Connect with us

Politics

Netizens question Mdm Halimah’s role in reserves withdrawal decision and oversight of former PAP colleagues

Mdm Halimah Yacob, Singapore’s 8th President, stressed the “robust and intense” of discussions on tapping into the nation’s reserves during the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, questions linger about her role in the decision and her capacity to oversee former PAP colleagues. Bertha Henson, former Associate Editor of The Straits Times, highlighted that Mdm Halimah did not address whether she had discussed the potential replenishment of reserves.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: In a comprehensive interview with state media Channel News Asia, Mdm Halimah Yacob, Singapore’s 8th President, elaborated on the challenges and intense discussions surrounding the decision to draw on the nation’s reserves during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We had many, many meetings. And those meetings actually don’t just (last) half an hour. They lasted a few hours because we need to ask questions, we need to be satisfied, we wanted more information,” Mdm Halimah detailed.

She reflected on the gravity of the situation, as Singapore was poised to make its most significant withdrawal from its reserves since the 2009 global financial crisis.

Back then, Singapore extracted S$4.9 billion (US$3.6 billion) to support the economy. Fast forward to the pandemic years between 2020 and 2022, and Singapore had to tap into about S$40 billion from the reserves to combat the unprecedented crisis.

Despite the logistical challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, Mdm Halimah shared that discussions on the reserves were conducted rigorously with half of the participants in separate rooms and others joining via Zoom.

The deliberations were marked by a high level of respect for each other’s roles, ensuring a “very thorough” process during this critical crisis.

Mdm Halimah stressed, “We have our role to protect the reserves and to make sure that the government’s request is reasonable.”

“I’m very clear in my mind, I’m only authorized to release past reserves for very exceptional circumstances,” she emphasized.

She grappled with the weighty responsibility of assessing the government’s request to utilize reserves for pandemic support, ultimately recognizing the dire necessity due to the dual health and economic crisis.

She offered a glimpse into her decision-making process, describing it as a “very intense process.”

Mdm Halimah recalled the rigorous briefings with ministers and officials, where she would prod them with questions to justify the funds they requested. “If you say the health situation is critical, what do you mean by that? Hospitals, if you say it’s going to be overwhelmed, what do you mean by that?”

The meticulous process ensured the government presented a clear breakdown of their needs.

“Once they provide that, then we understand better the situation, then we can talk about whether we want to support the government’s request to draw down the past reserves.”

Mdm Halimah’s unconventional path to Presidency raises questions of independence and public representation

Mdm Halimah’s presidential election was somewhat controversial because it was the first reserved race election.

In the backdrop of her term, Mdm Halimah’s rapid transition from a prominent member of the People’s Action Party (PAP) in 2017 as both a Member of Parliament and Speaker of Parliament to her role as the non-partisan President in just over a month had garnered significant attention.

Questions arose about her ability to act independently from the PAP and serve as an effective check on the government.

Her being the sole eligible candidate in the presidential race – after two potential candidates from the Malay community were disqualified – had left many Singaporeans shocked, feeling deprived of their political voice.

The President receives the same monthly salary as the Prime Minister, which includes the 13th month and the annual variable component, but excludes the performance and national bonuses. This totals S$1.54 million.

Henson: Tendency to glorify a person at the end of the term

When discussing the CNA’s interview with Halimah, Bertha Henson, the former Associate Editor of The Straits Times, pointed out that Mdm Halimah did not address whether she had discussed the potential replenishment of reserves.

Ms Henson found this omission unusual, given the importance of preserving resources for future generations.

Additionally, there was no mention of whether Mdm Halimah’s lack of financial expertise posed any challenges or clarification about the role played by her Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) in financial matters.

“I think the tendency is for us always to glorify a person at the end of the term. Rather than ask hard questions.”

Netizens scrutinize Mdm Halimah’s involvement in reserves withdrawal decision

Commenting on CNA’s Facebook post and official TikTok account, numerous netizens raised valid concerns regarding Mdm Halimah’s role in the decision to withdraw the reserves.

They questioned whether she had voiced objections to her former colleagues when disagreements arose with the current government’s choices.

Additionally, some comments called for Mdm Halimah to provide a detailed account of her contributions to Singapore, as many believe that transparency is essential to assess her performance during her term.

Netizens express scepticism over the President’s ability to oversee her former colleagues

One comment astutely highlights the striking contrast between Mdm Halimah, a former member of the PAP, winning the presidency in a walkover election in 2017, and the fact that the Prime Minister also hails from the ruling party, the PAP.

This raises the question of the effectiveness of a President in a situation where it may seem like a case of “ownself checking ownself.”

Considering the limited power held by Singapore’s President, certain netizens have raised more probing questions about the extent of Mdm Halimah’s involvement in the decision to access past reserves.

Some have even questioned whether these decisions were primarily made by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, prompting queries regarding whether Mdm Halimah had voiced objections to the government’s recommendations.

A netizen pointed out that Mdm Halimah’s role appears to be more about monitoring processes rather than making decisive policies on significant issues.

Another netizen expressed the sentiment that they couldn’t recall any substantial contributions made by the current president over the past 5 or 6 years, possibly due to the limited authority within her role.

She pointed out that the president does not have significant authority to protect the nation’s reserves.

In the event the president was to reject a proposal to access reserves (which they believe is unlikely with the current president),  the proposal would likely return to parliament for further action.

 

Parliament may overrule the President’s decision with two-thirds majority vote

In fact, In addition to its ceremonial role, the President is required to seek the advice of the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) on all fiscal matters related to Singapore’s reserves and the appointment or removal of key public service officials and Fifth Schedule entities.

In other areas involving the President’s discretionary powers, consultation with CPA is optional.

If the President vetoes any fiscal matter touching on Singapore’s reserves or the appointment/removal of any key office holder in the public service or Fifth Schedule entity, and the President’s decision is contrary to CPA’s advice, Parliament may overrule the President’s decision with a two-thirds majority vote.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Redditors question support for PAP over perceived arrogance and authoritarian attitude

Despite Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s warning that slimmer electoral margins would limit the government’s political space “to do the right things”, many Redditors questioned their support for the ruling PAP, criticising its perceived arrogance. They argued that SM Lee’s remarks show the party has ‘lost its ways’ and acts as if it alone can determine what is right. Others noted that the PAP’s supermajority allows for the passage of unfavourable policies without adequate scrutiny.

Published

on

In a recent speech, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong warned that “if electoral margins get slimmer, the government will have less political space to do the right things.”

Mr Lee, who served as Prime Minister for 20 years, highlighted the risks associated with increasingly competitive politics.

“It will become harder to disregard short-term considerations in decision-making. The political dynamics will become very different,” he stated during his speech at the Annual Public Service Leadership Ceremony 2024 on 17 September.

“Singaporeans must understand the dangers this creates, and so must the public service,” SM Lee stressed.

SM Lee pointed out that Singapore faces formidable internal and external challenges in the years ahead, with rising expectations and demands from citizens.

As growth becomes harder to achieve and politics becomes more fiercely contested, he warned, “Things can go wrong for Singapore too.”

He urged vigilance in preparing for an uncertain future, noting, “As the world changes, and as the generations change, we must do our best to renew our system – to ensure that it continues to work well for us, even as things change.”

Critique of PAP’s Arrogance and Disconnect from Singaporeans

The People’s Action Party (PAP) experienced a notable decline in its vote share during the 2020 General Election, securing 61.24% of the votes and winning 83 out of 93 seats, a drop from 69.9% in 2015.

A significant loss was in Sengkang GRC, where the PAP team, led by former Minister Ng Chee Meng, was defeated by the Workers’ Party (WP).

In discussions on Reddit, some users questioned why they should support the ruling PAP, criticising the party’s perceived arrogance.

They pointed out that SM Lee’s recent remarks illustrate that the party has strayed from effectively serving Singaporeans and seems to believe it has the sole authority to decide what is right.

Others highlighted that the PAP’s super-majority in Parliament enables the passage of unfavourable policies without sufficient scrutiny.

One comment acknowledged that while many older Singaporeans remain loyal to the PAP due to its past achievements, younger generations feel the party has failed to deliver similar results.

There is significant frustration that essentials like housing and the cost of living have become less affordable compared to previous generations.

The comment emphasised the importance of the 2011 election results, which they believe compelled the PAP to reassess its policies, especially concerning foreign labor and job security.

He suggested that to retain voter support, the PAP must continue to ensure a good material standard of living.

“Then, I ask you, vote PAP for what? They deserve to lose a supermajority. Or else why would they continue to deliver the same promises they delivered to our parents? What else would get a bunch of clueless bureaucrats to recognise their problems?”

Emphasising Government Accountability to the Public

Another Redditor argued that it is the government’s responsibility to be accountable to the people.

He further challenged SM Lee’s assertion about having less political space to do the right things, questioning his authority to define what is “right” for Singapore.

The comment criticised initiatives like the Founder’s Memorial and the NS Square, suggesting they may serve to boost the egos of a few rather than benefit the broader population. The Redditor also questioned the justification for GST hikes amid rising living costs.

“Policies should always be enacted to the benefit of the people, and it should always be the people who decide what is the best course of action for our country. No one should decide that other than us.”

The comment called for an end to narratives that present the PAP as the only party capable of rescuing Singapore from crises, stating that the country has moved past the existential challenges of its founding era and that innovative ideas can come from beyond a single political party.

Another comment echoed this sentiment, noting that by stating this, SM Lee seemingly expects Singaporeans to accept the PAP’s assumption that they—and by extension, the government and public service—will generally do the “right things.”

“What is conveniently overlooked is that the point of having elections is to have us examine for ourselves if we accept that very premise, and vote accordingly.”

A comment further argued that simply losing a supermajority does not equate to a lack of political space for the government to make the right decisions.

The Redditor express frustration with SM Lee’s rhetoric, suggesting that he is manipulating public perception to justify arbitrary changes to the constitution.

Concerns Over PAP’s Supermajority in Parliament

Another comment pointed out that the PAP’s supermajority in Parliament enables the passage of questionable and controversial policies, bypassing robust debate and discussion.

The comment highlighted the contentious constitutional amendments made in late 2016, which reserved the elected presidency for candidates from a specific racial group if no president from that group had served in the previous five terms.

A comment highlighted the contrast: in the past, the PAP enjoyed a wide electoral margin because citizens believed they governed effectively. Now, the PAP claims that without a substantial electoral margin, they cannot govern well.

Continue Reading

Comments

Tan Kiat How: Police called after resident ‘became aggressive’ at meet-the-people session

Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How shared on TikTok that police were called to his meet-the-people session (MPS) in Bedok on Monday (17 Sept) evening after a resident ‘became a little more aggressive’, reportedly over a job issue. While the PAP MP emphasized the efforts made to assist residents, some netizens questioned the volunteers’ handling of the situation and urged more proactive measures from the MP.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Police were called to a meet-the-people session (MPS) in Bedok after a resident became aggressive, causing a disturbance, according to Member of Parliament (MP) for East Coast GRC Tan Kiat How.

Mr Tan, who represents the Kampong Chai Chee ward, addressed the incident in a TikTok video posted on Monday (17 September).

In the video, Mr Tan, who is also Senior Minister of State for National Development, emphasised the need for mutual respect at these sessions, which are intended to be safe spaces for both residents and volunteers.

“It was unfortunate that the police had to be called to MPS today when a resident became a little more aggressive,” Mr Tan said, acknowledging the incident that occurred during the Monday MPS session at Block 408 Bedok North Avenue 2.

Mr Tan expressed empathy for the challenges faced by residents but urged individuals attending MPS to remain respectful towards volunteers.

“Sometimes you see such cases at MPS, where one of the residents get more aggressive and can be a little bit more violent,” he noted.

He added that while efforts are made to assist residents, certain matters are beyond their control.

“For example, we can’t write to a government agency to demand the agency to offer a job to a person … but we can facilitate and make sure that opportunities are available for our residents,” he explained.

@tankiathow

It was unfortunate that the police had to be called to #MPS today when a resident became a little more aggressive. We always do our best to help #KampongChaiChee residents, but some things are beyond our control. Let’s work towards mutual respect and ensure MPS remains a safe space for both residents and volunteers. #caringeastcoast

♬ Future – Official Sound Studio

Netizens Question Volunteers’ Handling of Situation and Call for Greater Action from MP

The incident drew numerous responses on TikTok, with some expressing support for Mr Tan and others sympathising with the unnamed resident.

One comment suggested that the individual may have been “desperate” for a solution to their issue, while another urged patience, noting that not all cases can be resolved immediately.

Separately, Mr Tan responded to one user by confirming that he had previously helped the resident’s parents.

Some questioned whether the issue arose from a lack of tact by certain volunteers in handling the situation, suggesting that they receive proper training to address residents’ concerns effectively.

In response, Mr Tan emphasized that his volunteers always do their best and that empathy is crucial in such situations.

Another user noted that empathy should be mutual, suggesting that while residents are trying their best, they may feel they have no other solutions, urging Mr Tan to show greater understanding.

One comment pointed out that something significant might have affected the resident, possibly leading them to drastic actions, and called for more proactive measures from the MP rather than just expressing empathy.

This is not the first time an MPS has been marked by aggression.

In 2018, Jurong GRC MP Tan Wu Meng was assaulted by a 32-year-old man, leaving him with injuries.

The assailant was arrested after rushing into the MPS area and attacking Dr Tan.

Similarly, in 2009, Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Seng Han Thong was attacked when a resident doused him with paint thinner and set him on fire. Mr Seng survived but required extensive medical treatment.

Continue Reading

Trending