Choo Zheng Xi / Editor-in-Chief
Mr Siew Kum Hong’s detractors have recently begun lobbying the government to deny him a second term as a nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) on the basis that he has stood up to oppose discrimination against homosexuals.
These vocal detractors would have the public believe that Mr Siew should be defined by this single issue. Nothing could be further from the truth.
If there is one defining characteristic of Mr Siew’s term, it is the professionalism and energy he has brought to Parliament in the discharge of his appointment.
A brief survey of his time in Parliament will reveal the prodigious effort Mr Siew has put into his time as NMP. For the Singaporean taxpayer, Mr Siew is value for money.
Mr Siew’s record speaks for itself. His contributions to Parliament have covered an eclectic range of issues from requests for more direct assistance to lower income families to seeking transparency on Temasek Holdings’ accounts. Mr Siew has also rigorously challenged the government’s benchmarking of politicians’ pay to top industry earners.
Mr Siew has called on the government to put in place safeguards to prevent Singaporean male job-seekers from being discriminated against in their National Servicemen liabilities. He has also spoken out against the heavy workload that the Ministry of Education’s new policies are imposing on teachers.
Mr Siew has consistently spoken up on issues concerning civil liberties, championing not just the rights of gay people but also the rights of every single Singaporean.
Despite his much publicized clash with Professor Thio Li-Ann on the issue of 377A, he strongly supported her call for a by-election in Jurong GRC. He also highlighted the questions of constitutional law she raised in relation to amending the Films Amendment Act while stating his opposition to the bill.
We think Mr Siew’s record speaks for itself.
The intentional mischaracterization of Mr Siew as an obsessed homosexual rights campaigner tells us more about the narrow-minded paranoia of his critics than the narrowness of his Parliamentary contributions his critics allege.
TOC hopes that instead of allowing a vocal minority to perpetuate the illusion of public division, the Parliamentary Selection Committee will send a strong signal that there is space in Parliament for independent minded individuals with the courage, conviction and stamina to challenge the government. That was the original rationale of creating the NMP position in 1990.
TOC does not support the NMP scheme in principle, and we would prefer to see Mr Siew in electoral politics. However, in lieu of the abolition of the NMP scheme or Mr Siew’s entry into electoral politics, we believe that Mr Siew should be given a second stint as an NMP.
If the government were to deny Mr Siew a second term, it would be Parliament and the country’s loss. There are few people in Parliament who need their position less than the position needs them. Mr Siew is such a person.
——
With special thanks to Wee Yeong Wei for research support.
Join the Facebook group expressing support for Siew Kum Hong’s second term here
—–
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
I agree to this position: “TOC does not support the NMP scheme in principle, and we would prefer to see Mr Siew in electoral politics. However, in lieu of the abolition of the NMP scheme or Mr Siew’s entry into electoral politics, we believe that Mr Siew should be given a second stint as an NMP.”
In fact those who criticised SKH are people who also ride on his contributions. Anyway it is best avoid those negative religion-driven crtiques and see the larger picture of things, and how he can keep useless MPs on their toe throughout his 2nd term. I am sad that the best man in Singapore can only found in the NMP seat and there is no potential leader under LHL own umbrella. How can a “YES MAN” be able to lead a country when they have no mind of their own? No wonder nobody wants to join politic and ended up like LBW character.
That guy is good, keep him as NCMP.
Yes , as a one man operation, he did his best to keep “parliament on its toes”
But unfortunate that he got carried away of late; he should have seen it coming.
Now he has opened up himself – but is it not good to see support for him – SKH to be in parliament as a voted MP is the best thing supporters can give back to him. Also he must come clean on his Swedish connection to be all disclosing.
Encourage him to be a legitimate MP instead of an NMP – debate in parliamment will go up one notch; add on James , and it will go up 2 notches, add on some deserving people from TOC – it will go up 3 notches, add on Tan Kin Lian – it will hit the roof……
some are trying to prevent SKH get his 2nd term.
I suspect these are those who are against LBGTs .
Well, the people have spoken that they prefer open society and tolerance of different believes and thinkings.
So, i mean their efforts will be futile trying to stop SKH.
I mean, even if he does not get to be NMP again, I believe if he runs for MP he would still win.
I am not religious but i think truely good religions would not teach followers to be intolerant of people who have sexual orientation different than theirs.
Teachings may be good but I do hope all followers truely understand what is being taught.
Finally, I like to ask people, what if their offspring also has such preference ?
This is strictly a hypothetical question. My point is things happens. Will your stand change when u are affected?
Congratulations TOC on taking a strong, clear and unambiguous stand.
From all we have seen and read, Siew Kum Hong, in his capabilities and convictions, is head and shoulders above the majority of his cohort in Parliament. He is worth much more than many other members of the House whose voices are rarely heard. In refusing to be a yes man, he has shown himself to be his own man and a leader.
Even his stand on section 377A is deserving of the highest praise, in that he stands for non-discrimination and for the under-represented.
I hope the government will have the guts and gumption to put him back into the house for another term. Otherwise it will give the lie to its stated intention of having genuine alternative voices in Parliament.
I say, you wish !
PAP only keep dogs. They dont need human that can talk.
I know that this is not the thread to post, but the relevant one on pinkdot appears to have been blocked.
Just want to congratulate the gay community for the pinkdot gathering. We are all Singaporeans and we should live harmoniously.
I admire him. He dares to speak up and touch on real issues.
I prefer someone like him who have his own principle and opinion. At least i feel he is one of the rare MPs who still keep his feet on the ground. Why would i want another “clony” out there who only talks and align his decisions like every else?
People who critised him are just another “clony”.
“TOC does not support the NMP scheme in principle, and we would prefer to see Mr Siew in electoral politics. However, in lieu of the abolition of the NMP scheme or Mr Siew’s entry into electoral politics, we believe that Mr Siew should be given a second stint as an NMP.”
I’m a little confused on this statement. If one is in principle against the scheme, shouldn’t it be regardless of who is using it? It shouldn’t be the case where one is against the scheme but makes exception just because his/her favorite person is using it or benefitting from it.
My point of view is the NMP scheme has its uses in providing more voices. Even if Sg becomes two party, multi-party one day, it will be still be ruled by a political class- just a matter of different party affiliation. The NMP scheme helps to diversify the debate and may be useful for topics that are politically suicidal (and hence avoided by all political parties- both ruling or opposition).
I think Mr Siew has been excellent NMP based on his contributions and should continue as NMP. But I’ll like to also point out that Mr Siew should be more savvy in politics too. After all, NMP is a political job and public perceptions count. Then there is also the ability to take heat. No politician will be liked by everyone at all times. I guess most people forget this because the ruling party has monopolize the rule and the blunt end of “flaming” for so long.
The editorial ends with a startling arrogance that “(t)here are few people in Parliament who need their position less than the position needs them. Mr Siew is such a person”. This is precisely the hubris that PAP puts forward to have its candidates enter Parliament. The end results are walk-ins into Parliament, sky-high salaries and the constant reminders for Singaporeans to be grateful for people of “high caliber” who left their lucrative jobs to “serve” the people.
Siew Kum Hong should run as an independent candidate to be voted into Parliament if he is not interested in party politics. Let the people decide and not a secretive committee. That should be TOC’s stand instead of campaigning for him in an undemocratic process.
Will do KH no good.
With friends like Dana and TOC, KH does not need enemies.
“The intentional mischaracterization of Mr Siew as an obsessed homosexual rights campaigner tells us more about the narrow-minded paranoia of his critics than the narrowness of his Parliamentary contributions his critics allege.”
It would be a much editorial if you leave the above out. Insulting those against him is not helping him a bit.
He has to account for his behaviour at the AWARE EOGM and the rumour about connection if any about some Swedish things. For the AWARE EOGM he already
said he is no legal adviser to AWARE. He may have done a lot of good things but
one bad thing can destroy a man’s career.
Some of those anti SKH must have come from the opposite camp of AWARE，this is kinda petty, we should look at the bigger picture – his contributions in parliament. I think SKH will not be given a second term, the media is stirring to let the government say no to his second term. I think SKH must decide if he is going to stand in the coming election so that he can continue to do his good work for the citizens of Singapore. Even Kenneth J can do it, why not he? We are in need of quality oppositions in parliament.
The issue with being an NMP is not about how well an NMP can state his case but who is he arguing his case for, because at the end of the day, an NMP officially represents no one. He can be said to be speaking up for this or that issue, or, this or that group of people, but ultimately, these are just hollow representations because when compared to the argument of one who is an MP, he won’t stand a chance. The preference, when deliberating a solution, will surely lean toward the arguments put forth by an MP, who represents his consituents, against one who represents no one.
Encourage Siew to become an MP, not to continue as an NMP. I am no big fan of Siew, because of his AWARE performance, but like most observers, he is better than any PAP MP. He needs to know this and take the chance to be the people’s representative – with an electorate to back his arguments in Parliament.
For people who disagree with the NMP Scheme, please stop singling Kum Hong out. There are also other NMP candidates to target if you disagree. Here are some names you all should consider too
1. Dr Thio Li-Ann, the Daughter of Dr Thio Su-Mien
(it is unclear if she is actually running)
2. Terry Lee, President of the Insurance Employee Union
3. Two Candidates from the Singapore Business Federation
I do hope Mr Siew will get a second term. He has spoken on a wide range of issues and been very constructive. It is sad to see him come under attack for a single issue. I think this is yet another example of how harshly and unfairly politicians are treated – NMPs. PAP and opposition MPs all have to face it. This will do little to encourage capable people to step forward and serve – which is a very bad thing for all of us.
“TOC does not support the NMP scheme in principle, and we would prefer to see Mr Siew in electoral politics. However, in lieu of the abolition of the NMP scheme or Mr Siew’s entry into electoral politics, we believe that Mr Siew should be given a second stint as an NMP.”
1) TOC does not support the NMP scheme in principle.
2) TOC supports Siew Kum Hong as NMP.
Looks to me that by supporting somebody as an NMP, you are supporting the NMP scheme (old saying, action speaks louder than words).
Get him to replace Lee Bee Wah. Quick!
Tan Kin Lian, Siew Kum Hong and Kenneth jeya form a GRC team?
LKY will get rid of these people thru whatever means who ever dare to challenge any GRC!
“Till I was lowered down into the grave, I will raised like Jesus and hunt them”
To Whom It May Concern,
Even taking into consideration whatever bad image some quarters are trying to paint Siew Kum Hong, it will be extremely beneficial for the Singapore Government and the PAP to keep him as a Nominated Member of Parliament for a second term for the mere fact that he has shown his passion, conviction, commitment, enthusiasm and hardwork, sacrificing his personal time and comfort, in the last few years as a NMP to earn his position.
Moreover, Siew KH has also displayed to everyone of us that he was able to articulate in detail, with facts to substantiate, many controversial points of views that even elected MPs have shied away from.
In fact, from the bottom of my heart, I would even go as far as to say that Siew KH has been one of the best MPs in Singapore so far.
Overall, Siew KH has proved himself as a national asset instead of liability and therefore his request for a second term as a NMP should be welcomed.
My family and I strongly recommend and fully support Siew Kum Hung for his application to a a Nominated Member of Parliament for a second term.
Who supported him & voted him in the parliament in the 1st place? The ppl should decide. Based on what are our NMPs being elected? The last time we have a Miss Universe, so this time round they want to vote an actress or something? Can I see their resume?
There are also a lot of ppl that are being discriminate, low-income workers, senior citizens, etc. So, why he never speaks up for them?
I feel he has even taken up issues with the govt even when the duly-elected opposition members didn’t.
And I agree with TOC on the stand against this NMP scheme in principle but better to have SKH, he is tried and tested and is actually good for a full-MP if he did run for a seat.
To SKH : Keep it up, for every distractor, there must be more people who are supporting you !
#14 aloha – I think SKH must decide if he is going to stand in the coming election so that he can continue to do his good work for the citizens of Singapore. Even Kenneth J can do it, why not he? We are in need of quality oppositions in parliament.
The problem lies in the voter demographics. Once you stand in the election, you have voters to feed, other than driving your own agenda. And what do most of the oppositions voters want?
Kum Hong needs to make his views known, constantly. His independent and courageous stand can influence the thinking of ordinary Singaporeans, who form the vast majority of the electorate. The TOC is one avenue Kum Hong can use to disseminate his thinking on the many issues of the day. He should use Facebook, he should write hisown blog. God help him find the time to do all this.
But he must keep up his writing and expound his views. In time, he will be known as The Voice of the People No 2. The No 1 spot currently belongs to Tan Kin Lian.
By the time, elections come around, both Kin Lian and Kum Hong wil be ready to join the electoral fray — battle-hardened to take on the might of the ruling party.
Hi Loop,
Kum Hong did speak up for the poor, the elderly and low-income workers. Why don’t you go to his blog and look up the tags CPF, HDB, Welfare, Workfare, and http://siewkumhong.blogspot.com/search/label/poor“>poor? You should verify your claim before posting it. Otherwise people will accuse you of being you-know-what.
The Most Reverend Dr John Chew,
As an observer, I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations on your measured responses so far on the management of the AWARE Saga and its aftermath. I admire your wisdom in the timely intervention of the AWARE Saga at the eve of the recent AWARE EOGM.
It was a critical move to allay heightened tensions due to Pastor Derek Hong’s abuse of the pulpit to mobilise political support for Madam Josie Lau, the former Vice President of Credit Cards and Unsecured Loans at DBS, and her fellow church members from the Anglican parish Church Of Our Saviour (COOS) for the leadership bid of the secular feminist NGO AWARE.
Nevertheless, tensions still remain between the Christian Community and other Singaporeans. Much reconciliation is needed to preserve the social fabric of our shared society and the public expects the President of NCCS to play a key role.
Read the remainder at http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=3330
I wish there was this much furore about the actual MP’s who sit there and do nothing and collect a monster pay check..
@ 30) jaded.sg
oh well, one got burnt
C’mon, being a NMP and criticise PAP Government and giving “alternative and diverse” views is akin to an armchair critic sitting comfitable within OB Marker.
To perform as a NMP is one thing.
To evolve and moves up the next level as a political acitvist, and crosses the OB Marker, that is a different story.
PAP is condescending when you are a NMP.
But try to speak the same thing when you a known political activist and outside the Parlaiment…..
Nope. No more NMP for him.
Ah Siew should move on.
With this solid bedrock he built up during his 3-year stint as NMP……
he is more than competent to move on to become a respectable politician, whether with PAP or Opposition, ……
“18) observ on May 18th, 2009 9.56 am
Looks to me that by supporting somebody as an NMP, you are supporting the NMP scheme (old saying, action speaks louder than words).”
does it have some similiarity in the following example. how about giving humanitarian aids to those very very poor people who are living in some dictatorial country (of course along with a dictator). does it mean that giving such aids means supporting the dictator. surely not. sometimes, we have to make do with whatever we have and try the very best. anyway, where did the term of lesser mortals come from.
we should not pin the blame on the powerless people but the not-so-desirable system where the powerful people in it can change it for the better if they want to but somehow may not choose to do so for reasons best known to them.