But come 23rd November, PMD riders have been given a platform to air their grievances in public, without fear of getting cut off by Lam Pin Min or any of the PAP MPs who so readily agreed with the overnight ban. PMD delivery riders are invited to come and speak your mind at Hong Lim Park, and let Lam Pim Min and the other ministers know that they are taking away your livelihoods by taking away your PMDs.
While this will be painted in the MSM as PAP MPs going out of their way to accommodate the PMD riders by meeting them and having a dialogue with them, the reality is that this was nothing more than a PR exercise, where the angry and unhappy PMD riders are gathered under one roof, and told in no uncertain terms that the government will never budge from their stand. This was never a dialogue, but a monologue from a PAP MP.
The fact that GST is going to be raised sooner or later now does not even surprise Singaporeans anymore. So, is integrity really about telling Singaporeans in advance about the expected hike, or actually apologising to Singaporeans that all those noise about GST not being raised were in the end not true? Shouldn't DPM Heng, who is also the Finance Minister, show more integrity to Singaporeans by saying that the government could not fulfill its promise of just four years before, and thus apologise for this breaking of promise? That is integrity.
His statement smacks of him praising his party to high heavens. He might have forgotten PM Lee's promise during the last election campaign that GST would not go up, quashing WP's claims that it would. No matter, because according to Heng, just because you are upfront about the raising of GST it means you have integrity, past promises be damned.
For sure, if it occurred in AHTC itself, WP will be questioned over and over, and motion filed in Parliament to accuse them of negligence of the highest order. After all, an oversight like this may cost lives, as it so nearly did in this particular incident. WP will be accused of not exercising due diligence.
Many Singaporeans question the timing of this new Law, indicating that if this was to be passed into Law, it should not be parachuted in immediately for the next election, but instead should be carried out for the next one. Many also questioned if the hurried nature of the Reserved Presidency Election was to stop Tan Cheng Bock from contesting, as he had been widely tipped to run for the President, and most said that he could have won.
While Senior Minister of State Lam Pin Min told Parliament that the move was necessary to make pedestrians feel safe again, about 100,000 PMD users who depended on them to make a living, were left jobless and clueless as to what they can do. The question that most PMD users had for the people who made the decision from their ivory towers was that did the new law kick in without proper consultations and deliberations, and was there any thoughts given to those whose very rice bowl depended on them riding the PMD.
But if this was a less a conclusion than an affirmation that the PAP MPs care more in their ultimate drive to fix the opposition and ensure they get their cushy Parliamentary seats in the next elections, rather than s desire to improve the lives and welfare of Singaporeans. After all, for this motion, almost all PAP MPs were present, but when debates were done on other pertinent issues, Parliament would often see a majority of empty seats.
Pritam said the motion was carried out hurriedly and and was premature, and indicated that the timing is highly "unusual for a legal system that places an exacting premium on the rule of law as a defining characteristic of the country". He then urged the PAP to come clean and explain to Singaporeans why they hurriedly file the motion before the case is concluded. Pritam also revealed that AHTC's auditors had submitted an unqualified financial statement this year and it has been sent to the Ministry of National Development, which oversees town councils.
Other pertinent issue raised by the resident was why the residents were not consulted if TC funds were used, why the TC hired the most expensive lawyer to represent them as if the case was strong, then even the cheapest lawyer can also ensure a Court victory over the WP, why there were no 3 quotations done to hire the lawyers representing the TC, and did the TC actually breach any rules and regulations in using the TC funds.