Search the Community

Yahoo News Opposition parties criticise PA letter Two opposition parties have criticised a recent letter by the People's Association (PA) on why opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) cannot be advisers to grassroots organisations (GROs). "I can only conclude that the PA is partisan," said Hougang SMC MP Yaw Shin Leong, pointing out that organisation seemed to be equating the government with the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) in its forum letter. "The government and the said political party needs to be separated in terms of identity," Yaw said. "Over the decades, however, the two seem to have been increasingly seen as the same." The Singapore People's Party echoed this view. "By choosing not to work with duly elected Opposition MPs, the PA is confirming that it is working for the interest of the PAP, not Singapore," the party's central executive committee said in a statement. In a forum letter to The Straits Times published on Wednesday, PA's director for corporate and marketing communications Ooi Hui Mei said that opposition MPs cannot be advisers to GROs because they "cannot be expected" to promote government activities. "The government has to appoint grassroots advisers who support its programmes and can play this role well... Opposition MPs cannot be expected to do this and thus cannot become advisers to GROs," wrote Ooi. She further explained that "besides connecting people to people, grassroots advisers are required to help the government connect with people and help promote government policies and programmes such as anti-dengue and active ageing." Ooi was responding to a reader who felt grassroots advisers, who are appointed by the PA, should be elected MPs. Yaw told Yahoo! Singapore that he found it strange for the PA to comment that an elected opposition MP, being one himself, is unable to fulfill the role of connecting with people and promoting programmes such as anti-dengue and active ageing. When contacted, Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC and PAP MP Janil Puthucheary defended the PA's policy. Dr Puthucheary, who sits on the PA's board of management, said that as a statutory board, the PA is "linked to government policy" and the grassroots adviser has to believe in the overall thrust of the government's approach. "People who implement and operationalise these policies cannot oppose them. You simply can't have a situation where the adviser does not support the implementation of these policies," he noted. Opposition MPs fundamentally oppose the government and so would not always be in support of its policies and programmes, he said. "Even if they did support policies such as anti-dengue and active ageing programmes, it is possible that they could oppose methods of implementation of these policies," he added. However, political observer Tan Ern Ser said that the PA's actions may erode the moral ground of the PAP and dilute its political capital. While the PA is able to defend its practice of appointing PAP members as grassroots advisers on "logical grounds", the associate professor of sociology at the National University of Singapore suggested that Opposition MPs take matters into their own hands. "I would argue on practical grounds that the WP may want to consider setting up its own grassroots organisations, since the ones set up by PA may not take to them as advisers in any case," he said. The debate over the politicisation of the PA started when Workers' Party (WP) Aljunied GRC MP Chen Show Mao was uninvited from a Hungry Ghosts' Festival dinner organised by Hougang residents because they were told that approval for the venue would be withdrawn by the PA if they invited Chen. It later emerged that 26 commonly-used spaces in the constituency had been leased to the PA by the Housing and Development Board in June. Following a public outcry, the PA revised its policy and relaxed its restrictions on event guest lists.

So... How will TPL fare without SM GCT?