surely can still last another trip, based on his experience, do you just trust him and accept that as true and fact , bearing in mind that there are passengers’ lives at stake? or do you respectfully tell him, while you have proven track record to be an excellent pilot, its still standard procedure for you to show me that proper checks have been done by certified people for the job and he has signed on black and white confirming that checks have passed and plane is safe to fly. No short cuts or auto pilot.
It boils down to the question: How can we not trust someone we voted for?
wait, did we have a choice to vote?
WOW! did he really said that?? (Sorry, i must have missed the best speech of the century!!)
This is what we call “赌包赢“ – sure win answer!
Really classic… must really let everyone know
Tharman, to me, is also seen to be another wayang. He asked whether they can be trusted. My asnswer to him is, after TT Duria cheated on old NKF, trust should not be given lightly to anyone who claims to be trustworthy. This is especially so when an establishment is not transparent or lack clear accountability on public funds received from donations, conservancy fees or taxpayers money.
If Tharman cannot answer simple query in parliament, may be our president should step up to clarify the process. President should be an independent party not subjected to any political party influence. Let’s see if he dare to come out from his comfort zone.
“may be our president should step up to clarify the process. ”
OUr president can only answer query related to prata-making, so please ask the right question to our DEAR president. Unlock Key ? You mean Key to UNLOCK WOODEN CABINET containing ingredients for prata ?
“About the key – the President holds only a duplicate key !!”
No independent party can even allow to verify if it is a genuine key to the reserve . Even a key in HOTEL 81 is also a KEY. Even a key to his own locker containing prata and flour is also a key. Who to say it is the right key ?
Likewise, bloggers must also stay united with same objective and not hitting at each other for popularity reason.
Oops, posted my last post in the wrong topics which should be directed at the forum to asking oppositions stay united.
Tharman to President Nathan : Sir, we need your autograph on these documents
authorizing us to use the reserves for stimulating the economy.
Nathan : Ya, but I don’t want to go down in history as the first president doing this
Tharman : Sir, this PAP A-Team will also go down in history as well.
Nathan : OK Lah,but are you sure we have the money, because I have no clue.
Tharman : Sir , you mean PM,SM and MM never brief you ?
Nathan : Ya lah, they told me it is not necessary for me to know because they will
never touch the reserves and I remember that they were upset with Ong T C
for asking…..so much trouble like 50+ man-years to check lah.
Tharman : Sir , in that case I will have some of my scholars go thru’ the books
with you and update you on the numbers.
Nathan : OK lah, but I may have problems understanding all these statements
and figures, so how to tell the public I have verified that everything is in order ?
Tharman : Don’t worry Sir, I am actually a spindoctor, I will convince the public
that it is all about trust and they have no reason not to trust the President.
Nathan : Wah, you are so clever lah, come to think of it, if they cannot trust me,
then who can they trust, afterall I am the President.
I would like to be the President’s best friend and have lunch with him everyday so that he will trust me and unlock when I say unlock’. Like that why we need a President in the 1st place???
Actually, originally I blur-and-blindly trusted the President but with the way Tharman was trying to evade answering the sensible and logical question directly, I became suspicious.
Plus he had admitted that the estimates issued to the members of parliament were not updated. Then the question arose whether the same outdated estimates were sent to the President for him to make decision. If so, then how could the President have made a proper and correct decision based upon out-dated estimates?
So instead of trying to reinforce my trust, he has totally erased all my trust.
Trust trampled upon is trust lost. Don’t play play.
TOC
Obviously you don’t read the cartoons on yr website. )))
A recent one explained the presidential decision in layman terms.
Nothing more needs to be said.
But gd to point out that Tharman gave evasive answer.
anyone can post the names of the Presidential Council?
Are they all upright people like Ong Teng Cheong or more of the spineless type?
Hey blokes,
why like dat?
he our Elected President. WE elected him, by definition right?
dio boh?
1st world lah!
mr president is quite busy @ this moment
he is havin his prata in joochiat circle
next to the two squabellin houseowners
he just want to see the wayan show in joochiat circle
somemore with free vietgong chiobus cyclin there as well
what key?
what lock?
merrily lynch hav the key
brarclays bank hav the lock
This pattern of evading a straight answer with rhetoric is getting real old and, honestly, very irritating. When I go to a restaurant and am faced with an unfamiliar dish, I expect the staff to explain to me what are the ingredients and/or cooking process as necessary to give me the information I require to make a decision. There is no way I can or will accept an answer of “just trust us, we know what we are doing as we are an established and high-end restaurant”.
I believe most of my fellow Singaporeans are the same and will choose to either not order the item or demand a proper explanation in the above scenario. What puzzles me is the fact that most of us are doing just that – accepting such important things at mere face value of intangible attributes such as ‘trust’ and ‘talent’.
No matter how much trust or talent there is, mistakes still can and will happen, so it is only sensible for everyone to go in with their eyes open – including the people. Well, things don’t look like they are going to change, so one alternative is for the middle class to actively look for viable opportunities elsewhere as Singapore Inc is primarily an opportunity-laden paradise for the upper class.
I think we should just trust the govt to do the right thing. Who stupid idea was it that we need two keys to unlock the reserves? Surely we should have enough faith and trust in the govt? And because this was such an impt role, his pay had be jacked up!
““This is a system that relies on trust in the individuals who are in charge, including those appointed to the CPA and the Elected President. Do you trust them? Have they made decisions wisely? Has the government been acting responsibly?”
Why are you asking this question to us ? You mean all this while, you can’t even answer your question truthfully ? Is millions dollar so cheap to buy your conscience and integrity and your soul just like it buy the buddies of yours ?
“”“This is a system that relies on trust in the individuals who are in charge”
Trust ? Big deal ! Try telling that to those myriad investors who get con and screw by the apathetic government into think that DBS, the pride of Singapore, is a safe haven for singaporean to invest, old and young alike. Just like old NKF who make use of minister’s protection and backing.
The parliament debate shows that singapore government is just built on image using SPH. consist very little substance that worth their salary.
True enough, many minibonds and high notes investors trusted DBS and the same number of people got burnt. Singaporean trusted that CPF can be withdrawn at age 55 but govt kept changing its goalpost. Many years ago, people also trusted LKY that two is enough but now we need more foreigners to fill the population gap. We also trusted 2% GST hike will help the poor but it created inflations and made many people poorer. Last but not the least of all relevant examples, we trusted “someone” that this is golden period but we ended up dipping into the reserves to save jobs. If anyone asking for trust again, he ought to knock himself on the wall..
This may be good news – the President is slowly coming out of the ‘Yes-Man-I-Am-A-Puppet’ mode. (Too late for BUSH!)
@Dr Syed Alwi I fully agree with you!
The President’s ‘NO’ is supposed to be stronger than any other’s proposals (even PM). Without his “yes”, many things are not possible. But it’s a very delicate thing because we all know the PM holds the key to his army.
To quote an ex-navy guy: “They have squandered their chance to earn our trust.”
The word ”trust” is a difficult thing for me. I don’t trust. I must have a reason for a certain hypothesis. Either I know a thing, and then I know it -I don’t need to trust it.
If we Trust that TRUST can do IT then:
we don’t need an Elected President, ’cause in the Parliament we trust.
but then we don’t need the Parliament, ’cause in the Government we trust
but then we don’t need the Government , ’cause in the Cabinet we trust
but then we don’t need the Cabinet , ’cause in the PM we trust,
but then we don’t need the PM ’cause in his Father we trust,
And then we don’t need Democracy, ’cause in ONE MAN WE TRUST.
I have always have a high regard for Tharman. But his response was quite disappointing. He sounded defensive and irritated. TRUST? There is nothing wrong in wanting to know the process of the decision. Why cant the Ministers be more open minded to questions raised in parliament. If this is a question raised by MM or SM, i believed they will explain the process involved in detailed and convinced them that processes are in place and there is sufficient in the reserves. Questions are raised cause people do not know how much reserves we have, what is the %tage of reserve being drawn,
#44 disappointed,
“Questions are raised cause people do not know how much reserves we have, what is the %tage of reserve being drawn,”
Now that the elderly man has revealed the amount , we should just take his word for it right?
I mean, of course I take his word for it. Juz wanna know what others think. I mean the well educated to think and analyse intellectuals. Unless readers are not?
Trust is such a beautiful thingie.
If you simply trust the information, you save time and energy trying to find out.
If you simply trust, every month you still continue to feel so happy.
I am not trying to do anyone in. I am just singing about the benefits of Trusting someone.
This is the way in the digital age, I think. Trust and Trust.
For example, I trust the news. News says Yes, I say Yes. No means No.
1st world standard.
Last time, ISO standard.
Now time, Sarbanes Oxley standard
Some even got Basel 2 standard.
Very unique.
43) SIMPLE on February 8th, 2009 4.25 pm
If we Trust that TRUST can do IT then:
we don’t need an Elected President, ’cause in the Parliament we trust.
but then we don’t need the Parliament, ’cause in the Government we trust
but then we don’t need the Government , ’cause in the Cabinet we trust
but then we don’t need the Cabinet , ’cause in the PM we trust,
but then we don’t need the PM ’cause in his Father we trust,
And then we don’t need Democracy, ’cause in ONE MAN WE TRUST.
To add on:
But then we don’t need that One Man ’cause we can just trust Ourselves.
Trust needs to be earned.
Not by the mere token fact that his monthly pay is higher than the PM.
I trust the MM, the SM, the PM, and even some of the other Ms, because of their experience and exposure to the ins and outs of our country.
Now, the President is another thing, because other than jetting around and shaking hands, he is almost like a lump of clay, shape shifting to the whims and fancies of his “advisers”. I don’t see anything remotely independant in his decisions.
They will not answer the peasants’ questions and evade the issue throwing up red herrings like trust, wisdom or responsibility.
Simple questions – what is the process, the reasons? No answers.
This is what is totally wrong about one-party politics. And they think we are all dopes easily satisfied with diversionary tactical answers.
I think Mr Tharma shot himself in the foot here as apaprently he did not have an appropriate answer to give.
It rose suspicion of the President listening to the one that appointed him all along as there is no contest to his chair.
It is also shocking to know that the govt actually alows all this to go on in a democratic country with open election and corruption-free politics. This kind of act will be shot down in many developed countries.
This again is one of may of our govt’s shortcoming. I still adovcate a two-party Parliament system with at least 1/4 of seats to be taken by opposition members. Our opposition so far has being disappointing to act as a check on the govt doing. With just two opposition members in Parliament, their work is cut out for them.
All this only drag our country down.
Tharman’s adoption of the moralistic stance in flipping the question back to us in asking if we ‘TRUST’ the elected individuals to make the right decision just seems like his attempts at brushing off the concerns of the people, the same people whom these politicians are meant to serve and be answerable to.
Low Thia Khiang hit the nail on the head when he used the two key analogy to illustrate his doubts on the veracity of how Nathan scrutinizes the request to use our Reserves.
What i TRUST is that it seems impossible that Nathan would exercise his largely ceremonial role as ‘elected’ president in blocking the request, since the system which elected him in the first place, simply uses his acquiesce to justify all their actions as having been through the proper process of checks and balances.