“So, as much as we may say -– with reason too –- that gay people should be treated purely on their merits as potentially capable NMPs, and that sexual orientation should not be a factor, ” …….

Agreed; provided they do not abuse their positions in parliament push their gay agenda and try to change the status quo. Otherwise, even if he makes 1,000 speeches, I will still not accept him as an NMP. And neither should the govt, given that they have promised the people during the previous debate that they do not want to move forward in this areas if the majority of the population is against ti.

empty vessels make the most noise, what proposals have been taken note or implemented? Why he needs the NMP allowance is it or he so scared nobody knows him when he walks on the street, not enough recognition meh?

SKH has spoken out for all walks of Singaporeans on major issues like by-election in Jurong East, public order laws, resillience package, etc. Yet just because he also spoke out for gays, these single-issue people cannot stand him.

Posting on behalf of my friend who is laughing and questioning :- Why on earth would Siew Kum Hong be selected now that he has proven to be blind and deaf and completely unaware of the jeerings and booings at the AWARE EGM? How to justify to the public but to be termed blind and deaf too to select Siew Kum Hong as NMP for another term? Crazy lah !

First, they sneaked in stealthily their pro GLBT agenda via the CSE program coated with poison to our pure & innocent young minds. Now, they are making a concerted push via the 3 potential pro GLBT NMPs, including Siew (read TODAY, 14th May). Should they be selected, I will be very disappointed with the PAP – the PAP should instead field them (or any willing candidate with similar agenda) in a single constituency and let Singaporeans decide on their own merits, with their pro GLBT’s agenda.

Siew claimed in TODAY that he is not pro homosexuality – only 3 years old will believe based on his stands & actions so far on this subject.

Empty vessels,

It is clear you have something against people who speak for equality and pluralism.

Not all Singaporeans want to live in the Dark Ages you know, so where’s the representation?

Get with the plan..it’s fairer that way.

I support him for one I think we need more diversity not only in our society, but more from within the PAP herself. Siew is an outstanding MP imo, and he dares to openly express his views and opinions on various range of topics, be it right or wrong.

Siew is reasonable and courageous which makes him quite a credible person to be NMP. Anyone still remember who was speaking up for the rights of citizens while the 2nd law minister was trying to push the move on law down our throats?

Our elites only practise meritocracy towards people who are good at carrying balls. Sorry to say but SKH definitely does not fall into this category and most likely he will be out.

A single issue (pro rights for homosexuals) should not discredit all he have done for singapore…..while i m personally against homosexuality, i am more with him on other issues…

Please look at his contributions as a whole and not let the gay issue define him. he has spoken out courageously on many issues and alot of what he says makes sense. so much more sense than PAP MPs, which reflects that he does think about what is good for the people as compared to those who only think of what is good for their party. i think he represents Singaporeans more than the majority of the PAP MPs and for this alone he should be nominated, even elected if he stands for election.

Posted by Alex Au in main article above, in Yawning Bread site

>>Having said that, we shouldn’t pigeonhole gay persons. There is no reason why a gay NMP cannot be engaged on other issues, from energy conservation to defence policy.
>>

That is something I have been telling the gay community for quite a while. All over blogosphere, I have said that if gays can only contribute in areas of economics, healthcare, finance etc and keep away from sex, sex, sex issues, the general community will respect gays in good time.

>>Yet, the undeniable fact is that our leaders are backward. In my estimation, the Select Committee will be unable to shake off from front and centre of their minds that they are looking at a gay man and a lesbian woman.
>>

It is sad that you expect others not to pigeon hole gays, yet you have already in your mind stereotyped the govt. The fact is that if the pro-gay nominees don’t get selected, you have already pre-conditioned your mind that the govt is bias against gays.

This is sad. How can the gay community advance, if they keep having this mindset?

Anyway, this is just a piece of friendly advice to you, Alex. I have noted that you have put up in some posts some gay (artistic? porno? that’s just opinion) pictures on your site. Of course, that is your site and you can do whatever you like. However, in doing so, are you not once again reinforcing that gays are just sex-crazed?

Stick to social issues like lack of free speech, job losses and so on. Everyone knows you are a gay. No need to keep harping on t. If you concentrate on just economic, social and political issues without mentioning gay issues, over time, people will realise that gays can really think outside the issue of sex.

Then you don’t have to be suspicious of the govt if they don’t select a pro-gay MP.

TOC,

No links in my post now, yet still under moderation. What’s up?

Why doesn’t SKH stand for elections like Chia Shi Teck as an independent? Why still re-apply for NMP? Is he willing to take the plunge? Answer: Probably No. Singaporeans love to be arm chair critics and hide behind their cosy settings. Have some passion and take the plunge SKH. You have my vote.

Please lah, Siew Kum Hong is not the one at fault, of course some people may feel that he is gutless as he will support whoever got numbers for example 2000 people sign online petition for 377 homo law and when more people jeering and booing, uncouth behaviours in the AWARE EGM than minority, he begs to differ to defend them. Come on, this is normal got brains type of actions that it is his survival at stake, got numbers, so keep quiet and even if it is not the right thing to do, say something to support and defend the jeering and booing. Many people will say we don’t need a gutless and one who dare not stand up against others NMP.

But we have to look at the overall scheme of things, the key player is Straits Times, don’t campaign against Siew Kum Hong. It is obvious that many people are upset with Straits Times and asking others to boycott Straits Times for 12 months. If it works, then this website will bloom.

He should not continue as a NMP taking potshots at PAP Government and representing pressure groups in a “safe NMP environment”.

If he is that passionate on Liberalism, he should have the moral courage to take the next step and enter mainstream politics.

Move on and let Beatrice Chia take over from him.

SKH had made his bones as a politican and libertarian.
To continue another term as NMP is just “playing safe” with a PAP-given platform but not really accepting the repsonsibility of his growing status as an outstanding spokesperson for Liberalism.

He just morphed into another Lee Kuan Yew’s “my kind of acceptable opposition”.

Time for SKH to move to a bigger stage where Goh Meng Seng, Chia Ti Lik and other WP Young Guns “had being there, done that”, and Siew Kum Hong hasn’t…..yet..

If our ministers and leader are jittery about SKH being re-elected as NMP, the message that bring across will be one that our ministers and leader aren’t warrior as they claimed to be. Anyway, this bunch of white-uniform losers only know how to enact laws to protect their own ass. Anybody whom they can’t defeat, will end up in prison or get kicked out of parliament. Let’s see the outcome to prove my point. In times of war, I cannot rely on our leader but ourselves, but don’t expect me to protect their ass when such day comes.

I think anyone who bothers to speak up for animal welfare (community cats in Siew’s case) is likely a good person.

But naturally I am always for the underdog, be it humans or animals.

Most importantly, we need people from the middle class to represent our voices. Not another religious fanatic who is obsessed with gay people or a “Get out of my elite uncaring face” higher mortal.

Who will speak for the homeless & destitute? Who will speak for the perpetually jobless? Who will speak for the elderly who lost their life savings? Who will speak for the poor who has to jump through hoops to get help? Who will speak up against the double standards in the legal system?

Who will speak up for you?

Mr Siew has made valuable contributions to Parliamentary debates, more so than many PAP backbenchers. It would be a loss to the nation if the government decides to drop him for political reasons.

16) Lai CF on May 14th, 2009 1.28 pm
“If he is that passionate on Liberalism, he should have the moral courage to take the next step and enter mainstream politics.”

mainstream ? then why have NMP in the first place.

“He should not continue as a NMP taking potshots at PAP Government and representing pressure groups in a “safe NMP environment”.

if two think alike, one is redundant. if not for other pressure & interest groups, then they are merely there only fitting for the purpose of the incumbent – and we have 80+ there already.

You guys got it all wrong. Many people have said that Mr Siew Kum Hong enjoys being in the limelight, he loves publicity and appears to be want to be in the thick of actions so that his name will appear in the newspaper. Looks like it is the case if one were to investigate further.

I have not heard much , if any, from Chiam.
I do not mind a CHANGE as long as the people representative voice up more.

Mr Siew has voiced up substantially.
This is to be encouraged.

I have no sadness with the leaving of Olsen.

If people only welcome MAINSTREAM thinking people as NMP, then they are missing the point of having NMP. They are here to give diverse views.

There will not be reasonable debate on issues if the Parliament is filled with like minded people. They will never think out of the box.

PAP has the gut to take on real, and diverse debate or not??

The answer is YES had he remained neutral during the AWARE saga
Now we know about his conduct at the AWARE EOGM and it would appear he was
pouring fuel into the fire..instead of bringing peace to the whole event. His statement that after the incident he is proud to be a Singaporean could not gel with his behaviour and performance…so my answer is No No!

Good idea to boycott Straits Times for 12 months, wonder if it will work, they so powerful.

About Mr Siew being gutless point of view, it is normal for people to protect themselves for survival. Everybody can be gutless at some point in time.

Some people have commented that he is an arrogant and pompous NMP and think we don’t need such NMP who is dying for attention, guess they have some reasons for their view points, but I think he is ok, after all he is human. Of course to be fair, we must not blindly agree with whatever Alex Au says otherwise we wil be called brainless Alex Au’s robots, we must exercise independent thinking too.

Why are we even talking about who makes a good NMP? Should we be talking about who would make a good MP insead? If Siew is really serious about politics, then come out and stand against the PAP, and get into the real business of representing the people as an MP. What’s the use of being a NMP where you can talk till the come comes home and gets nothing out from it except the feel good factor for himself

I hope the committee accepts Mr Siew’s submission to continue as NMP for another term.

My memory fails me, but I do vaguely recall weeks (or months?) ago in the ST, some reference was made to Mr Siew’s articulation/representation of youth views. Specifically, I believe it was suggested that he had spoken up and made more inroads than some of the P65 PAP MPs. Mr Siew played this down and instead remarked that unlike PAP MPs, he did not have to attend Meet-the-People sessions, attend to policy matters etc. A big-hearted man, I think Singapore’s political complex will be poorer without people like Mr Siew.

Interesting that Siew Kum Hong has spoken up more and better than Worker’s Party Sylvia and Low. He is more helpful to Singapore than those 2 party people.

I will vote for Sylvia. If you think that Siew should be nominated by merits of his participation, boy, many of us here should be a NMP too.

I believe to be qualified, Siew needs to carry himself professionally and focus his attention where he can make a difference. Not all over the place.

Too bad, Siew is damaged goods after his repeal of Section 377, proposition to repeal Section 377a and the most recent AWARE saga.

How can one not believe he is not pro-gay from the things he is pushing? The Govt would not accept him if they want to votes of mainstream conservative Singapore.

Mr Siew is a voice of reason, even if some disagree with his views. S’pore needs more people like him, even if he does not stand against PAP MPs by joining a political party.

21) socrates on May 14th, 2009 2.43 pm
… it would appear he was pouring fuel into the fire..instead of bringing peace to the whole event. His statement that after the incident he is proud to be a Singaporean could not gel with his behaviour and performance…so my answer is No No!

FM, Josie and team had no intention to communicate with AWARE from beginning to the end. How to make peace with them.

SKH had done the right thing, support AWARE to right the wrong done by FM, Josie, and team.

22) gemami on May 14th, 2009 2.52 pm

Why are we even talking about who makes a good NMP? Should we be talking about who would make a good MP insead?

Because it is one of the valid option. Why ignore it. There is nothing wrong to get to the NMP post now when it is available and get into MP contest later.

Then shouldn’t Siew Kum Hong goes ahead to amke a difference by entering into the political field?

He had strong lobby groups supporting him.
he isa recognizable public figure.

To seek a 2nd term is really like an “American Idol” winner trying to participate in next season again.

Move to the next level of poltiical activism Siew.

I am not against Siew Kum Hong, but I think some people are wondering if he could be very cunning and manipulative that he is trying to win sympathy votes or sympathy understanding acting as being attacked party in Today newspaper report by alleging some conspiracy by some people against him. If it is real campaign against him, then I suppose it is ok, but what if it is like some people wondering what if it is a ploy to win by acting as underdog, then I disagree that such a cunning and manipulative person to be selected as NMP. Thanks for seeing my viewpoint.

21) socrates on May 14th, 2009 2.43 pm

I agreed with your view too. Siew has his own agenda. He did not provide helpful solution but just create issues… If he is death serious about getting into the politic al arena then he should stand for the general election and not get in by the easy way route. Maybe the gays will vote for him but not me. No way…..

33) Lai CF on May 14th, 2009 4.28 pm
To seek a 2nd term is really like an “American Idol” winner trying to participate in next season again.

Well, SKH is not here for “American Idol” kind of fame. So this view is greatly flawed. He is here to voice his views and NMP is a good platform for him to do this. Be it NMP or MP, both options should be open to him. There is no reason to try to say he should not take one of the option.

Dear #22 gemami,

I agree with you completely. It is heart-rending that Singaporeans here do not realize how miserable and pitiful they are. They are wasting their time and energy discussing about an NMP whose status is inherently irrelevant and illegitimate.

He does not represent anyone and therefore does not need to answer to anyone. He is being installed by the whim and fancy of the Government of the day as a cynical contrivance to distract the people.

I believe Mr Siew Kum Hong is a very decent gentleman and I have the utmost respect for him. But that does not detract from the fact that he had allowed himself to be misused by the system.

He should now do the honorable thing.

26) gemami on May 14th, 2009 2.52 pm
“What’s the use of being a NMP where you can talk till the come comes home and gets nothing out from it except the feel good factor for himself.”

The good thing is that you still can make noise as an NMP to get your point across and influence others outside of parliament. remember thio junior.

want to be mp, can just be mp meh. you think just like buying roti prata from your friendly mama stall meh.

this feel good factor is so “shiok” not for himeself only but for many others leh except not for you lah

Ever tot that Damien Siow makes govmin look progressive?

30 yrs ago, LKY would have thrown him in jail. 18 yrs ago GCT would have done a “Catherine Lim” on him.

By giving him another term, shows this PM wants a more open society heh?

So even though he may be doing the right thing by S’poreans (particularly AWARE OG, GLBT militants, and those who love to do anal sex), he is running dog of PAP, just like Lee Bee Wah etc.

Except he no get their MP allowamce of 12,000 a mth.

Can’t be very smart?

“They are wasting their time and energy discussing about an NMP whose status is inherently irrelevant and illegitimate.”

of course, mp will be good lah. if not, nmp also can (no fish, prawn also yummy). same applies to mp lah. there are a lot of candidates, ppl just need to tick the box lah. if not, someone sounding the drum to get attention on orchard road also good (extracting the best out of the worst lah). we the citizen of sin…………………………………………..

run for mp…..not nmp is his best route….let someone else take his place

The measure of a successful NMP is not how many times he talked. Measure should be how well he represented the people’s views and offer proposals to alleviate their situations. To that, obviously Mr Siew has failed miserably. He campaigned for something which the people have already indicated their views. He abused his NMP position. Has he offered something very constructive like Walter Woon, on Parents Maintenance Bill? What has he used his legal skills for?

if you look at the statistics, Jessie Phua who asked the least questions (11 in total) just got promoted to Chairman of GPC (ST, 14.5.09)… i think it speaks volume about parliamentary debate in S’pore. The less you asks, the faster you get promoted…

There are two kinds of people in parliament. The first kind stay neutral and play safe, and not doing anything, watch by the side, after all they get to keep their high pay by not doing anything. Another kind is maverick who to progressively keep up with the change, and therefore speak his mind and support and do what he believe is the right thing to do despite know that he will be in disadvantage. Yes Man has no mind on their own once in parliament and concede to whatever policy as they are not the one greatly affect by it. Singapore doesn’t need YES-MAN, Singapore need people like Siew who speak up against unfairness and injustice. 377 ? If the government is willing to accept the homo from other countries for economic and prestige then they should have the guts to repel the 377 thingy otherwise ask those foreign homo to go back where they belong then. Do anyone remember the AngMoh who do the earthquake research in Singapore that the government so happily put his face on mainstream newspaper or do Singaporean has short memory ?

What we need is NMP who has the conviction to do the right thing and doesn’t shroud in secrecy and coverup. Siew has proven himself from time to time that he is no YES-man and willing to speak up for a cause, and this is what Singapore needs.

Let’s be realistic – nominated or not, all members of parliament are still our parliamentarians. The NMP and NCMP Schemes were introduced to boost the diversity of opinions in parliamentary debates, so nobody should expect any of the NMPs and NCMPs to be a Yes-Man. It is just counter-intuitive to do so.

SKH – one of the few MPs (NMP, PAP or Opposition) who spoke up on key issues, did his homework and put forth his views with passion. Would be a sad day for Sg Parliament if he is not re-appointed as NMP.

From my observation, it does seems Mr Siew does enjoy the limelight as he seems to go around looking for issues so that he can be in the limelight. I am not saying this because I cannot stand him. But let’s us look at rationally at his behaviours and actions and we can safely observed that he does look for limelight. The other possible conjecture for his behaviours is that he got a big mouth which I don’t think it is nice to describe him like that.

One thing I do agree that he is a YES Man, YES Man to numbers and majority so to speak. It is a pity he didn’t use his bravo behaviours to stand up against people who unfairly accuses and labeled people based on their religious convictions in the recent Aware saga instead sided with the booing uncivilised majority. People will certainly question if we need another YES Man for NMP for another term.

Likewise to be fair, he shouldn’t do ungentlemanly double standards actions by stand up against people who accuses or labled people based on their sexual orientation otherwise people will accuse him of behaving ungentlemanly and double standards which is not desirable quality of an NMP.

Hi 32) sarek_home,

When is ‘later’?

Dear #37) smallvoice585,

Thank you for concurring and for adding those wonderful points. It is sad indeed that we have been reduced to this ‘breadcrumbs-snatching’ state.

I am sorry to raise my doubts and concerns whether Siew Kum Hong is smart and capable and suitable to be an NMP for another term as we really need smart and capable NMP to uphold the standards.

I have my doubts because if Siew Kum Hong is very smart, he would have cleverly forecast what would be the reactions to his take on Aware in his blog where he tried valiantly to defend the rowdiness, uncouth, ruly, booing and jeering behaviours of the supporters in Aware meeting and that he would pre-defend his position before being attack by others for being blind and cocky and arrogant after he published his take on Aware viewpoints, which he did not and seem to opened a gateway for others to criticise him, thus any reasonable person would have the same doubts about Siew Kum Hong capabilities and being suitable for another term.

I can now understand why some people feel that empty vessel makes the most noise, I guess it would be wise to step one side and let more capable people step forward.

Better not, we have a lot of able men and women so we already given him his oppotunity and enough of him. This guy is dangerious too, so better avoid him.

Please no more Pro LGBT NMPs… I, am in an opinion, that instead of looking into more serious/ pending issues and be an advocate for everyday Singaporeans (e.g. unemployment, economy, CPF withdrawal issues.. etc.), they will look into opportunity to further homosexual causes, as one of their top priorities.

First of all, I’m not against LGBT, but i believe that a MP (or NMP for that matter) should exercise caution and sensitivity on issues that affect our mainstream conservative society. Since the AWARE saga and its CSE, i’m taking a stance to be more observant and interested in Singapore politic. These, if taken for granted, can affect the outcome of my life, my families, and Singapore’s future. As a parent, i need to protect my children, their upbringing and our religious belief. I want to make my vote counts!!

I will support Siew for another term as NMP.
This whole affair might just be a conspiracy by the MIW, ti drum up Siew’s “pro-gay” view. Just look at the way the ST anti-Siew forum letters to be publish.
Where is the proof that he is pro-gay? Just because he acted for the Aware’s old guards? Come-on people, lawyers have duty to their client. His comment after the Aware’s saga were pin-pointing the way the JL team trys to take over the organisation, and not a pro-gay statement.
What about the other NMP hopeful- the union ‘veteran’. Why no one comment on the necessity of having another Gahmen union yes-man in parliament.

4) empty vessels make the most noise on May 14th, 2009 11.49 am

Hi there,
i suppose you walk your talk?

SKH has voiced up what none dared to voice up.
Most if not all of his speech I truely enjoying hearing.
I appreciate his efforts made so far and wish him all the best .

So, tell us, what has been your contribution in this aspect.
peace.

if mr siew did not become nmp again,

he will surely run for mp.

if he become nmp,

after this second term he will still run for mp.

no matter how it will be just a matter of time he will be a mp.

the above is just my wishes hope they will come true.

i support him to be nmp and mp.

and maybe minister next time.

heaven knows.

good luck and all the best mr siew.

Should a parliament be represented by like-minded people or it should be represented by people with diverse viewpoints?

Let’s look at other things besides the ‘pro-glbt’ stance-

he spoke out against the Public Orders Act
he questioned the jobs credit scheme
he supported the by election in Jurong GRC when Dr Ong Chit Chung passed away
he wanted to make things fairer for foreign workers in S’pore
He fought for more benefits for single mothers

In essence, he put his ‘money’ where his mouth is by being a voice for the marginalized and overlooked, even if some of the views rankles. Would you have preferred some other NMPs who practiced a more selective kind of voicing out for minorities – seeking to speak up for human rights for some groups of people and yet insist on the deprivation of the same rights for others?

I am afraid some fundamentalist might have inflitrated into TOC, whenever SKH name was brought up, these group of revenge will go all out to tarnish him. It seems to me that they “have a hatchet and a very sharp one” against SKH. Sorry, I am worried because I thought AWARE saga was over, but it doesn’t seem to be so. Anyway, the truth is SKH has done a great job for many Singaporeans, nobody can deny it other than an insignificant number of attackers here. I rest my case.

major Religious teachings are good overall and that is one reason for their continued existence and not extinction.

While teachings may be good, followers may at times not know they have not practised correctly the teachings.

For example, if the teachings include Respecting Others Religion and their rights to practise other good religions, then things become much more clearer and simpler. Also think about Diversity and Inclusivity.

Humans can be unique and many should be or could be. I tell you people in the face, I do not prefer Gays. At the same time, I am not against them. Why should they not have the right to exist? There are many species of life . Why must some people Demand uniformity in sexual preference – like either you are with us or against us kinda mentality?

SKH has the right to defend Gays who are Part of Our society, like it or not. Truth is sometimes Unhandle-able to some. Despite this , the Reality is that Gays are among us – male and female forms.

SKH has done enough for me to support him. Consider the FACT that there is a shortage of talents who dare to voice up the way he is doing. While there may be 84 in there, to me, its not enough at all.

So, I definitely say I support SKH just like I support Sylvia and LTK and our late JBJ and Kenneth our new ray of hope. I also support TOC contributors and wayang party.com (hope this is not censored)

peace

42) Netizen on May 14th, 2009 5.43 pm

Measure should be how well he represented the people’s views and offer proposals to alleviate their situations. To that, obviously Mr Siew has failed miserably. He campaigned for something which the people have already indicated their views.

People change views when they see things differently after open debate. It will be very sad if the society does not have people with diverse views to stimulate the public conservation and help the society to self-evaluate and update its position.

How is the society going to evolve and think-out-of-the-box if we just conform to existing majority views.

SKH is the kind of people we need and he has spoken on many diverse issues. So he has done a very good job in represented the people’s views.

It is very funny that some people say we need NMP that are supportive of Asian values.

What is Asian values?

Why need more NMP to support and speak up for Asian values? They think the ministers and MPs are not able to do that? They think the minsters and MPs are not able to make good arguments to support the so-called Asian values?

Are they afraid that their so-called Asian values argument will fall apart simply because someone question it?

What is Asian values indeed…

a) Confucian values from china?
b) Hindi values from India? (oh and including all that very permissive yoga and tantric stuff)
c) Buddhist values from India? (which include neutrality on the GLBT issue)
d) islam?
e) Judaism?
f) Christianity (from Asia as well?)
g) Animalism (still practiced in many parts of Asia)
h) Shinto-ism?
I) Taoism?
j) Zen?

Which Asia value are we talking about?

He says that he should not be judged on ‘his activities carried out in his personal capacity.’ Pleassssseee this is exactly what they did to Josie and Co, find out what they do on sundays, search out their church, record what their pastor said in church, stir up anti-christian sentiments, keep harping on the fact that Christianity is not pro-homosexuality.

Look at your own dirty fingers. You say there is no middle ground for existence. There was till you razed it to the ground. Look at how you treated other people at the AGM. The new guards felt threatened but so did their supporters. Giving hostile stares to people who don’t support your cause. Oh no i don’t dare not want him for my NMP, I might get death threats. What a step foward for civil society indeed. I quote the New Paper, ‘no right to reduce his re-nomination to just one issue (homosexuality)’. Well, you dig your grave and so you must lie in it. He pinpointed the new guards and so did the media, that it was all about homosexuality when the new guards kept saying they wanted to help women and mentor women into corporate positions. Oh but no, they didn’t take in that balanced view at all. Well now that he has drawn attention to his cause for homosexuality, he should be proud of it.

You want sensible and rational minds. Well i didn’t see any sensibility to how he rouse the swearing and jeering crowd at women whose only crime was to serve other women and ensure their children not receive an education that was contradictory to their beliefs. He judged other people by their personal preferences, so let’s see if his personal actions and behavior stand up to the test.

So what now? Everyone who doesn’t support Mr Siew’s re-nomination is anti-gay?

Hi Jagesh Nathan,

While the Old Guards have NMP Siew Kum Hong, Josie’s Committee has Feminist Mentor Thio Su Mien, the mother of NMP Thio Li-Ann. Plus a good number of the Old Guards themselves are former NMPs. There was no way the Old Guards could have mobilised so many people until Pastor Derek Hong gave many people the reason – he abused the Pulpit to support Josie’s political agenda for AWARE.

On another note, our dear Minister WKS warned that the Government would intervene if religious activism threatens Singapore’s social fabric. He said: ‘If religious group start to campaign to change certain government policies, or use the pulpit to mobilise their followers to pressure the government, or push aggressively to gain ground at the expense of other groups, this must lead to trouble…… [The Government] will not stand by and watch when intemperate activism threatens our social fabric.”

Mr Siew completely DON’T deserves another term as NMP. He turns a blind eye to so obvious lousy unruly behaviours that he shows himself to be gutless in the face of vocal majority. He therefore don’t deserve any right to speak on the behalf of the people and his chasing of limelight on such a diverse variety of issues shows that his heart is not in the right place in Singapore’s political scene but clearly shows his own selfish agenda and self-centered ego boosting recognition. Please screen NMP thoroughly, be careful of selfish people trying to stick their foot in every topic so that they can be in limelight and gain recognition.

The very asian value of “if can make money, nothing else matters”, lah….

This discussion on whether Siew Kum Hong is suitable for Parliament (or anyone else) needs to remain civil and based on commonsense.

- Is he good for our Parliament?

- Can he contribute to the quality of debate in Parliament?

- Is he truly single issue (as many have made him out to be) or has he spoken up for other issues? A search at http://www.parliament.gov.sg/parlweb/hansard_search_latest.jsp should help you know better.

The suitability of our NMPs or even elected MPs should not be based on the shrill noises of a few vocal netizens; it should be based on simple fact and commonsense.

I really hope that commonsense prevails in the Parliamentary Select Committee’s decision making process and that it not be thwarted by unwarranted doubts.

benedict

/// 58) sarek_home on May 15th, 2009 12.19 am
It is very funny that some people say we need NMP that are supportive of Asian values.
What is Asian values? ///

sarek – I suppose Kama Sutra and the Dream of the Red Chamber are also Asian values…

Poor Mr Siew, looks like his attacks all over the internet are people with legal background and knows what they are doing. Perhaps he should be wary of such people in his future interactions as he may be talking to an enemy. Be careful, Mr Siew, three cheers.

Got Karma Police?

And he also spoke out on the Odex issue. =)

Impressed ? Loud mouth and always attention seeking.

Now when the chips are down, denying sets in – “not legal adviser to old aware ? not supporting homosexuals ? ”

Amazing how ground can shifts when the threat of losing an NMP’s allowance is in sight! Easy money before !

“Poor Mr Siew, looks like his attacks all over the internet are people with legal background and knows what they are doing. ”

what legal background lah ? common sense normal day fight lah ? if they are so much superior in their legal background, I still have not seen Mr. Siew getting into legal hot soup. legal background people are only good in court lah, outside you talk common sense which may not have to comply to their strict legal parameters lah. we are not talking about murder and serious crime lah.

I think during his term, Siew spoke out even more than our PM. Siew actually is quite a good MP, who dares to make his opinion knowns and who are also more connected to the ground. Its a blessing that MP like him exists in parliment. In fact, we need more MP like Siew who are not “ball carrier”, or “yes sir”, who actually can speak up for our behalf.

There are some truly strange posts here that seem to begrudge SKH for not going against his own side because it was being “unruly”. Well, why would you expect him to go against his own supporters? That doesn’t seem like a very smart thing to do.

Also, what do you have against noisy, vocal, uncivil conflict? That’s what democracy sometimes is, after all. We should be glad that some Singaporeans are bothering to speak up in real life.

“Mr Siew completely DON’T deserves another term as NMP. He turns a blind eye to so obvious lousy unruly behaviours that he shows himself to be gutless in the face of vocal majority.”

blind eye ? did your own dear friends also turn a blind eye ? what did they do (or possibly could have done also) ? weren’t they also being humbled by such atmoshere (unruly behaviours). some guy (gal) here mentioned about the legal background of some ‘dream team. so what ? and at the end of the day, perhaps they did it with open eyes (not blind) and resigned humbly.

“There was no way the Old Guards could have mobilised so many people until Pastor Derek Hong gave many people the reason – he abused the Pulpit to support Josie’s political agenda for AWARE.”

now go back to elementary maths. 3000 members. 1414 vs 761 in favour of old guards (total voted : 2175). remaining not voting (unable to vote) = 3000 less 2175 = 825.

that Hong guy only came out publicly (in the newspaper on 2nd May), the day of the EGM itself, now you tell me the possible margin of so-called POPULAR support if all the remaining votes of 825 shifted to the new guards – not a lot I guess (1414 vs 1586) but enough to win.

“He therefore don’t deserve any right to speak on the behalf of the people and his chasing of limelight on such a diverse variety of issues shows that his heart is not in the right place in Singapore’s political scene but clearly shows his own selfish agenda and self-centered ego boosting recognition. ”

1. Diversity: We need precisely MPs who Can debate on diverse issues. We do not want Yes men although I cannot prove there is one.

2. Ego : Do you not have an Ego? Positive Ego can be good for confidence. A leader Without confidence or Ego cannot fight well for the people he represents.

3. Recognition : People’s representative’s job is very much Public relations in many ways. He relates to his people. Without Recognition, he would be an Unknown. Pathetically Apathetic Singaporeans would not know he exist. Yes, I believe strongly, he needs to get Even More Recognition and ‘Advertisement’ so that people could spare 10 minutes to read what he has achieved or contributed to the People. In his line of work, being in the limelight is a side effect which is inevitable yet increases his ability to reach out to the electorate who can then write to him to get help to voice up for them on issues like employment etc.

I regret to say you give me an impression of someone who is very narrow minded.

regrads
Pork and Pork

NMP Siew use his NMP to practise his speeches only. Talk, talk, talk.. but nothing comes out of anything he talks

enough of botak. Got someone else with hair and possibly brains to go with it lah…

#64
“The very asian value of “if can make money, nothing else matters”, lah….”

oh wait. But didn’t we learn that from the capitalistic decadent WEST? All that corporate greed and stuff… (read minibomb, read some banks, read some marketing depts in some banks..)

oh well. I suppose it doesn’t really matter where these values come from as long as it’s good for the pocket…

Mr Siew,
if u are reading this thread, pls join a political party and if u happen to be in my GRC, I will definitely vote for u!

A quick check on the Parliament.gov website shows that, aside from the 377A debate, SKH has not spoken in Parliament on GLBT-related issues except on 2 other occasions. First, a PQ relating to the reasons for the charging of one Chan Mun Chiong under 377A in 2008. Second, a PQ relating to the cancellation of a licence for Prof Douglas Sanders’ lecture.

Instead, he has spoken on a slew of other topics which are pertinent to the majority of Singaporeans. In just the last 6 months, topics he has spoken on include freedom of speech (the Public Order Bill and the Films (Amendment) Bill), the misselling of structured investment products (and the MAS investigations), the Jobs Credit scheme and retrenchment benefits (during the Budget Debate), regulations governing the employment of foreign workers and foreign domestic workers, the remuneration of politicians and civil servants, liability claims against the government, performance gaps between students of different socio-economic backgrounds in the PSLE and ‘O’ Levels exams, the ASEAN human rights body, and the administering of the CPF LIFE scheme.

One thus wonders why some people are accusing him of being ’single-issue’ or a ‘pro-gay’ advocate. For an example of a person who really is parochial, they ought to look in the mirror.

And then there is the ludicrous allegation that because an NMP speaks on a variety of issues, he is “attention-seeking”. If speaking up on a range of issues which concerns people’s daily lives makes one ‘attention-seeking’, then so be it. We badly need people who are willing to articulate the interests and concerns of the oppressed and disenfranchised: the foreign workers, the students from disadvantaged backgrounds, the investors duped by banks and financial companies, the retrenched and jobless (and those at risk).

I give up defending Mr Siew, there are some many not nice postings all over place. I cannot say with a fact that there is a campaign against him as I don’t know and no evidence. Perhaps we can try to divert attention to look at Straits Times coverage instead. Three Cheers too.

Wake up Singapore – let not the ostrich syndrome weigh you down. Homosexuals are all around us – they are part of our society and make invaluable contributions. Homophobia has no place in Singapore. Wake up and move on!

And just because SKH dares to voice his views, he should not be admonished so harshly. He is the voice in parliament that dares asks, he is fearless and is the man we need to make true representations. After all, we don’t want people who are voiceless, faceless or gutless.

KUDOS KUM HONG. YOU HAVE MY SUPPORT

1 If SKH’s raison d’etre in Parliament is to promote the gay cause, my answer is No.

2 If he is Parliament to engage the govt in important issues affecting Singapore, my answer is Yes.

Mr Siew: please do not let the negative and/or ignorant posts on this site get you down – there are many people like myself who admire the work you do in making parliamentary procedures more transparent and accessible to the public and look up to you a the voice of reason among the madness. Keep it up, and I hope you are nominated again and not scapegoated as a result of your speaking out for your principles. I think you are very courageous!

78) Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang) on May 15th, 2009 12.49 pm

“oh wait. But didn’t we learn that from the capitalistic decadent WEST?”

No, today the West is a bankrupt, not only financially but morally as well.

We learned it from Deng Xiaoping who said that “The color of the cat is no longer important. What is important is whether it can catch mice.”

And I think he added a corollary too : “To be rich is glorious.”

Today, China has the world’s largest foreign reserves of US$2 trillion.

What distrubs me about Mr Siew is that he denies his role in the AWARE EOGM as a legal adviser to the old guards.

He was clearly presented by the old guards as their legal adviser.

For those of us there , that was certainly the perception.

With his public standing and easily recognized head features as a NMP and a NMP candidate with some legal background , one would think he would have clarified that he was not to remove that perception- IF indeed he was not acting in a legal adviser role.

With his renewed denial that he was , the public begins to doubt his credibility?

86) Average Joe on May 15th, 2009 1.59 pm
“What distrubs me about Mr Siew is that he denies his role in the AWARE EOGM as a legal adviser to the old guards.”

ya lo. could you please the any link (official one like that in his own blog or msm lagi best) to indicate his denial.

Poor Kum Hong. Because he is an NMP, he is put there by the government and therefore must be a stooge. So no need for him. Then because he speaks up on many issues (including the gay issue) and nothing comes to pass, he is useless, so remove him.
Either way, Kum Hong needs to be removed, so say some of our netizens, who seem to be a disgruntled, rancorous lot. Nothing works for this negative bunch.
The fact is, Kum Hong is not afraid to speak his mind. The trouble is, sometimes, his intellectualism flies way above the heads of many of the disgruntled souls in our society, who only appear to care for food, drink and I suppose, cheaper transport fares. Nothing wrong there, I assure you. We could always live better lives if the cost of living could be brought down. But we must allow for the likes of Kum Hong to also provide us food for thought.
Who knows, he might one day be a valuable voice in the opposition.You have my vote, Kum Hong. But speak simply, friend, so that more of the common folk can appreciate your point of view, and that includes me.

Now, ON the topic of his GLBT stance…

Has it crossed anyone’s mind that if you were to be a voice of the marginalized – which includes among others, the poor, the underprivledged, the single parents, the FWs, etc etc… you can’t really exercise the option of picking and choosing?

Taking a leaf out of the inerrant approach to religion that some of you have – if you believe that one can’t pick and choose what is in the doctrines, then why fault a person who is essentially doing the exact same thing when it comes to his principles of being non-exclusive?

So what is it really that he should do that would please everyone? Speak for the poor, and the weak, and the under-represented.. BUT leave GLBT out? Wouldn’t that then be double-standards.. and is double-standards what we want out of any MPs, nominated or not?

Somehow I believe that Mr Siew was the factor of pushing the old guard back to power, He was the organiser, the one pulling the strings. Otherwise what has AWARE got to do with him and why were the old guard that protective of him.

Might as well admit Mr Siew.

Siew K H comes along as a package deal, like it or not. From what I observe those opposing his renomination are not happy with his involvement in the AWARE saga. This govt has already made its stand very clear to the public, especially to both camps in the AWARE saga and mainstream folks should not feel threatened by the gay community.

I believe it is better for Siew to go a step further by taking part in the next GE and get voted in. Nothing like having the people’s mandate.

Nevertheless, Siew should do some introspection, understand that at the end of the day he still needs the support of mainstream folks, no matter how well
or how frequent he had spoken. Frankly, can anyone recommend a replacement who is on par or better than Siew ?

The most important is not whether if he get his 2nd term. The question should be will he get the support from the masses.

I dont know the answers.

I give my full support to mr siew running for a second term.

He has done exactly what an NMP is suposed to do, provide an alternative voice in parliment. He has dared to ask difficult questions, and vote NO (to the films act ammendment). Without him, the PAP would have had a much easier time.

Thank you Mr Siew!

I feel that 40 per cent of our population say they are anti-gay, with at least a good number of them being ambivalent about the issue but still feel it is politically correct to say they are anti-gay. Another 40 per cent are tolerant of gays and the remaining 20 per cent have no views on the subject. (Mind you, this just a feeling and not data from an indepth survey)
It is up to the 40 per cent of Singaporeans who are tolerant, and I feel they are tolerant of most things, to persuade the others to take a similar view of things. This will make for a more inclusive society — and a happier society. But they should bring around the others through gentle persuasion and good example, not strident advocacy like Josie Lau and others of her lik.

Well, i guess if he wants to take this opportunity to masquerade as a politically neutral person to gather as much support as he can before he eventually joins the WP in the next or next next GE, then ya, I guess he cld run for a 2nd term….

in response to an earlier request for those interested in his alleged denial of legal adviser role in AWARE EOGM just do a goggle search ” siew kum hong role as AWARE ’s legal adviser”, he is quoted all over the place in the news .

In his blog, siewkumhong.blogspot.com, he says he did not breach the provisions of the LPA ( Legal Profession Act )

interestingly on his blog on sunday 3 may 2009 he posts at 01.:35 21 :

we won

“…….I have been advising the original members of AWARE in their ( successful ) battle to remove teh exco headed by…..

it has been a real honour and privelge…etc etc ”

Interesting person.

To CNA Mr SiewKH said: Reiterating that he was “at all time, cognisant of the fact that I do not hold a practising certificate”, Mr Siew said: “It was the members of the Old Guard of AWARE who described me as their legal adviser. I did not hold myself up as such.”
I thought he sat in the front row with Constance during the EOGM. He should be sitting at the back with the other men who are Associate Members. By this action alone he has held himself as legal adviser as described by the Old Guards. Also did conduct himself as if he is the lgal adviser??No?Yes?
I was not there but I saw a picture of him on the front page of today’s TODAY.

Amongst the NMP’s I am most impressed with Mr. Siew. His active participation and high quality of parliament debates are second to none. I hope he would continue to be actively involved in the Singapore politics. I believe he would bring value for the betterment of Singapore. It doesn’t matter to me if he joins as an NMP; an opposition or as a member of PAP. I trust his integrity and that he would contribute constructively regardless of where he stands.

p.s. for those who had assumed that he support gay course, I think you had been miss-led. If you would take a moment to listen through his debates related to this subject. I know you will be impressed too.

“98) methink on May 15th, 2009 4.18 pm
Also did conduct himself as if he is the lgal adviser??No?Yes?”

did you engage his service ? yes ? no ? so why the concerns ? did he give you and any of your friends any advice resulting in loss. yes ? no ?

in fact, he was there and your dear friends lost in the presence of more certified lawyers of their own. right. now, go back and think over and have a good rest. trying to split hair when there is not much to split anymore.

From the many comments on SKH, it seems that the NMP scheme is good. It further supports the contention that the NMPs’ are not placed in Parliament to raise concerns of the man in the street.

The purpose of NMP is sucintly described by Ms Seow Soh Keng as “The purpose of the Nominated MP (NMP) scheme is to broaden Singapore’s political system and makes for a better Parliament. The NMPs are politically non-partisan; they do not belong to any political party. They can therefore give voice in Parliament to dissenting views and views of the protest voters, those who are unhappy with the Government over certain policies but want the PAP to form the Government. Many such voters do not identify themselves with the Opposition even though they do not think that PAP MPs can speak out convincingly enough on their behalf. The scheme also caters to people who for legitimate reasons are not able to stand for election as MPs, but who can make valuable contributions in public policy debates. NMPs can fulfill a useful role in Parliament.”

As (80) above has pointed out, SKh has spoken on various issues with conviction and truly served the role of an NMP.

first AWARE, then MOE CSE and now NMP – all attacked. who is hidden hand behind all these astroturfing? relevant govt dept please investigate.

83) Curious on May 15th, 2009 1.40 pm

2 If he is Parliament to engage the govt in important issues affecting Singapore, my answer is Yes.

Read this and make your judgment.

http://siewkumhong.blogspot.com/2007/10/speech-on-penal-code-amendment-bill-22.html

Vote the Feminist Mentor for NMP……Not!

lawyer cannot be legal advisor mah if he advise friend and pro bono some more?

I think the question is not whether with his legal background , he is alllowed to be a legal adviser- pro bono or otherwise.

I think that is probably a decision that the authorities governing the legal profession has to decide .

It ’s the flip flopping- he was presented as the original AWARE team ’s legal adviser in the EOGM.

He claims in a post in his blog that he advised them but in some of the news report – purports that he is not their legal adviser and additional ly that it is the original Aware team that make him to be..

NMP Siew Kum Hong is probably one of the best NMP the nation has seen. He spoke boldly on controversial issues that many anonymous write would only write about. He spoke on behalf of minority groups and fought for their rights. He is a brave individual and a person who want to see fairness and justice being executed in society. I know certain brand or group of individuals (astroturfing maybe) do not like him because he is not one that flows with the current. But as a NMP he do not and should not have to please men.

I salute NMP Siew Kum Hong and hope he get selected for another term. I surely hope more people like him will be selected as NMPs and even MPs. We need people who will dare to speak the truth no matter what.

102) Modernist on May 15th, 2009 7.25 pm

Feminist Mentor may be selected to be SNMP…. self-nominated MP….

101) sicktothebones on May 15th, 2009 6.50 pm

first AWARE, then MOE CSE and now NMP – all attacked. who is hidden hand behind all these astroturfing? relevant govt dept please investigate.

I am afraid a civil battle is brewing behind the scene. They started it and now they are not going to give up. More people will draw into it and take side. Things is going to get worse.

The moderate must take a stand to keep the peace and promote positive progress instead of fueling more fight and attack.

106) Joel Low

First you hero-worshiped Dr Gwee, even though you had not the foggiest notion that he is man and not a woman and even though he had admitted in the Kent Ridge Interview kerfuffle that he had “no insider’s knowledge into the affairs of AWARE or the Church of Our Saviour and can only make general guesses here”.

Now we see you gushing forth with the same plethora of superlatives for SKH. If anyone is that compelling why not take the baptism of fire and enter Parliament through the front door?

/// 83) Curious on May 15th, 2009 1.40 pm
1 If SKH’s raison d’etre in Parliament is to promote the gay cause, my answer is No.
2 If he is Parliament to engage the govt in important issues affecting Singapore, my answer is Yes. ///

Looks like you are not curious enough. Otherwise you would not be asking these questions. The answers are in the article and the Hansard. Of the 134 speeches and questions by SKH, how many dealt with homosexuality? Now, be curious and go and find out for yourself.

105) Joel Low on May 15th, 2009 7.44 pm

“But as a NMP he do not and should not have to please men.”
Whew! That’s a relief…………

Thanks, Joel, for the bit of levity that provided.

Hi guys,

If you support Kum Hong, you may wanna join the Facebook Group here;

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=82451473402&ref=nf

113) T

There is no need to plumb the depths of childish name-calling. If out of “the 134 speeches and questions” raised by SKH in Parliament, the majority were for engaging “the govt in important issues affecting Singapore, then my answer is Yes.”

Better still if anyone is that “compelling why not take the baptism of fire and enter Parliament through the front door?” Why go in by the back door?

We should get FHM model to be NMP.

“He claims in a post in his blog that he advised them but in some of the news report – purports that he is not their legal adviser and additional ly that it is the original Aware team that make him to be..”

assuming that this is true, what is wrong with this. maybe the use of the title ‘legal adviser” can only be allowed by strict registration of a person with some official body – is it really so. if not, then it can be loosely used. what is so wrong if someone is advising on an area that an organisation feels the person is more fitting than some other person apparently more “qualified” (just because he satisfies some official definition) and hence represented by the organisation as such.

should it be the concern of others who may just want to nurse their bruised ego of their very own straight-jacket ridicule.

have you heard of the title of planner or consultant which is quite commonly dished out nowsadays by fresh faces that you sometimes see on road shows in your friendly neighbourhood estates. with a more knowledgeable world afforded by easily available past-paced information and educational platforms, you are going to see a lot of “freelance” experts not sticking to traditional boxes of definition anymore.

i think his denial and unwillingness to own up to that role suggest a major flaw in the person for an NMP candidate.

He takes credit when things are working ” his blog WE WON !”

Now potentially a subject for a probe and he denies it?

I also don’t think you your financial planner friends appreciate being dragged into this discussion?

Maybe Siew’s over commitment in his role as NMP may have cause him to be pass over.

His performance of course is e xplemary and most PAP MPs are mere shadow and should learn from him to perform in PArliament.

If we need NMPs to speak up for us all I wonder why do we ever need MPs in the first place?

Let all of them be NMPs so that we can have a more robust Parliament!

Some MPs are so quiet that I wonder if they ever exist in the first place. Many I realise are only one-termers and I believe that this could be the soft agreed contract they have from the govt before joining politics.

My votes to Siew though and keep up the good work.

120) Average Joe on May 16th, 2009 11.27 am
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/429367/1/.html”

after going through the news as above and if everything presented is 100% accurate (100% ????), i do not see any problem why he would not be able to handle it.

“Now potentially a subject for a probe and he denies it?”

denies what ? that everyone can see from what has been recorded during the egm event on 2nd May 2009 or everything that smart people like you are able to assess in his blog.

the issue lies in the word ‘legal adviser’. you and your friends are splitting hair on the title “legal adviser” while the content of his work speaks volumn – which may not to be your liking. perhaps, this is one last straw all of you are left to be holding where the bigger logs are nowhere to be found. yes, keep trying as you need to stay afloat.

“I also don’t think you your financial planner friends appreciate being dragged into this discussion?”

was the word ‘financial’ mentioned. well, this is the world as it is (there are good people and there are not-so-good people) and how did this financial crisis come about – definitely not due to those lesser-mortal non-experts. let’s not pretend, you have whole shade of goodness to badness in everything.

There are many questions that these NMP nominees must answer. From their interests and stands on issues to their backers, financial and otherwise. They asked the old “new” Aware these questions when they took over, now the table is turned and they should be asked these very same questions.

What and how do they represent, honestly and truthfully. There are many allegations made that they are promoting the gay cause, prodded on by locals and a (gay rights?) Swede.

NMPs and Siew Kum Hong, prepared to be probed and prodded.

“This is the interesting part that draws the connectivity to the people and issues”

aiyoh, you call this interesting. just a group of like minded people coming for a specific cause and they may move on after this and maybe form another group as and when it is called for. instead, i do think that people like you are interesting and a rare breed.

you may connect here and there and at the end of the day, they are still there for you to make further connectivity. you can’t really stop intelligent people to do what they are doing. if it is so wrong and illegal, they would have been arrested in no time with all the glaring alarm / publicity given to them by people like you.

“What and how do they represent, honestly and truthfully. There are many allegations made that they are promoting the gay cause, prodded on by locals and a (gay rights?) Swede.”

they ? how many nmps you are talking about who are promoting gay cause leh ? out of a sudden many allegations ? do you think these allegations are going to increase or decrease leh ? do you think this promotion of gay cause is going to increase or decrease even with all the allegations around leh ?

you just do not understand that you are dealing with a slowly shifting of the human psyche on some outdated mindset that many people still hold. did you you read this :

“In his speech, PM Lee said that Singapore is basically a conservative society and the conventional family, a heterosexual stable family, is the norm and the building block of our society. However, we recognise that homosexuals are part of our society.

They have a place in our society and are entitled to their private lives. This is the way the majority of Singaporeans want it to be – a stable society with traditional, heterosexual family values but with space for homosexuals to live their private lives and contribute to society. ”

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_376723.html

a lot of people are not pro-gay but are anti-your-screwed-up logic.

There are also talks all over the internet that SDP and other people may be involved. I think this is getting out of hand…Singapore politics influenced by foreigners??? They may not directly indicate so but this is serious allegations….the involved parties should come forward and clear the air early before the facts before it gets any worst.

Let’s deal with the whole issue of whether or not SKH was acting as an “unauthorised legal advisor”.

The relevant legal provision is section 33 of the Legal Profession Act.

If you look at that provision, it’s clear that the charge against SKH holds no water. SKH did not take out any writ or summons, or prosecute any court proceedings, or draw up any legal document. He clearly did not “wilfully or falsely pretend” to be authorised to act as a lawyer, because practically everybody knows (and even more so, his friends at AWARE) that he’s a corporate counsel without a practising certificate. You can’t deceive or mislead a person unless he’s ignorant about the true facts. Otherwise, X can be charged for fraud if he tells Y that the sun rises in the west.

Also, it would be interesting to see how SKH’s application for a second term pans out, in light of this provision (para. 3(2) of the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution):

“in making any nomination, the Special Select Committee shall have regard to the need for nominated Members to reflect as wide a range of independent and non-partisan views as possible.

it’s a nice question what “non-partisan” and “independent” mean. Do they simply mean that the nominee cannot be a member of a political party, or do they mean that the nominee must be ‘neutral’ and not take sides? If the second interpretation is preferred, then SKH’s application could well be rejected, since he took sides in the 377A debate.

Of course, that would be a ridiculous outcome. True ‘non-partisanship’ and ‘objectivity’ is impossible. We’re all ‘partisan’ in respect of the values and beliefs we hold dear to, and we expect our politicians to fight for what they are genuinely passionate about, be it gay rights, equal educational opportunities for all children, or fair retrenchment benefits. If we expected our NMPs to be “non-partisan” in the second sense described above, then we’d get no one but the spineless and feeble-minded filling those positions.

Let me first make clear that I am not in support of Mr Siew for another term as NMP but please don’t term it as an attack on him. I am aware many of his supporters when cannot defend him and his actions, took another direction of attack by alleging conspiracy against him, alleging unproven bullying him, alleging inflammotory attacks which are actual upset and truthful comments and viewpoints against him etc..

His admission that he is now not a legal advisor to the Aware team astounded people where earlier he did not dispute this reported fact that he is legal advisor to the Aware team. Why is there a flip flop and turn around? Where is his crediblitiy? How reliable is he? Can we trust his words now on? Can we sincerely have some answers without being attacked as baseless accusations or unfair attacks against him

123) Right versus Wrong on May 16th, 2009 12.25 pm

Last week I met up with my secondary school classmates. We had dinner. I discovered one of them is now a gay, two of the girls have been living together since 1990s and their are lesbians. 2 of them have just been released from prison. Another one is actively involved in a opposition party in Singapore….

After the meeting, news spread that we are all (21 of us) have been funding the opposition party, and we are planning to get support from prisoners in Singapore prisons by converting them into gays and lesbians. In fact some Christian classmates who did not come told people we are tools of the devil trying to destroy family structure by promoting gays and lesbian living together.

Right versus Wrong, …… If you do not have real proof and only hear say then do not make baseless accusations …. you have to be responsible for what you said and proof that it is a fact…. if you spread it. Can you tell us where you hear all this information….. from another forum?

siew’s extension depends on how the pap view him ie is he on opposite mode?

siew’s exposure has brought him a lot of admirers and supporters and he had given the parliament a lot of good points and debates. he has raised good issues and constantly debated for improvements or changes.

honestly siew will not get his extension, not he is controversial… he is too close to oppositions.

129) don’t defend Mr. Siew by suppressing questions and views using conspiracy on May 16th, 2009 5.22 pm

You are those who attacked. Why are people like you making claims that you cannot proved or substantiate? Show us proves of what you have claimed, not some guy who wrote something stating he got the info from another source who also claimed the same. WE WILL LISTEN if you can prove it, if not it is only rumors and we seriously question your intentions and who is the mastermind behind all your baseless claims. Prove it. If I have lunch with PM Lee, does that means he is paying me money and soon making me his minister. DO NOT JUMP TO CONCLUSION. USE you brain.

133) I Support Siew Kum Hong on May 17th, 2009 3.39 pm

Exactly, this is what I meant. People make accusation based on somebody story which is also based another people story…. and so on. We just like to hear juicy stories make make it sound like real. If you can see the blog …. a lots of words like “maybe”, “I think”, “I heard”….. is being used. How can one trust their statements.

134) Tang Li on May 17th, 2009 4.43 pm

Why is he a disgrace? At least he is making full use of his right in the given space as a NMP. Many of the other NMPs and most MPs are pretty useless and do not engage in debates with the government at all. He is doing the best he could….. Tang Li, again you are thinking from your butt….. Why is he disgraceful? At least he spoke out, YOU only know how to criticize.

I googled and found the link to the committee of Muruah Singapore. Never heard of this group before until now.

http://maruahsg.wordpress.com/about/the-committee/

Joel (135) – I see my attempts at sarcasm were lost on you and for that I appologise.

I actually worked with SKH during the AWARE saga and I think he’s what we need in parliament – a person driven by passion of belief rather than passion of ……….Though having said that, one should be able to see how SKH is not best loved by the powers that be.

i have been supportive of siew’s efforts up till now

what i dont understand is why are the allegations of him behind funded by the Swede, an attack? if it is untrue, Siew has indeed stepped out like a true man and has even made a police report

i firmly believe that politics is not squeaky clean. there has to be a certain amount of truth before someone has to balls to go about pointing such dirty fingers. then again, even though siew has made a police report, it doesnt mean that he is the victim too.

the politics scene is getting interesting

Get it or Not. Like it or Not.
If the oldman say “YES”, All others will echo “AYE”

I do not think this chap is worthy to be nominated again. In the situations he faced , he had no business getting into a women’s association and be one of the key people in the center – sometimes we must choose our issues carefully – in his case , I think his judgement is not very good !!

I’m really disappointed that some people here do not want SKH to be appointed for another term just because of this whole homosexuality issue.

Let me just highlight a few points:

1) As mentioned so many times above, the VAST majority of his speeches, etc were NOT about homosexuality.

2) SKH explicitly stated that he was not pro gay, just anti-discrimination.

3) It is ridiculous to say that you do not want him in parliament because you are the taxpayer and you do not want your money spent on someone who has made such speeches. Don’t homosexuals pay taxes too? One measly speech out of 134, made by one measly NMP out of 80 plus members of parliament, is a pitiful underrepresentation for homosexuals.

4) It is also ridiculous to say that you only want people in parliament who have the same mainstream conservative views as you. A homogeneous parliament is redundant.

and most importantly:

5) It is a true EMBARRASSMENT to singapore that the people wish to resolve issues on the basis of whether it matches our “mainstream conservative values” , “Asian values”, etc, instead of through REASON, EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, etc. Honestly, the sky is not going to fall if you choose reason over tradition.

Anyway, homosexuality aside, SKH comes across as a very intelligent, humane person, thus his anti-discrimination stance on that one particular issue. I suggest we see him as someone with the right skills to be a minister, instead of overreacting to a corollary of that.

SKH is pro-gay but hide under “anti-discrimination” umbrella ..

Alex Au is gay and of course buddy with SKH

No to SKH fro another term .. his behaviour at AWARE saga showed his true color and as NMP he encouraged the attacks on the Josie team who had shown great tolerance and control throughout.

With the recent turn of events, Mr Siew should consider standing for election to be an MP instead of an NMP.