atans1

NCMP: WP playing a gd game

In Political governance on 26/01/2016 at 4:13 pm

Whatever the outcome of its motion on the NCMP post (details below), WP will look good.

Heads it wins, tails it loses.

It’s not only me who says so but a pro-PAP lawyer (Hates TRE, TOC, believes in hanging, not helping the poor and elderly, and most probably drinks children’s blood to keep healthy) posted this on Facebook:

[Wayang Party: my words not his] played it perfectly – if they get it, they get their star debater in parliament. If they don’t, they will say PAP not sincere in offering the NCMP seat.

That is why I say – do not vacate the seat. The electorate voted LLL as the best loser – it is her seat and nobody else.

Nice to hear from a PAPpy that the WP is upping its game: MPs no longer a bunch of highly paid social worker whose heroine is PAP’s very own Kare Spade Tin (Parly is waste of time) but MPs who are walking the talk of being a check on the PAP administration.

Earlier he had posted this v.v. analysis of the law (bar the last para) on the NCMP post

A mistake the media keeps making is to state that Lee Li Lian was “offered” the NCMP post. There is nothing of the sort. Under the Parliamentary Elections Act, she is duly elected and has been declared elected as an NCMP. The only semblance of an “offer” is when a GRC is entitled to one or two seats, in which event, the GRC team is invited to elect the two NCMPs, failing which the election will be determined by lot. In Lee Li Lian’s case, she is the NCMP whether she likes it or not, until the NCMP post is vacated.

Under the same Act, Parliament is not obliged to declare it vacant – it is just empowered to do so. It is a real aberration for the same political party to refuse to take the oath for an NCMP seat and then offer another candidate to fill the seat – in effect the NCMP seat is filled not by the will of the people but the will of the Workers’ Party.

On that basis, the PAP and the Workers Party should respect the will of the people – that the duly elected NCMP is Lee Li Lian and not a second member of the East Coast GRC team. Parliament should therefore decline to declare it vacant, leaving the seat in the name of the person so elected. It is, of course, up to her to resign the seat but should not be allowed to just not take it up.

 

 

Advertisements
  1. I wonder. You do realise that because Lee Li Lian is not taking up her seat, then this seat if given to Daniel Goh is no longer the people’s choice. They are doing it by passing a motion in Parliament. Meaning to say, WP is asking PAP to please vote their guy in.

    So PAP can do it, and then say “see, we respect diversity of opinion enough to let you in.” In truth, one more NCMP is really no big deal to them, but it will help them score such points. Not too bad right?

    And this NCMP will always bear the reputation of being literally voted in by the PAP. The moment he doesn’t fully appease the cybernuts, I guarantee you, he will be derided as “PAP endorsed” by the likes of GMS and KJ.

  2. Hi. The lawyer you mentioned is not a pro PAP lawyer. He is in fact a card-carrying PAP member, so i’d take his words with a pinch of salt.

  3. That lawyer is not a pro-PAP lawyer like you say he is. He is in fact, a card carrying PAP member. So it’s best to take his words with a pinch of salt.

  4. […] Ground: So, who said what in Parliament today? Part Two – Thoughts of a Cynical Investor: NCMP: WP playing a gd game – My Singapore News: Elected President or Appointed President better bet? – […]

  5. and I’m a card-carrying sdp member.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: