Leong Sze Hian / Andrew Loh
Minister fails to realise the consequences of his remarks and actions in Parliament
In 2005, then-Minister for Education, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, was the guest of honour at a youth and media conference. The key theme was censorship. “Ask not what you can or cannot do, but do something to make a difference instead,” Mr Tharman urged the youths then.
Four years later, Mr Tharman, now Finance Minister, had a golden opportunity to do just that – to make a difference.
On 18 August, Mr Tharman was repeatedly questioned in Parliament on Mr Charles Goodyear’s resignation from Temasek Holdings. In spite of a 25-minute grilling by Members of Parliament, according to the Straits Times, the Finance Minister flatly refused to divulge the “strategic reasons” which was offered by Temasek as the reason for Mr Goodyear’s departure.
The parliamentary sitting was, to my mind, a case of irony.
We had new Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP), Viswa Sadasivan, saying, “Accountability requires the government to go beyond lip-service in addressing the call for greater democracy, civil liberties and choices”. He was calling for the House to “[reaffirm] its commitment to the nation building tenets as enshrined in the National Pledge when debating national policies, especially economic policies”.
If the Finance Minister’s refusal to answer MPs’ questions on Goodyear’s resignation is not a travesty of the values espoused in the Pledge, and of the standing and authority of Parliament, I don’t know what is! Mr Tharman has given new meaning to the phrase “lip service” – his lips moved but only to insult Singaporeans, not to mention the parliamentarians in the chamber as well.
If the Government chooses not to be accountable to questions in Parliament, citing the reason that it does not serve any strategic purpose, then I say with great sadness as a Singaporean, that Parliament is a sham, and our parliamentarians should be ashamed, that this charade of non-accountability, non-transparency, continues even after 44 years of nationhood.
I was aghast at the Finance Minister’s remarks, that whilst he agreed that it was “a matter of public interest”, he chose not to answer the questions anyway. If there ever was a blatant disregard for the public’s interest, this was it.
And as a minister in the service of the people, and as a guardian of the people’s interests, Mr Tharman’s refusal to answer the question is totally and utterly unacceptable.
Is he saying that what’s in the Government’s interest (to not tell) is more important than the public’s interest?
A Government which puts its own interest above that of the people is not the people’s Government.
Has every Singaporean student’s daily recitation of our national pledge “gone down the drain”?
Did we not, just a few days ago, boast about how significant it was for the entire nation to recite the pledge at 8.22pm on National Day – as we put our clenched fists to our hearts and spoke the words which represented what we hold dear? Words such as “a democratic society”, “based on justice and equality”?
The Prime Minister keeps telling Singaporeans to be united. But, how can we be united, when Parliament is not accountable to the people?
Why elect and appoint MPs to represent the people when the Government can choose at its whim and fancy not to answer questions and keep important answers to issues secret?
The secrecy surrounding Mr Goodyear’s resignation is not the only example. There are the issues of Temasek’s investment failures and losses, the reinstatement of Ms Ho Ching as CEO after having resigned, the GIC’s huge losses too, the Mas Selamat escape fiasco, and so on. No government official has been brought to account for all these.
In the past, at least the Government tried to give all kinds of reasons and excuses, as to why it was not good for the nation, to disclose the information asked for.
This time round, the Government did not even attempt to give any reason at all for not answering!
Maybe it has finally run out of excuses.
In any other democratic country, what happed in Singapore’s Parliament on Tuesday is unthinkable – there would have been a national uproar! MPs would resign! NGOs would protest!
As someone who once urged youths to not be afraid, and to “do something to make a difference”, Mr Tharman certainly did not live up to his own words. For, as Finance Minister, he had the opportunity to make a substantial difference to the discourse over how the two sovereign wealth funds operated – and to lift the veil of secrecy which shrouds Temasek Holdings and the GIC.
“One does not develop a conviction and commitment to a society without first questioning and pushing the boundaries,” Mr Tharman said in 2005.
Sadly, in 2009, that very “conviction and commitment” to society of which he spoke was absent from the man himself.
Does Mr Tharman think that keeping his lips tight would help enhance Temasek’s – and Singapore’s – international reputation for transparency and accountability? Does Mr Tharman think that shrouding Temasek in secrecy helps in its recruitment drive or builds confidence in Temasek? As Finance Minister, does Mr Tharman think that his silence helps in S’pore’s ambition to be a financial hub?
And beyond the damage to Temasek and Singapore’s international reputation, Mr Tharman’s refusal to provide answers in Parliament has, to our minds, a more serious consequence – it undermines the public’s faith and trust in the authority and integrity of the House. For if the House is a place where accountability can be dismissed or avoided by mere semantics, it means the people’s voice and power, in our democratic society, has little meaning – and Parliament nothing more than an empty shell, a theatre for superficial debates.
Perhaps these are the public interest and strategic reasons which Mr Tharman should have considered before he so callously dismissed MPs’ questions.
Mr Tharman’s pathetic defence for non-disclosure is a mockery of Parliament.
Indeed, our parliamentarians should all hang their heads in shame.
——
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
On JBJ, my personal opinion would be: good politican will never win and usually die in vain. Seriously, he had his chance but I personally think he wasted it (but I am not JBJ, so I don’t know why he did what he did last time in the parliment). If you noticed, that actually gave LKY to justify why the opposition are a group of scarey people to entrust the country to. Old man actually start to capitalise on that with the subsequence election until today. CJS later re-enforced this fear to the Singaporean again and LKY was too happy that he did that.
However, I feel sorry but I respect JBJ for his belief. All I hope is that he did not leave this world with regret. For long term target, I am looking foward to the next election coming. If this time, Singaporean still cannot makeup their mind. I would start to plan on leaving this country for good.
Going thru most of the comments from the people here on some of the topic, I am very sad that supporters for different opposition party actually bashing each other leader for some view differences.
If the communist and KMT can stop warring at each other and point their nozzles at the Japanese in 2nd world war. I don’t see why the supporters of different parties can’t do the same in working together to balance the parliment. I hope the sentiment between different opposition party leaders are not like that.
Like Buddha had said: there will come a time when there will alot of people who
know how to say good but have no idea how to do good. I do not know JBJ or CSJ did the right thing, but I know it that alot of courage to do that as we all should know that anyone crossed path with the LKY or his team, his/her life would not be the same anymore. Redemption of their life might only come after the old man is six feet under, that is not guaranteed!
world class govt –> world class shame & mockery
I have had this kind of situations, when you are placed between a hard rock and ……
You are caught btween saving the dirty faces of your BOSSES and STANDING UP for the truth/ principles/ justice /equality, etc.
I remember reading about Goh Keng Swee one of the early Ministers of the ’60s who used to have brainstorm sessions with the OF in private and is well known to offer resignation if he is instructed to act against his principles.
It has been said that the OFart had on many occasions conceded to GKS’s WILL , sound arguments and threat of resignation.
GKS, and a few of the Old Guard were MeN of their own minds and unwavering souls.
That’s why I believe in the early years of PAP, there were old guards to check and balance LKY. When the old guards started to leave one by one for one reason or other in the 80s, PAP actually became more dictatorial and self-serving. By the 90s, they were already paying themselves “market rate” salaries…
Well said, good authors. It’s insulting to every Singaporean that these nominated members of parliament see no need to answer matters of public interest. Are they not public servants? The mainfestations of the growing disgust and resentment will come in the next GE.
The Finance Minister has no guts to hold the wife of the PM for the huge losses she made. I guess the reason Goodyear left is becos HC want to remain as the CEO so that husband and wife now run Singapore as if the whole country belong to just the 2 of them and Singaporeans are born to serve them. That’s the strategic reason the Finance Minister is talking about.