DOCSLIB.ORG

Remarks by Esm Goh Chok Tong Parliamentary Debate on Pm’S Statement on Allegation of Abuse of Power – 4 July 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Remarks by Esm Goh Chok Tong Parliamentary Debate on Pm’S Statement on Allegation of Abuse of Power – 4 July 2017 REMARKS BY ESM GOH CHOK TONG PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE ON PM’S STATEMENT ON ALLEGATION OF ABUSE OF POWER – 4 JULY 2017 Mdm Speaker, 1. This sad public squabble between the Lee siblings is blown out of proportion. But it has embroiled all of us. It has tarnished the reputation of Singapore and distracted the Government from far more important work. 2. Because the allegations against PM have been made by members of the Lee family, they are given weight. The public is confused and concerned, even as Singaporeans continue to trust the PM and the Government. There is thus urgency to explain, restore trust and get back on track. It is our duty and responsibility to do this, to account to our voters. 3. My main concern is neither the fate of 38 Oxley Road nor the family feud. They are far removed from the daily concerns of Singaporeans. It is the wilful attack on the integrity of our leaders and the insidious corrosion of public faith in our institutions that I want to address. The nub of the issue for us in Parliament is integrity and trust – in the Prime Minister and our system of government. Absent these, Singapore will descend to a Third World country. 4. Incorruptibility of our Government is what distinguishes Singapore. The Prime Minister is central in upholding that incorruptibility. He holds the key levers of state power, entrusted by the people. When trust in the Prime Minister disappears, his moral authority and political capital shrivel. 1 Therefore, the constant self-policing, restraint and care of the Prime Minister in wielding the immense power at his disposal, is paramount. There is no hiding from public scrutiny. One’s entire character is laid bare and there is only total dedication to the job. This is the standard we want to uphold. 5. My view remains that when a Minister thinks that an allegation made against him is without basis, he has to sue. PM has explained in his speech why he would prefer not to sue. I can well understand his dilemma. Being the eldest in the family, he must harbour hopes of reconciliation, however remote it seems now, even at a cost to his own political standing. Indeed, I have urged him as well as Lee Hsien Yang to sort out their differences, misunderstanding, and reconcile. It is surely not worth the feud being passed on to the next generation. 6. Given the immediacy of the issue, I commend PM for his courage in opening himself and his Ministers to scrutiny in Parliament. 7. Is the Ministerial Committee shrouded with secrecy? Are DPM Teo Chee Hean and the Ministers PM’s puppets? You have listened to DPM Teo Chee Hean’s explanation yesterday. I brought him into politics, after he distinguished himself in the Singapore Navy. He stood with me in the 1992 by-election in Marine Parade GRC. He went on to serve key appointments with distinction. Today, he is Minister in charge of the Civil Service and Co-ordinating Minister for National Security. To suggest that he would do PM’s bidding blindly is to insult the Civil Service and Singapore Armed Forces, never mind the PAP and DPM. 8. Many of the other Ministers served under Lee Kuan Yew too. And they have stood up to him. Lee Kuan Yew told them that he 2 wanted to have his house demolished after his death. They said “no”. They are not yes-men. 9. I have come to the conclusion that neither money nor the house is the real issue. The dispute over 38 Oxley Road is only a fig leaf, only a fig leaf, for the deep cracks within the family, cracks which perhaps started decades ago. What then is the agenda of PM’s accusers? 10. Are they whistleblowing in a noble effort to save Singapore, or waging a personal vendetta without any care for the damage done to Singapore? I have kept my ears open. From what Lee Hsien Yang and his wife are freely telling many people, it is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans. 11. It is now no more a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew, and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a private family affair. But if in the process of their self-destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair. 12. Unsubstantiated accusations have been dished out on Facebook and the media, ad nauseam. Singaporeans are getting sick and tired of all this. We cannot, and will not, allow ourselves to be manipulated as pawns. 13. There must be a clear conclusion at the end of this debate. Either we clear PM over the allegation on his abuse of power or we censure him. 3 14. I have heard PM’s and DPM’s statements. I have also been following closely the lengthy postings that Lee Hsien Yang has shared online. I have heard the views and questions of MPs, and paid close attention to those from Workers Party and the Nominated MPs. I reaffirm my full confidence in the integrity of the Prime Minister. I have known and worked closely with him for more than 30 years. I brought him into politics in 1984, and I should add, it was not at Lee Kuan Yew’s behest. He was my Deputy Prime Minister for 14 years. He has been Prime Minister for some 13 years. 15. This episode, in fact, has revealed PM’s political sensitivity and integrity. He gave the proceeds from the sale of 38 Oxley Road away so that no one could accuse him that he would benefit should the Government acquire the land. He had put country before self and family interest. 16. I still keep a close eye on government matters. This is an occupational hazard for former Prime Ministers. On this case, PM’s and DPM’s accounts accord with my knowledge of how the Government and Ministers operate. I am also fully satisfied that DPM Teo acted independently as chairman of the Ministerial Committee. I met Teo Chee Hean in June 2016 to understand his thinking of a possible range of options for 38 Oxley Road. PM had recused himself a year earlier. I was trying to mediate between him and Lee Hsien Yang. That is, PM and Lee Hsien Yang. I conveyed DPM’s thinking to Hsien Yang on 23 June 2016. I told Hsien Yang that the dispute over the demolition of the house was actually between him and the Government. It was not with Hsien Loong, as PM has no say over the fate of the house. I emphasised this point to him – between him and the Government. 4 17. I agree with Low Thia Khiang that we should end this sad saga and move on. But how, he asked? I will tell him how. 18. I have stated clearly my position on the integrity of the PM and the Government. As Prime Minister, I investigated Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong in 1996 over their purchase of apartment units in Nassim Jade. My judgment and integrity were at stake then as today, when I state my conclusion on the PM’s character and integrity. 19. After so much has been said by both sides and the Government, it is clear that the allegations are baseless. There is enough distortion out there. I invite Low Thia Kiang and his Workers’ Party MPs, as well as the NMPs to also state their position clearly on PM’s and the Government’s integrity. 20. Low Thia Khiang said in his speech that, I quote, “Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling should not make vague allegations in the public domain against the Prime Minister based on scattered evidence centred on family displeasure. Making allegations that appear to be calculated to undermine the Prime Minister’s authority does not make for constructive politics.” Well-said. Follow up with a clear statement of your own that you have come to the conclusion that the allegations are baseless and calculated. 21. His colleague Png Eng Huat read out quotes from Wei Ling’s and Hsien Yang’s 14 June Facebook statement. Anyone can simply read. That is akin to spreading rumour. As an Honourable Member of Parliament, he should state his position on what he has read. That is what we are elected as MPs for. They have a clear view on issues. In 1996, at the end of the debate for Nassim 5 Jade, Low Thia Khiang and Chiam See Tong stated their positions unambiguously. 22. Lastly, if reason fails, I appeal to the emotions and sensibility of the Lees to stop trying to drag each other down and move on. Stop your family quarrel, sort out any misunderstandings and reconcile, and if that is not immediately possible, at least stop making things worse. Keep the quarrel private and seek mediation or arbitration to resolve your differences. No one doubts your deep filial piety. Hsien Loong is here, I hope Wei Ling, Hsien Yang, outside will hear me. Your parents were proud of you. This is what your father said during the debate on the Nassim Jade episode: “The proudest thing (for your mother) are her three children – upright, well-behaved and honourable. …. They were brought up straight, they are likely to stay straight. It is like, as I have said, a code of honour.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Why Are Gender Reforms Adopted in Singapore? Party Pragmatism and Electoral Incentives* Netina Tan
    Why Are Gender Reforms Adopted in Singapore? Party Pragmatism and Electoral Incentives* Netina Tan Abstract In Singapore, the percentage of elected female politicians rose from 3.8 percent in 1984 to 22.5 percent after the 2015 general election. After years of exclusion, why were gender reforms adopted and how did they lead to more women in political office? Unlike South Korea and Taiwan, this paper shows that in Singapore party pragmatism rather than international diffusion of gender equality norms, feminist lobbying, or rival party pressures drove gender reforms. It is argued that the ruling People’s Action Party’s (PAP) strategic and electoral calculations to maintain hegemonic rule drove its policy u-turn to nominate an average of about 17.6 percent female candidates in the last three elections. Similar to the PAP’s bid to capture women voters in the 1959 elections, it had to alter its patriarchal, conservative image to appeal to the younger, progressive electorate in the 2000s. Additionally, Singapore’s electoral system that includes multi-member constituencies based on plurality party bloc vote rule also makes it easier to include women and diversify the party slate. But despite the strategic and electoral incentives, a gender gap remains. Drawing from a range of public opinion data, this paper explains why traditional gender stereotypes, biased social norms, and unequal family responsibilities may hold women back from full political participation. Keywords: gender reforms, party pragmatism, plurality party bloc vote, multi-member constituencies, ethnic quotas, PAP, Singapore DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5509/2016892369 ____________________ Netina Tan is an assistant professor of political science at McMaster University.
    [Show full text]
  • 2Nd REPLY by MS GRACE FU, SENIOR MINISTER of STATE for NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT and EDUCATION, on DELIVERING a STUDENT- CENTRIC EDUCATION
    FY 2011 COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY DEBATE: 2nd REPLY BY MS GRACE FU, SENIOR MINISTER OF STATE FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATION, ON DELIVERING A STUDENT- CENTRIC EDUCATION 1. Sir, allow me to address specific issues raised by members, and elaborate on two key areas: (i) First, our efforts to create a student-centric learning environment; and; (iii) Second, providing more support for students with special needs. (I) SUBSTANTIVE AND INNOVATIVE INVESTMENTS TO DELIVER A STUDENT- CENTRIC EDUCATION Enhanced School Infrastructure to Support Holistic Education 2. Mrs Josephine Teo and Mdm Halimah Yacob asked for an update on the Primary Education Review and Implementation Committee’s (or PERI) recommendations. We are upgrading 40 more Primary schools in Phase 3. This will facilitate primary schools to transit to single session and allow strengthening of non- academic aspects of education like PE, Art and Music. 3. These upgraded schools will have newer and better facilities to support more innovative and engaging lessons. Allow me to cite a few examples. 4. The first slide shows a PE lesson at Hougang Primary School. To support a more holistic education, indoor sports halls such as this will allow PE lessons and CCAs to be conducted throughout the day, rain or shine. All schools that need it will be equipped with synthetic turf, which is cheaper to maintain and can be used immediately after it rains. 5. For the Performing and Visual Arts, schools will have band rooms, dance studios, and performing arts studios. Here we see a Performing Arts Studio at Lianhua Primary, which is integrated into the library to maximise the use of space.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewel Skyline
    experience A newsletter of the Singapore Cooperation Programme July - September 2012 ISSUE 44 JEWEL in the SKYLINE MEGA PARK GARDENS BY THE BAY IS A FANTASY IN BLOOM GREEN WITH A PURPOSE THE MAKEOVER OF SINGAPORE’S PARKS REBUILDING A COMMUNITY A HELPING HAND FOR PAKISTAN’S FLOOD VICTIMS FOREWORD QUOTES FROM READERS’ LETTERS n our last issue of Experience Singapore, we revealed Singapore’s plans to “Thank you for the April-June issue of Experience Singapore. I collect all the issues transform from a “Garden City” to a “City in A Garden”. We provide more details that you send me. Any latest news of in this issue. Our cover story Jewel Of A Park is dedicated to Singapore’s new Singapore never fails to impress me. When I Gardens By The Bay which was offi cially opened by Prime Minister Lee Hsien saw the latest cover, my mind went back to ILoong on 28 June 2012. The Gardens, which took 8 years to complete, are set to the Chinese cultural centre in Chinatown – it become an intrinsic part of Singapore’s new downtown. was one of the most striking places I visited in Singapore four years ago.” Outside of the city, the rejuvenation of our community parks is also well underway. In Beautifying With A Purpose, fi nd out how a utilitarian canal in Premachanda Abeywickrama Danapala, Sri Lanka Bishan-Ang Mo Kio park was transformed into a beautiful waterway employing natural bioengineering techniques to keep the water clean. This issue also explores how Singapore NGO Mercy Relief recently completed a “After my wonderful experience in Singapore, project to reconstruct homes for the people in the village of Wazir Ali Jat in Pakistan, where I had the opportunity to participate in the SCP course ‘Enhancing Pedagogy Skills For who were displaced in the nation’s worst-ever fl ood.
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore 2020 International Religious Freedom Report
    SINGAPORE 2020 INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM REPORT Executive Summary The constitution, laws, and policies provide for religious freedom, subject to restrictions relating to public order, public health, and morality. The government continued to ban Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (Unification Church). It restricted speech or actions it perceived as detrimental to “religious harmony.” The government held 12 Jehovah’s Witnesses in the armed forces’ detention facility for refusing on religious grounds to complete mandatory national service. In December, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) detained a 16-year-old Christian male for planning to attack two mosques using a machete on the anniversary of the 2019 Christchurch, New Zealand mosque shootings. According to the ministry, the individual had been self- radicalized through online material, including the Christchurch attacker’s manifesto and ISIS videos of violence against Christians. The government stated the individual acted alone and did not try to influence or involve others in his attack plans. In February, the MHA launched an investigation into a local, unregistered chapter of the South Korean Shincheonji Church of Jesus the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony (Shincheonji Church), which resulted in the deportation of five South Koreans and the dissolution of affiliated organizations. In November, authorities arrested 21 individuals for resuming activities of the church “covertly.” In June, police detained a permanent resident for posting comments to Instagram about wanting to kill Muslims. In September, police issued a warning to Workers’ Party Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan for social media posts she made in 2018 and May 2020, before she was a candidate for parliament, accusing the government of discrimination against religious and racial minorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Changes, and Why Now?
    Why the changes, and why now? The upcoming Cabinet reshufe on May 15 comes earlier in the Government’s term than normal, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday. Below are his explanations for the various movements. On Mr Heng Swee Keat relinquishing Finance: On moving Mr Chan Chun Sing from As I announced two weeks Relinquishing Finance will Trade and Industry to Education: ago, Heng Swee Keat will free him to concentrate continue as Deputy Prime more on the Chun Sing has done an excellent job Minister and Coordinating whole-of-government getting our economy back on track, and Minister for Economic economic agenda, including preparing our industries and Policies. He will also chairing the Future companies to respond to structural continue to oversee the Economy Council, and changes in the global economy. This Strategy Group within the incorporating the has been a major national priority. Now Prime Minister’s Ofce, recommendations of the I am sending him to Education, where which coordinates our Emerging Stronger he will build on the work of previous policies and plans across Taskforce into the work of education ministers, to improve our the Government, as well as the council. He will also education system to bring out the best the National Research continue to co-chair the in every child and student, and develop Foundation. As Finance Joint Council for Bilateral young Singaporeans for the future. Minister, Swee Keat has Cooperation (JCBC), Nurturing people is quite different from carried a heavy burden, together with PRC (People’s growing the economy or mobilising especially during Covid-19 Republic of China) unions.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex B Biographies Keynote Speaker
    ANNEX B BIOGRAPHIES KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Mr GOH Chok Tong is the Senior Minister of the Republic of Singapore . He is concurrently Chairman of the Monetary Authority of Singapore . Mr Goh served as Prime Minister from November 1990 to August 2004, when he stepped aside to pave the way for political self-renewal. He was First Deputy Prime Minister between 1985 and November 1990. Mr Goh has been a member of the Singapore Cabinet since 1979, having held various portfolios including Trade and Industry, Health and Defence. Between 1977 and 1979, he was Senior Minister of State for Finance. He has been a Member of Parliament since 1976. Prior to joining politics, Mr Goh was Managing Director of Neptune Orient Lines. SINGAPORE CONFERENCE MODERATOR: Mr HO Kwon Ping is Executive Chairman of the Banyan Tree Group , which owns both listed and private companies engaged in the development, ownership and operation of hotels, resorts, spas, residen tial homes, retail galleries and other lifestyle activities in the region. Mr Ho is also Chairman of the family-owned Wah Chang Group; Chairman of Singapore Management University, the third national university in Singapore; and Chairman of MediaCorp, Singapore's national broadcaster. SINGAPORE CONFERENCE PANELLISTS: Dr LEE Boon Yang is the Minister for Information, Communications & the Arts, Republic of Singapore . He first won his seat in Parliament in the General Elections of 1984. He has since held political appointments in the Ministries of Environment, Communications & Information, Finance, Home Affairs, Trade & Industry, National Development, Defence, Prime Minister's Office and Labour/Manpower. Dr Vivian BALAKRISHNAN is the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth & Sports and Senior Minister of State for Trade & Industry, Republic of Singapore .
    [Show full text]
  • 331KB***Administrative and Constitutional
    (2016) 17 SAL Ann Rev Administrative and Constitutional Law 1 1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW THIO Li-ann BA (Oxon) (Hons), LLM (Harvard), PhD (Cantab); Barrister (Gray’s Inn, UK); Provost Chair Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. Introduction 1.1 In terms of administrative law, the decided cases showed some insight into the role of courts in relation to: handing over town council management to another political party after a general election, the susceptibility of professional bodies which are vested with statutory powers like the Law Society review committee to judicial review; as well as important observations on substantive legitimate expectations and developments in exceptions to the rule against bias on the basis of necessity, and how this may apply to private as opposed to statutory bodies. Many of the other cases affirmed existing principles of administrative legality and the need for an evidential basis to sustain an argument. For example, a bare allegation of bias without evidence cannot be sustained; allegations of bias cannot arise when a litigant is simply made to follow well-established court procedures.1 1.2 Most constitutional law cases revolved around Art 9 issues. Judicial observations on the nature or scope of specific constitutional powers were made in cases not dealing directly with constitutional arguments. See Kee Oon JC in Karthigeyan M Kailasam v Public Prosecutor2 noted the operation of a presumption of legality and good faith in relation to acts of public officials; the Prosecution, in particular, is presumed “to act in the public interest at all times”, in relation to all prosecuted cases from the first instance to appellate level.
    [Show full text]
  • Jaclyn L. Neo
    Jaclyn L. Neo NAVIGATING MINORITY INCLUSION AND PERMANENT DIVISION: MINORITIES AND THE DEPOLITICIZATION OF ETHNIC DIFFERENCE* INTRODUCTION dapting the majority principle in electoral systems for the ac- commodation of political minorities is a crucial endeavour if A one desires to prevent the permanent disenfranchisement of those minorities. Such permanent exclusion undermines the maintenance and consolidation of democracy as there is a risk that this could lead to po- litical upheaval should the political minorities start to see the system as op- pressive and eventually revolt against it. These risks are particularly elevat- ed in the case of majoritarian systems, e.g. those relying on simple plurality where the winner is the candidate supported by only a relative majority, i.e. having the highest number of votes compared to other candidates1. Further- more, such a system, while formally equal, could however be considered substantively unequal since formal equality often fails to recognize the es- pecial vulnerabilities of minority groups and therefore can obscure the need to find solutions to address those vulnerabilities. Intervention in strict majoritarian systems is thus sometimes deemed necessary to preserve effective participation of minorities in political life to ensure a more robust democracy. Such intervention has been considered es- pecially important in societies characterized by cleavages such as race/ethnicity, religion, language, and culture, where there is a need to en- sure that minority groups are not permanently excluded from the political process. This could occur when their voting choices almost never produce the outcomes they desire or when, as candidates, they almost never receive the sufficient threshold of support to win elections.
    [Show full text]
  • Islam in a Secular State Walid Jumblatt Abdullah Islam in a Secular State
    RELIGION AND SOCIETY IN ASIA Abdullah Islam in a Secular State a Secular in Islam Walid Jumblatt Abdullah Islam in a Secular State Muslim Activism in Singapore Islam in a Secular State Religion and Society in Asia This series contributes cutting-edge and cross-disciplinary academic research on various forms and levels of engagement between religion and society that have developed in the regions of South Asia, East Asia, and South East Asia, in the modern period, that is, from the early 19th century until the present. The publications in this series should reflect studies of both religion in society and society in religion. This opens up a discursive horizon for a wide range of themes and phenomena: the politics of local, national and transnational religion; tension between private conviction and the institutional structures of religion; economical dimensions of religion as well as religious motives in business endeavours; issues of religion, law and legality; gender relations in religious thought and practice; representation of religion in popular culture, including the mediatisation of religion; the spatialisation and temporalisation of religion; religion, secularity, and secularism; colonial and post-colonial construction of religious identities; the politics of ritual; the sociological study of religion and the arts. Engaging these themes will involve explorations of the concepts of modernity and modernisation as well as analyses of how local traditions have been reshaped on the basis of both rejecting and accepting Western religious,
    [Show full text]
  • 170702Mindmap Copy
    Who said what Numerous allegations have been made in the ongoing feud between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings, from misuse of power to a conict Against Lee Hsien Loong of interest in preparing the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will. Insight charts the Against Teo Chee Hean • Allegation: PM Lee misused his claims and accusations in the dispute over the fate of 38, Oxley Road. • Allegation: Committee focused power to prevent the house from solely on challenging validity of being demolished demolition clause in Mr Lee’s will PM’s response: Denied the DPM Teo’s response: Not true that “baseless” allegations, will refute committee bent on preventing them in a ministerial statement in demolition of the house Parliament tomorrow • Allegation: Committee did not • Allegation: PM Lee made disclose options in prior exchanges, contradictory statements about only identied members and its their father’s wishes and the house terms of reference when “forced in public and private into the daylight” Ms Indranee Rajah’s DPM Teo’s response: Nothing response: Notes that secret about committee; it is like Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s numerous other committees last will specically Cabinet sets up to consider specic accepts and Against Ho Ching Against K. Shanmugam issues acknowledges that DPM Tharman Allegation: Has a pervasive Allegation: Conict of interest demolition may not take place. • • Shanmugaratnam’s inuence on government, well being on ministerial committee, response: Cabinet has beyond her job scope having advised the late Mr Lee and • Allegation: Did not challenge the numerous committees family about the house last will in court when probate was on whole range of granted • Allegation: Removed the late Mr Mr Shanmugam’s response: issues, to help think Lee’s items from house without PM’s response: Wanted to avoid a Calls the claim ridiculous; says through difcult choices approval; represented the Prime public ght that would tarnish the nothing he said precluded him from Minister’s Ofce despite not family name serving in committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Vote Swing
    BT INFOGRAPHICS GE2015 Major vote swing Bukit Batok Sengkang West SMC SMC Sembawang Punggol East GRC SMC Hougang SMC Marsiling- Nee Soon Yew Tee GRC GRC Chua Chu Kang Ang Mo Kio Holland- GRC GRC Pasir Ris- Bukit Punggol GRC Hong Kah Timah North SMC GRC Aljunied Tampines Bishan- GRC GRC Toa Payoh East Coast GRC GRC West Coast Marine GRC Parade Tanjong Pagar GRC GRC Fengshan SMC MacPherson SMC Mountbatten SMC FOUR-MEMBER GRC Jurong GRC Potong Pasir SMC Chua Chu Kang Registered voters: 119,931; Pioneer Yuhua Bukit Panjang Radin Mas Jalan Besar total votes cast: 110,191; rejected votes: 2,949 SMC SMC SMC SMC SMC 76.89% 23.11% (84,731 votes) (25,460 votes) PEOPLE’S ACTION PARTY (83 SEATS) WORKERS’ PARTY (6 SEATS) PEOPLE’S PEOPLE’S ACTION PARTY POWER PARTY Gan Kim Yong Goh Meng Seng Low Yen Ling Lee Tze Shih SIX-MEMBER GRC Yee Chia Hsing Low Wai Choo Zaqy Mohamad Syafarin Sarif Ang Mo Kio Pasir Ris-Punggol 2011 winner: People’s Action Party (61.20%) Registered voters: 187,771; Registered voters: 187,396; total votes cast: 171,826; rejected votes: 4,887 total votes cast: 171,529; rejected votes: 5,310 East Coast Registered voters: 99,118; 78.63% 21.37% 72.89% 27.11% total votes cast: 90,528; rejected votes: 1,008 (135,115 votes) (36,711 votes) (125,021 votes) (46,508 votes) 60.73% 39.27% (54,981 votes) (35,547 votes) PEOPLE’S THE REFORM PEOPLE’S SINGAPORE ACTION PARTY PARTY ACTION PARTY DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE Ang Hin Kee Gilbert Goh J Puthucheary Abu Mohamed PEOPLE’S WORKERS’ Darryl David Jesse Loo Ng Chee Meng Arthero Lim ACTION PARTY PARTY Gan
    [Show full text]
  • Speech by Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong at The
    SPEECH BY SENIOR MINISTER GOH CHOK TONG AT THE CONFERMENT OF HONORARY MEMBERSHIP BY THE SINGAPORE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (SMA), AT SMA ANNUAL DINNER HELD ON SATURDAY, 27 MAY 2006, AT 7.30 PM AT THE ROYAL BALLROOM, REGENT HOTEL Distinguished Guests and Friends A very good evening to you all. Thank you, Vivian, for your warm and kind words. I happened to be in the right place at the right time. Many of the achievements which you attributed to me actually belonged to others - the staff and doctors in MOH, for example. And my ideas could not have been realised without the hard work of the officials who fleshed them out and implemented them. Take for instance, Medisave. Khaw Boon Wan, guided by Andrew Chew, then PS (Health), crunched the numbers and turned concepts into programmes. 2 I thank also the Singapore Medical Association (SMA) for conferring the Honorary Membership on me. This is an unexpected honour and in a sense, ironic, for I went against the flow and chose to do Economics instead of Medicine. Many of my close friends, like Tan Cheng Bock, are doctors and members of your Association. I take it that I can now rub shoulders with them in the same august Association. 3 As Vivian mentioned, I was Minister for Health a long time ago. Singapore’s healthcare sector has come a long way since then. As Prime Minister, I took an active interest in formulating our national health plans and promoting healthy living amongst Singaporeans because good health, like good education and good housing, is a key requirement for happiness and progress.
    [Show full text]