Inside Scoop Breaking News Video Blog Index Participate Humor
Home The Secret Political Blog In defense of the PAP: How fair is it to blame everything on them?
+ Follow Me

The Secret Political Blog

Liau Chuan Yi and Norvin Chan

Location: Singapore

My Posts | My RSS feed


In defense of the PAP: How fair is it to blame everything on them?

 
Dec. 19 2009 - 04:40 pm
View comments (13)

2


The PAP is not particularly well-liked amongst certain groups of people, especially me. Regardless, I have realized something disturbing that I wish to point out:

Whenever something goes wrong in Singapore, fingers get directed at the PAP.

Somehow, the PAP has become the scapegoat for anything wrong that happens in Singapore, it has been blamed for everything from killer litter hurled from the HDB heavens to the food poisoning incidents in Geylang. It is time to consider whether such blame is justifiable.

The recent case revolving around a chili sauce bottle has led to criticism by The Online Citizen of the town council which did not solve the complaints of killer litter that occurred prior to the case:


“According to media reports, residents in the area had been complaining of killer litter for months. Half-eaten food and even sanitary pads had been thrown. Six complaints have been reported to the Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council in the last three months.”

Which means that poor Kasman Samat who was attending a wedding at the time of the incident, could very well have avoided suffering ‘fractures to his head and injuries to his face’ had the Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council chosen to handle the matter immediately when they received the first complaint (or second, third or fourth, for that matter).


However, the fallacies of this argument become obvious as the chili bottle was thrown by a deranged woman who is unlikely to have been the sole perpetrator of all six cases. Even had the town council managed to investigate and identify the hurlers prior to the case, a most difficult feat, it is unlikely that the chili-sauce-bottle saga could be avoided. So is the PAP (implicitly attacked through the town council) really liable to blame? Or have we been too eager to see their hand in every stir on our shores?

This is not the only incident in which the PAP has been blamed through a tenuous link. The same Online Citizen article also points out another incident which the PAP has received blame, namely that of the Geylang Serai mass poisoning.

In the end, what happened in Geylang Serai is that a hawker placed a bowl of cuttlefish near a bowl of gravy in a fridge, leading to water dripping from the cuttlefish into the gravy. Is Khaw Boon Wan, who has been called to resign for the incident, responsible for everything that happens in Singapore, right down to what happens inside someone’s fridge?

Granted, the PAP could have instilled greater enforcement action on both the cases and started some new campaign calling for greater awareness of such issues.

But, and a very great but, every time we expect the PAP to manage Singapore flawlessly, we must expect to concede to an even greater role of the government in our lives. Are we really happy should the government embark on a new spate of campaigning over mundane issues such as the placement of potted plants on ledges, and the relative location of our seafood and gravy in our fridges? Are we willing to accept crippling fines introduced for the purpose of deterrence to scare us into considering always our safety? Are we willing to accept a shift towards the police state?

Blaming the PAP for every aspect of our lives will thus have the effect of acknowledging that we want the PAP to play a role in every aspect of our lives, and manage it flawlessly. And that… will not be a desirable outcome.



  Comment It |     |    Email it    Print it   


Comments



by Anonymous
on 12/20/2009 02:47 am

The other way to see it is that because the PAP has consistently claimed to be the best government in the world and so very deserving of their outrageous salaries, so when anything goes wrong its not unexpected that people blame them for it.

If they are less arrogant and not heap praises on themselves all the time, I am sure people would be more forgiving of their mistakes.


by Anonymous
on 12/21/2009 03:38 am

If our leaders cannot tell the difference between the government and political party, I don't expect the common man on the ground to be able to do so.


by Anonymous
on 12/21/2009 04:34 am

i think you guys have confuse "blame" with wanting the garmen or authorities to come up with ideas to prevent another similar occurrence in future.

generally, people don't blame because, we are all learning as we progress.

and i won't go to the extreme to think that if the garmen pays more attention to our grouses, it will lead to the garmen mirco managing our lives.

i think they will just impose more severe laws and regulation - as usual.


by sgcynic
on 12/21/2009 01:12 pm

"However, the fallacies of this argument become obvious as the chili bottle was thrown by a deranged woman who is unlikely to have been the sole perpetrator of all six cases."
On what basis do you concclude that the woman is 'unlikely to have been the sole perpetrator of all six cases"? The crux of the matter is not whether there is one or many perpertrators, it's about residents' complaints that no action was taken by the Town Council. At most you should argue whether that is thhe role of the Town Council.

In the Geylang Serai Food Poisoning issue, the public perception is that the hawker was made the scapegoat for the neglience of the National Environment Agency (NEA) and Kampung Ubi Citizen Consultative Committee which oversees the food centre. Why were over a hundred rats caught after the food poisoning but not before despite the Committee's claims of "best efforts"? Why was the hygience certification done but certificates delayed over a month? Put all the blame on that one hawker? How fair is it?

It is not a matter of "we expect the PAP to manage Singapore flawlessly, we must expect to concede to an even greater role of the government in our lives". It is more of the PAP government not being responsible and accountable in lapses which comes under their current roles.

Please do not report only part of the story and twist the facts to exonerate the government.


by KAM
on 12/21/2009 02:58 pm

You are spot on. We should all be responsible netizens and call an apple an apple.


by Anonymous
on 12/21/2009 03:52 pm

"Blaming the PAP for every aspect of our lives will thus have the effect of acknowledging that we want the PAP to play a role in every aspect of our lives, and manage it flawlessly. And that… will not be a desirable outcome."

Are you working for PAP ? Such a nonsensical and illogical statement can even come from you ?

If someone oppress and hurt you in every aspect of your body, instead of blaming that person for the injury, will you say that "Blaming the attacker for every injury of our body will thus have the effect of acknowledging that we want that person to play a role in hurting every aspect of our body, and manage it flawlessly. And that… will not be a desirable outcome." ?






by Picaresque
on 12/22/2009 02:20 am

Great article! Good to know there are still sensible bloggers in Singapore. Though from some the other comments I doubt it'll invite anything other than scorn from its intended audience.


by Anonymous
on 12/22/2009 03:01 am

Hi
Just as we don't want PAP to take credit for all things good, we should also not blame them for all things bad.
Is there a place for rational debate in Singapore ?


by Anonymous
on 12/22/2009 10:14 am

Rather than tell the people not to blame PAP which is known to control every aspect of your life whether you like it or not, isn't the best way is to tell the PAP is to start listen to people and earn the trust of lesser mortal ? If lesser mortal trust the God and Demi-God that whatever they are doing, they are doing for good of the nation rather than political and self-serving agenda, the former will be more willing to compromise and seem rational behaviour. The mortals are what they are because of PAP, or are they not. So instead of solving the root of problem, you actually help to deflect them and put the blame on lesser mortal.


by Liau Chuan Yi and Norvin Chan
on 12/24/2009 12:56 pm

Allow me respond to the comment made by Anonymous.

According to this person,

If someone oppress and hurt you in every aspect of your body, instead of blaming that person for the injury, will you say that "Blaming the attacker for every injury of our body will thus have the effect of acknowledging that we want that person to play a role in hurting every aspect of our body, and manage it flawlessly. And that… will not be a desirable."

===========================================

I don't really see how the scenario painted by Anonymous at all contradicts the logic put forth by Norvin. Allow me to rephrase both arguments.

Norvin's argument is that by blaming the government for every single thing we concede that they have a duty to manage our welfare in every single area, and therefore by extension accept their authority in every area of our lives, leading to an overly invasive government.

Anonymous then argues that if we blame the attacker for every little scrape we suffer we concede that the attacker has a duty to manage our physical welfare in every single area and thus acknowledge that we want them in every area of our life.

Indeed, the attacker should be responsible for every single injury he causes, but not those that he is not responsible for, just as the government should not take the blame for every single thing. If we blame the attacker, we concede that we want him to be responsible for our physical welfare in every aspect, just as we concede that we want the government to be responsible for our welfare in every area if we blame it. Surely neither an aggressive person or a dictatorial government is desirable in our lives. I do not see how Anonymous has rebutted Norvin's argument.

Chuan Yi


by sgcynic
on 12/27/2009 12:15 am

Appreciate if you can respond to my post.


by Liau Chuan Yi and Norvin Chan
on 12/27/2009 02:33 am

Hello sgcynic. I didn't know that you wanted a response yep. So here goes:

"On what basis do you concclude that the woman is 'unlikely to have been the sole perpetrator of all six cases"? The crux of the matter is not whether there is one or many perpertrators, it's about residents' complaints that no action was taken by the Town Council. At most you should argue whether that is thhe role of the Town Council."

The problem is that if the chilli-sauce hurler did not hurl rubbish prior, she will not be caught even had the town council took action and arrested the 6 evildoers responsible for the 6 letters. Even if the town council took action, the tragedy hence cannot be avoided.

"Why were over a hundred rats caught after the food poisoning but not before despite the Committee's claims of "best efforts"? Why was the hygience certification done but certificates delayed over a month? Put all the blame on that one hawker? How fair is it?"

Although there were a hundred rats, or a thousand for that matter, should we consider only the geylang serai case, rats has nothing to do with it. Khaw Boon wan was called to resign over the cuttlefish and gravy issue, not the rats. Should the rats had been blamed on him, it will have made a little more sense. However, that is not what the PAP was blamed for.

"It is more of the PAP government not being responsible and accountable in lapses which comes under their current roles.

Their current roles in both incidents, are yes, to ensure safety. Yet they are only able to maximise safety, not to give complete safety. Should we expect absolute safety and the complete absence of risk, then we will have to give them complete power as well, and that is the essence of the argument.

And have a good day :D

Norvin



by sgcynic
on 12/27/2009 11:41 am

Thanks Norvin,
Now I understand that your post is directed at the few who made stupid demands, not the many who were right to question the negligence and incompetence of the government in the cases that I cited.




Name:

E-mail:
(optional)
Comment:

Allowed HTML tags: <B></B>, <I></I>, <A></A>
Are you human? 




designed by Fusion