Khairulanwar Zaini / Andrew Loh
The last time Dr Chee Soon Juan crossed swords with Mr George Yeo was in 1996. The two had met at a Select Committee hearing specially convened to ascertain the Singapore Democratic Party’s assertions about healthcare costs in Singapore. Mr Yeo was then Minister for Health.
13 years on, the two men are again exchanging words – this time, in cyberspace.
On 8 August, Dr Chee posted an invitation on Mr Yeo’s Facebook page inviting the minister to an online debate, according to a report on the SDP’s website. “I would like to extend to you the same invitation… to a debate on the key issues affecting Singaporeans,” Dr Chee said in his note.updates his Facebook daily, replied, “I am happy to engage as and when issues arise, but I do so as an individual without getting the PAP or MFA involved. Short responses, not long exchanges if possible. So far it has been fun for me and I hope to keep it that way. Hope you understand.”
Mr Yeo suggested Dr Chee wrote to the People’s Action Party if he wanted a formal debate. To this, Dr Chee asked Mr Yeo to pass on his request for a debate to the PAP secretary general at its next Central Executive Committee meeting. He also said he would write to Mr Lee Hsien Loong separately. Mr Lee is the Prime Minister and also the secretary general of the PAP.
Dr Chee, who addressed the minister by his name – “George” – then raised three concerns regarding ministerial salary, the Public Order Act and the operations of Temasek and the GIC.
To this, Mr Yeo referred to the “extensive debates in Parliament” over the issues and said that he did not think he could add much to, or subtract from. The minister added, “I am a little puzzled over this exercise. I fully associate myself with the responses given by ministers in Parliament on salaries and the Public Order Act. I hope you were not thinking that I would privately to you say otherwise.”
Personal view
Dr Chee was however more interested in Mr Yeo’s “personal views” and asked whether Mr Yeo’s ministerial pay was “morally and economically defensible”. “Do you think you deserve the amount (it’s nearly $3 million at last count, I believe) and are you comfortable with this knowing that the poorest of our poor whom you and your colleagues rule over are paid as little as $400 a month?” Dr Chee asked. “Economically is this just? Morally is it sustainable?”
He also raised the issue of public assembly. He pointed out that “PAP supporters (are allowed) to hold processions and assemblies while supporters of the opposition are not.” Dr Chee also sought Mr Yeo’s opinon on Ho Ching’s continued tenure in Temasek despite her presiding over a $40 billion loss.
Dr Chee said he was looking for Mr Yeo’s ‘thoughts and views, not those of (his) colleagues in Parliament’, instead of ‘non-answers’.
In Mr Yeo’s third reply, he affirmed that he “fully associate … with the responses given by ministers in Parliament on salaries and the Public Order Act”.
He assured Dr Chee that “there are many programmes” for Singaporeans facing hardship, adding that “as an MP, (he) address(es) their needs directly.”
He also defended Temasek’s performance. “On foreign visits, I often receive favourable comments about how Temasek is run. A number of countries actually hold Temasek up as a model to follow,” he said. He added, however, that with Charles Goodyear’s departure, Temasek “will have to go head hunting again.”
Minimum wage, Constitutional fairness & Transparency
To this, Dr Chee lamented the “many Singaporeans currently taking on full-time jobs who are paid so poorly that they cannot pay their bills, send their children to school, or live decent lives”.
He said that in light of the salaries that ministers draw, Singapore should “introduce Minimum Wage”.
Dr Chee also asked about the disparity of treatment when the so-called Tak Boleh Tahan protestors were arrested, compared to the protests held by the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case).
He also reiterated that Temasek and the GIC were not transparent, and that Temasek’s statement on Chip Goodyear’s resignation left much to be desired.
“The transition failure between Ho Ching and Chip Goodyear exemplifies what I mean about the non-transparency issue,” Dr Chee said. “Other than a brief and general statement from Temasek, little else is known about why Chip did not continue as CEO. Can the Government be more forthcoming with information on this?”
The exchange continues.
——-
Just read from the latest GY-CSJ exchange from the SDP site, our George boy is a SAF BOND-BREAKER!!
That’s really some news…
There are no neutral grounds in the island city state. Trying to fight the system within the system is doomed cause. The ball is in the court of the rulers – as always. The rulers dictate the rules and regulations in such a way that they ALWAYS win. Opposition leaders in such a scenario must in for the long haul. Like what Nelson Mandala underwent in South Africa. It’s all about time and stamina to run the marathon race.
To Tango,
i agree with you that i’m biased against CSJ. i didnt hide that fact from the start. But i’m not biased against the man, but his methods, his grandstanding politics. His words/ intentions are lost to me because of this. And he has lost his credibility to me, because of this.
As opposed to Chiam’s or the late great JBJ’s “silent killer” ways. I bet the PAP would be scared of, or dare i say it, even try to listen to these opposition leaders, rather than CSJ (though we all know they prefer shutting any form of opposition).
GY is right there on FB. any of us could have befriended him and ask him the questions we’ve been longing to ask. If you can do so, how would you approach GY?
(i)the same shouting and challenging style, as CSJ has done,
(ii)or would you put things politely, earnestly, to him? would u ask him for help?
What sort of response do you think GY would give for (i) or (ii)?
Put it another way. You have a meet-the-people session with an MP. Do you to go him and scream “why you get so high salary? We’re suffering here. Why i cant get my CPF money?” or do say “Mr MP, i’m struggling to make ends meet. i need help. my job was taken over by an FT. Can you help me?”
Which would get a better response?
I give it to CSJ for doing so with GY, and continuing his fight with the PAP, but he’s been at it for the longest time anyway, ever since the first time he went for elections back in the early 90s (i went to all his election speechs when he went into politics (i hated the PAP for kicking him out of NUS over taxi fares then), but he lost my support when he went on that hunger strike).
And to no result from what i’ve seen.
Hi Aygee,
How would you respond to any PAP politician if PAP had made you bankrupt while they send “policemen” to harass you with double-standard laws?
and one last point,
FB is a social network. GY started it because he wanted to connect to a new group of Singaporean digital natives, known more as a person rather than a member of PAP. He posts his personal stuff there.
If you go to a party, you hang around people u want to hang around with, chit chat, talk about personal stuff, joke. Along comes a man, shouting and screaming, and challenging you about your company, your family etc etc. How would you react?
The point is again, yes, we need more platforms for open debate. But is FB the right way? Pick and choose your battles, find the right ground to fight and be heard, and make an impact.
To Oxford Dude,
You’re taking on a “what if” or a “slippery slope” discussion. Its a discussion that wont end, and puts me on the defensive. I wont go there, and, its not the point i trying to make – which was – again – CSJ’s engagement with GY on FB is grandstanding politics.
aygee,
I agree with you. FB is a social networking site. It’s personal and for friends only. Chee SJ does not know manners. I find his behaviour deplorable. He acts like a gangster, asking stupid questions which already answered, then act like a bleeding heart for the poor (while he is able to find money to host events at hotels, drive a car, etc), and has no manners to respect the minister.
Chee is grandstanding. It is plain for all to see. Sadly, again he has fallen into the trap of his own ego.
Ang Gu Lin,
I was there when Bill Clinton spoke at the Clinton Global Initiative in HK. Never has a man’s words put tears in my eyes, like Clinton did. Talk about a politician, a diplomat, a peace envoy.
SDP (or was it WP?) wanted to invite a political strategist to come to Singapore for a talk. I think it was SDP and a connection of CSJ. Apparently, he was stopped at the airport and asked to return.
Now, this kind of work, if it was the SDP, is the kind of thing i would laud. When CSJ talks to the foreign press outside of Singapore, he is so articulate – he puts his points well. i read that FEER article in which he was interviewed at length, and which the govt is suing Dow Jones for.
I just think he takes on this grandstand persona only in singapore, for the singapore audience. Why, i dont know…
Dear Aygee,
CSJ was NOT loudhailing GY. Firstly – lets not be naive. GY is a public figure. When GY goes on FB – he ought to expect Singaporeans wanting to query him, debate etc with him there. Its fair play.
What is so wrong with CSJ wanting to debate him there ? And besides – I do NOT believe that CSJ “loudhailed” GY. Thats blatantly false.
I think that CSJ made the right approach but that GY wanted to avoid public debate. Thats all there is to it.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
There is only one word for those who betray the National Pledge….”Traitors”.
The most depressing scene is the live telecast showing hypocrites in white reciting the Pledge. It is as good as making a vow…….but only for show.
Now use some common sense to see what ordinary citizens are up against in order to change the political scenario for the better. It will take a supreme effort from all citizens. Anything less will fall short when dealing with scums masquerading as political leaders.
This is what Dr. Chee and all opposition members are up against.
To #14, “e.g. if you are a senior board member of DBS and someone asks you for an opinion, even if its personal, that DBS has cheated people in the minibond saga, how would you answer? Every company, every political party would want to send out the same message.”
Watch it Joe! Are you suggesting that the PAP was dishonest and cheated the people’s money? The last time somebody made an innocent analogy like this – someone then was comparing some people to TT Durai of the NKF infamy – landed up in court with a defamation suit and lost his family fortunes.
No. 129 aygee
You made some bold assertions and criticism/condemnation about CSJ and yet when you are challenged about your criticisms/condemnation, you weasel out.
I repeat what was posted in #126
{Leaving out KJ as he is new, what EXACTLY have Sylvia Lim, Chiam, Low “help change anything or even make a dent in getting any points across”?
And what exactly do you and people of your thinking would like to suggest not only CSJ but other people who don’t fall into the category the power that be deemed fit to be FIXED, should do to gain the support of the lesser mortals……..the tactics, strategy, platform etc.
In any case, this thread is about Minister George Yeo offering to engage netizens on the Internet as a private citizen and CSJ has joined in.
So what’s the beef of those who criticise the person who has accepted to engage the Minister in the latter’s personal capacity as a pte citizen?
I agree with Steve Wu that it is difficult for GY to defend the indefensible.
Incidentally, all should reflect on why our elite Ministers and other office holders from the gahmen want to engage voters on the Internet and yet refuse to be serious in clearing doubts.
As to GY’s reply on the Temasek question, what do foreign goverrment know about Temasek’s actual performance to want to emulate it? Foreigners might be interested to copy Temasek’s SET-UP as Temasek has been able to gain from overcharging by the GLCs, like utilities, telecom, gambling ops etc……as to Temasek’s performance, even Presdient Ong was in the dark.
It is obvious that you are anti-CSJ to the core, in the same vein as the msm and gahmen would want to demonise him.}
…………………………….
As for your #129,
You obviously belong to that approved wayang player the powers that be don’t feel threatened to be FIXED. Not only that it just shows out that your kind of group is just a SHAM……………nothing more than free-loading dimwits. Nothing personal…just my opinion.
Rumour has it that because of the hundreds of thousands taking the pledge with such passion on National. day, a major announcement will be made this Sunday to scrap NS.
In it’s place a volunteer force will be introduce for those that pledged on Nat day to WALK THE TALK
It is expected that the so- called new arrivals will queue to volunteer to defend their new home. .
Bravo! MERDEKA! MERDEKA!
Loudhailer Chee #158
Obviously you haven’t seen parliamentary debates in UK or Australia?
Search it on Youtube!
Politics is not for the sissy and if PAP politicians were expected to be
treated like royalties , I say they all should take a hike.
Talk about a pot calling the other white!
re-#165
should add
“Aren’t PAP leaders methods of running down the oppositions with
ISA imprisonments and defamation suits as merciless and disrespectful as
you said about Chee?
Talk about a pot calling the other white
Transformer,
to your point, i taking a guess here but its because many PAP politicians dont really want to be politicians in the first place. (which explains the high salary, to induce them to join politics. As for those in Cabinet and their high salaries, well, enough’s been said about it).
Also many from the “elitist” model put into place by the govt. that breeds the high-and-mighty attitude that they have. Many are also well-educated, so they have yet another “i’m better than you” attitude.
PAP also has that paternalistic attitude about it, so if one talks back, they get the “How dare you?!” response.
LKY himself has realised that his candidates cannot engage and debate, and his excuse for having NMPs.
Anyway, this high-and-mighty attitude, elitist/technocrat, and their poor ability to engage and communicate, is the result of LKY’s hard approach anyway (i.e. the Machiavellian approach to governing).
For pragmatic reason, Chee Soon Juan should just migrate with his whole clan and live with his many foreign friends. And from there he and his clan can ‘carry on’ the political activities that they are involved locally.
And for pragmatic, reasonable view, I do not foresee Chee Soon Juan to be, will be a member of the Government of Singapore.
On balance, I think he does do good for Singaporeans by asking and challenging the Regime for accountability and transparency that most Singaporeans are demanding and expecting from the Authority. At least his calls are much more publicise than that of a lay citizen.
patriot
To 167) aygee
“to your point, i taking a guess here but its because many PAP politicians dont really want to be politicians in the first place. (which explains the high salary, to induce them to join politics. As for those in Cabinet and their high salaries, well, enough’s been said about it).”
What kind of “politicans” can these people turn out to be if your guess is true? In comparison, do you think they will be better than CSJ/SDP – just seeking your views as a fellow forumer.
Dumber and dumber #169
“the reluctant politicians and leaders.”
Robots who serve without any passiion.
Perfect recipe for the demise of any nation
“The point is again, yes, we need more platforms for open debate. But is FB the right way? Pick and choose your battles, find the right ground to fight and be heard, and make an impact.”
Any platform that has publicity and readership is a good platform for open debate just like any physical place that frequent by the mass is a good place for spreading message. However the PAP is smart to control all physical space and even come out ridiculous laws to ensure that etc condemn single person’s protest . Hence, any platform that utilize physical space becomes harder for opp party to spread their message and ask question, and even then it becomes less effective for opp party as now the PAPpy is using the police force and camera to create FUD. Therefore using any online popular social media platform such as blog, FB, twitter, etc is the lowest cost yet effective and ‘safest’ way to communicate and engagement for opp party. There is no right or wrong way as long as there is result. If you use a standardized and formal platform, one will never get the answer from the gov because you will always get a same standard and beat around the bush answer.
“we need more platforms for open debate”
Yes, we need more and I presume you means gov opening platform for open debate, but the question is to ask yourself that isn’t that our gov is so pragmatic and self-serving, and only willing to do so if they benefit them and their regime ? It has only show time to time from the answer by the gahmen that everyone get sick hearing their partisan answer (take the recent answer from LIM that indicate no transparency if it does not benefit the gov, TH, GIC, yes, nevermind the citizen.). You need to proof and argue how open more platform will benefit the government. Yes, the government and leegime not the citizen.
So until “more platforms for open debate”, let’s do with whatever platform, physical or online for engagement no matter how incomfortable, ineffective and informal as it may seems to some.
You see, the problem with us is that we still think that parliament is the “ONLY” official way for open debate even though we choose to deny it. We get use to parliament debate in TV ( one-sided with prince and family makng the final verdict) and utube.
Another question how useful will you find debate in platform likeMeetThePeople session, Meet the gahmen’s session , whereby the answer given are model answer already consolidated by Lucky Tan, haha. I am not kidding you when I tell you that as gahmen play it safe all the time (even P65blog now play it safe by using small unknow Pappies to avoid putting tight spot to MP, and removing trace of previous MP’s personal opinion and thought. Everyone non-gullible can see that).
A good thing about having engagement online is that all tachi of the gahmen will be recorded into internet through blog and user account for all to see, and it is free and convenient to access those “evidence”. The gahmen can no longer says that they have discuss issues and solutions in some private “gahmen’s session”.
So let not define the boundary and constraint of what a effective platform is because we doubt we know it ourselves. Yes, certain platform may seem effective and right but then is it practical and accessible by alternative party ?
> 110) No Bonus on August 12th, 2009 7.21 am
Are you telling me us asking why the MPs are getting such high pays are all sour grapes? Grow up.
Go check out the payouts for them in previous years and now. You would know what I mean. Are you from the PuPpies?
Is there no press in this world that cannot get away with publishing some articles?
A country that was born by accident. Her people seems to not appreciate freedom and does not understand the meaning of struggle (perjuangan). Chee has got fighting spirit and does not care what people say to him or about him. He continues. He may not reap the fruits of his struggle in his lifetime.
I am sure the next generation will. Have we not heard of entrepeneurs who struggled and made it. The same concept applies. But his struggle is of a higher calling.
170) transformer
I’m here to “learn” and “grow”; including view’s like Aygee that I sometimes disagree. In my opinion, we vote for oppositions or PAP for a reason or reason(s). I am learning to look from his “views”; and hopefully, he can evaluate the merits and flaws of my “view(s)” in the exchange.
aygee @159,
“I just think he takes on this grandstand persona only in singapore, for the singapore audience.”
Well, I think you think wrong. Its not whatever persona you want to call it. CSJ must have known by now that the Spore audience won’t go ga ga with this sort of thing after his experiences so why would he do that just for the Spore audeince?
I think CSJ is using any opportunity to expose the PAP, because NOBODY in Spore would do it. NOBODY would dare openly question a Minister with her/his identity known, for reasons you and I know.
Angelina #176,
I agree with you. He’s trying to expose the PAP, and working very hard at it.
But so has TOC, Tan Kin Lian, Leong Sze Hian, Lucky Tan and many other bloggers in recent times.
The late great JBJ was at it since the 80s when he first got into parliament. Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong were persecuted and banished for doing so. Said Zahari was locked up for 17 years for even thinking about opposing the Man.
He represents a political party. i think he should be doing what political parties do, not raise issues like what our bloggers are already doing. Engaging GY on FB can be done by any of us. If you choose not to, then fine.
But to laud him for being brave for doing so, i’ll refrain from that. He’s just doing what he’s been doing ever since the hunger strike. Thats why i think he’s grandstanding.
Looking at how they can come down hard on Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong and James Gomez, and let CSJ continue with whatever he’s doing, is a sign to me of how much of a threat the PAP sees CSJ.
anyway, its just my humble opinion. Its happened, lets move on ;-)
#2 pointed out something very relevant – this is war; uncensored, unbiased war.
let the people evaluate the views of the two opposing generals and may the best man win.
let’s look at the 3 questions raised by CSJ objectively, these questions are not new. The questions on minister’s salary and Public Order Act has been raised up many times over the past few year.
The question of GIC and Temasek’s bad investment in US banks, think no one wanted it this way. every major fund houses incurred losses last year.
personally, i think CSJ should focus on current topics that Singapore need to address. Like topics on how to maintain Singapore’s competitive edge, how to help companies tide this this diffuclt period , how to increase Singapore birth rate etc.
Topic posted for debate should benefit Singapore’s future rather than for the sake of debate.
The questions posted was designed to embarrass George Yeo and PAP, personally i find it unethical to do so
#177 aygee /// Thats why i think he’s grandstanding /// ;;; Hi aygee;;; So Gandhi, when he went through all that he went with the British, and at the end of it when he got assasinated was grandstanding? Mandela after spending 26 years locked up was grandstanding? Chia Thye Poh whom LKY detained under ISA for longer than Mandela was grandstanding? Tell us, by holding such views about CSJ, after he has sacrificed so much for the sake of we downtroden Singaporeans, aren’t you also grandstanding? Remember, when you point a finger at someone, there are 3 pointing at you.
budamax,
are you saying that CSJ = Gandhi = Mandela = Chia Thye Poh?
Me disagree with CSJ’s methods, and i’m grandstanding?
wow…i dont even know where to start to counter your argument. anyway, i have nothing more to add to this thread.
Thanks budamax, but i wont be pulled into a discussion based on your logic.
CSJ can debate for all he wants. The crux of the matter is that the average joe is contented as long as you give him a roof over his head and three packets of rice everyday. He has no time for truths and other grandiose things in life.