ST Forum:Why Oppo MPs Can't Be Advisers To Grassroots Bodies

[Vulcann]

From ST Forum:

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/...ory_707744.html

 

Why opposition MPs can't be advisers to grassroots bodies

 

WE REFER to Mr Muhammad Yusuf Osman's letter yesterday ('Advisers to grassroots bodies should be elected MPs').

 

The mission of the People's Association (PA) and its grassroots organisations (GROs) is to bond the community and connect people with the Government. PA and its GROs serve all residents regardless of their political affiliations in fulfilling their role.

 

Grassroots advisers are appointed by PA, a statutory board. 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.

 

Hence, 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.

 

Ooi Hui Mei (Ms)

Director

Corporate and Marketing Communications

For Chief Executive Director

People's Association

[Vulcann]

Grassroots advisers are appointed by PA, a statutory board. 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.

 

Hence, 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.

 

Geesh, why wouldn't an opposition MP assist in helping his or her constituents in anti-dengue and active aging programmes?

 

Unless this oppo MP is evil and nuts?

 

:huh:

[Vulcann]

In any case, the reply from PA was published yesterday and today's ST Forum surprisingly contained many letters, both in print or online ones, rebutting the PA's response.

 

All the arguments against the ruling party blokes being appointed grassroots advisers in every single ward irregardless they are elected MPs or not previously brought out since the dinosaurs ruled the earth were there so they are not new.

 

I agree with many bros that this is one sacred cow they will NEVER slaughter so all the points brought out will unfortunatelly fall on deaf ears.

 

Rest assured PA will come out with grand-sounding responses to counter these "noises".

 

Too bad guys, this is the way things had been, are and will always be...

Edited September 1, 2011 by Vulcann

[KARTer]

In any case, the reply from PA was published yesterday and today's ST Forum surprisingly contained many letters, both in print or online ones, rebutting the PA's response.

 

All the arguments against the ruling party blokes being appointed grassroots advisers in every single ward irregardless they are elected MPs or not previously brought out since the dinosaurs ruled the earth were there so they are not new.

 

I agree with many bros that this is one sacred cow they will NEVER slaughter so all the points brought out will unfortunatelly fall on deaf ears.

 

Rest assured PA will come out with grand-sounding responses to counter these "noises".

 

Too bad guys, this is the way things had been, are and will always be...

Quite a waste of time reading PA's lame excuses.... let them conitnue to lick, a leopard will never change

[Without_a_car]

I am quite surprised at the number of letters that were sent.

 

The saga proves that defeated PAP candidates can use the PA as a proxy to run day to day grassroots activities without being elected.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Without_a_car

[Latio2005A]

THis will turn many people off, definitely.

 

If PA acts like a govt body just like any stat board for example, then any civil servant can be appointed as Grassroot Advisors who can better explain govt policies. Why must they be P@P people, let alone DEFEATED and REJECTED Candidates?

 

PA ar PA, please wake up your idea. This is new Singapore, not the same one years' ago. My father btw has "migrated" upstairs, so you have to deal with the "new generation". And we crave for fairness!

[Rncw]

PA is a pro Pappy organization set up as a stat board - the propaganda machine for the pappy...not the gahment. this is the impression from the reply.

 

anti-dengue, active aging??? NEA do what???? MCYS do what???

 

"PA and its GROs serve all residents regardless of their political affiliations in fulfilling their role."

[Vulcann]

Anyway bros this is today's ST Forum website link: http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/ST%2BForum.html

so you can go read both print & online letters.

 

Still quite unbelievable today letters seemed 一面倒except one from a pro-ruling party supporter.

[Darryn]

What I think is a great way to remove partisanship from the advisor role (and let's face it - "ruling party" MPs are partisan - even if they do reflect govt policy) is to have the advisor role taken up by a senior civil servant (eg: head of stat board / govt agency etc)

 

 

[Without_a_car]

[Tigerwoods]

From ST Forum:

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/...ory_707744.html

 

Why opposition MPs can't be advisers to grassroots bodies

 

WE REFER to Mr Muhammad Yusuf Osman's letter yesterday ('Advisers to grassroots bodies should be elected MPs').

 

The mission of the People's Association (PA) and its grassroots organisations (GROs) is to bond the community and connect people with the Government. PA and its GROs serve all residents regardless of their political affiliations in fulfilling their role.

 

Grassroots advisers are appointed by PA, a statutory board. 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.

 

Hence, 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.

 

Ooi Hui Mei (Ms)

Director

Corporate and Marketing Communications

For Chief Executive Director

People's Association

Title is Director - yet don't even know how to write good explanations.

Nowadays Director is a DIME a Dozen.

 

[Darryn]

Title is Director - yet don't even know how to write good explanations.

Nowadays Director is a DIME a Dozen.

 

You think she wrote this herself? It sure got run past the higher ups first for such a thing...

[Kb27]

What else do we expect ?

If you vote opposition, utilities start disappearing?

Public transport start disappearing?

What if WP becomes the gahmen?

PA should be dissolved, bcoz PAP is now not the gahmen and they can't serve the people ?

 

Repent, vote PAP or else ?

[1fast1]

Where are our resident dogs, to defend the indefensible?

[Mustank]

this one is funny!!!!!!

[Csnewbie]

the govt system despite self-proclaimed world class/efficient,is often flawed and deficient.

 

and they indulge in self-deception and refuse to improve.

 

the ppl and their beliefs they employ are more interested in self-survival and good life rather than service.

 

how than can we expect more from them.

 

for

• eg:every junction just put in a light.

  where manual marshal could have been more efficient,in economic sense too.

• eg:Poor's complaints are most likely shelved aside and disregarded
• eg:while serving NS has alot of sh it inside
• eg:they bring in foreigners but neglect capacities,eg food,transport,housing.
• eg:society has become elitist,less educated has trouble surviving
• eg:regulations are rigid
• eg:too much work, no chance/venue for play

care to add more?

 

 

:blink:

Edited September 1, 2011 by Csnewbie

[Acemundo]

You think she wrote this herself? It sure got run past the higher ups first for such a thing...

 

yep you are right. i used to serve my national service at civilian camp. even the simplest of letter goes through CO and OC.

 

for those civilian that made very special request, even the Perm Sec of MINDEF have to vet through the letter. that's efficiency and bureaucracy in MINDEF.

 

but one thing i could not agree is that despite going through OC, CO and Perm Sec, the way the decision is made is always the same. follow the rules and precedent cases strictly.

 

so the OC, CO and Perm Sec participation is merely to look at the grammar and vocab of the letter.

[AlexToh13]

From ST Forum:

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/...ory_707744.html

 

Why opposition MPs can't be advisers to grassroots bodies

 

WE REFER to Mr Muhammad Yusuf Osman's letter yesterday ('Advisers to grassroots bodies should be elected MPs').

 

The mission of the People's Association (PA) and its grassroots organisations (GROs) is to bond the community and connect people with the Government. PA and its GROs serve all residents regardless of their political affiliations in fulfilling their role.

 

Grassroots advisers are appointed by PA, a statutory board. 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.

 

Hence, 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.

 

Ooi Hui Mei (Ms)

Director

Corporate and Marketing Communications

For Chief Executive Director

People's Association

 

The thing about this statement is that it seems to be poorly constructed in terms of giving a good reason. However, after reading a few times, I seem to feel that it offers a direct and clear response to what PA might actually is lor - that's it is promoting community bonding but only under the direction of the current ruling party.

 

Of cos, this stirs things up as PA should be for the people as it uses taxpayers funding ba, I think?