When the news broke that there were resignations from RP, the Sec-Gen issued a statement. It made allegations and insinuations abt those who had quit:
– The timing of this departure, its highly co-ordinated and planned manner and the way the individuals then went to the Press, hardly seems an appropriate response to personal incompatibility.
– an action designed to do maximum damage to The Reform Party and gain maximum publicity for the political careers of the individuals involved.
– then there was an account of an “ang pow” incident which seemed to insinuate that there could be corruption (although the Sec-Gen denied making an allegation of corruption.)
Contrast this with the response of Tony Tan and Hazel Phua. They wrote, In the short one year plus that we have been in the Reform Party, although we have our disagreements, we have also seen the SG’s drive and dedication. Since we cannot achieve agreement, we do not wish to be in his way.
They also answered the “ang pow” allegation, an explanation that sounds reasonable, though $400 sounds a bit too rich for kids.
The Sec-Gen is a gd economist, speaker and writer. But he is no gentleman as this statement shows and his petulance over the leaking of his letter to SDA showed.
Now not being a gentleman may not be be important in S’pore*, but being accident prone is. Can anyone trust a guy who has been involved in disrupting three parties: SPP, SDA and now his own RP?
*Example- the letters of condolences that MM, PM and SM sent to the sons of JBJ