Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Between a rock and a hard place
If Mas Selamat has been following the news (assuming that he is still in Singapore), he must be laughing to death at the level of embarassment and troubles he has caused to the government. I think the problem with the escape of Mas Selamat, at least for now, is not so much of a possible terrorist attack but rather, how far up the hierarchy should blame go?
There are two parallel lines of argument. The first one, favoured by many netizens, is that heads of officials connected to the escape of Mas Selamat should roll, whether they are directly involved or otherwise. Even if you are high up in the hierachy and not directly involved, you still have to go because like it or not, the escape happened under your watch and you are ultimately responsible.
The second argument, favoured by the government, is that only the heads of those who are directly involved should roll. The logic here is that it is unfair to punish someone for something that is not within his or her direct control. DPM Wong did not have direct control over the Gurkha guards. If he did, then of course he has to go. But since he didn’t, we should be fair to him and not blame him at all.
Each argument fundamentally works on a different set of assumptions, so it is difficult to argue one in favour of another. However, as Gerald rightly pointed out, most of the work done by a minister are actually that of the civil servants under him. Favouring the second argument means that any Singaporean minister will have an iron rice bowl (make that a diamond rice bowl: it’s the hardest substance around and it’s damn expensive) because he/she will never be directly responsible for most of the things happening under his watch. As long as a minister does not succumb to corruption or engage in behaviour defined as unacceptable by society or the ruling political party, the job is basically secured for life.
Either way, we have a problem. It’s either we create a culture of aversion to mistakes or we create a modern day nobility. We have to choose between a rock and a hard place. And, the choice has been made for all of us.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 24/04/2008 at 1:09 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 2 years ago
if the pay of our minister is what David Marshal got – or a declaration that ministers do not need a pay to be pegged to the private sector, I am sure many many Singaporeans will be more forgiving. Right? It was a booby trap they set up for themselves. Boom, thanks to Mas Selamat, we now know the elitist will never get blamed – only the peasants. Actually – my gut feel is that the COI report was faked. Sorry – someone has to sue the govt on behalf of Mas Selamat wife and kids.
about 2 years ago
Why do Singaporeans so easily allowed themselves to swallow wholesale, bait and hook, everything that is dished out to them?
Very few bother to think out of the box. Even less bother to piece
all the available information and data together and examine them
to see whether there are loop holes. In this case, there are so
many glaring loop-holes, yet only a handful of people managed
to detect some of them. (I know some would be asking me to
point out the loop-holes and I can’t blame them because they are
so used to being spoon fed – always want the standard 10-year
series answers to guide them through their exams – their whole
fxxking life is nothing but fear of not scoring high enough in their
exams!)
.
I think it must be the educational system and the environment that
have made Singaporeans what they are today. No wonder they
always get slaughtered by the Hongkongers and the Taiwanese
and now the mainland Chinese when doing business with them.
.
Nei ber mind, the meek shall inherit the earth … hahahaha…
about 2 years ago
http://singaporerebel.blogspot.com/
right, if ISA was correct all the time, the 22 roman catholics would have been confused God Loving Mao Red Book carrying Marxist. Francis Seow in representing the catholics ended up labelled an American spy. Sure, ISA has a record it can be proud of- says PM Lee and DPM. Who were the 22 marxists? Playrights enllightening us about the plights of filipino workers (what Breama Mathi is doing now – pardon my spelling) Lawyers speaking out to Singaporeans to help us become more caring and spend more time to help the poor (instead of working long hours to be the next multi million Law minister).
In the meantime (20+ years later) PAP ministers salary has rocketed, the bottom 20 percent of our Singapore citizens have a lower pay, more of the jobs of our poor are going to China ladies, NTUC makes you pay $100 to use $5 discount vouchers and our NTUC is million dollar profit making entity, instead of a cost plus entity. Have we improved? Where is our country’s soul – all counted in GNP and GDP
Of course the COI report is the handy work of the ISA. Do you believe it is factual??
I love my country, and I hope changes in PAP will start within soon, but some people say it is already too late.
I too feel sad when PM Lee says that if there are errors, it may be risk taking, a throw of the dice showing one instead of 6, and I FEAR for my CPF money. There will be no errors by Ho Ching / Tharman / MM Lee – they are gambling with our reserves. And it will be too late.
about 2 years ago
I hope Mas will state his story on how he actaully escaped to clear the air! ( I hardly believe myself in suggesting this) But in light of the loss of trust on the press and the independence of the COI, no choice LAH!
The whole saga shows they have no Leadership qualities. No pride. Shameless and Useless.4 years cannot decide on a DESIGN for grillls in a Toilet? Incomptence at working level, lack of honour at the highest levels
about 2 years ago
I think it is a fallacy to limit the choices of response to this issue to either firing Wong or exonerating him of all responsibility.
What Singaporeans are questioning is why there is no proper acceptance of responsibility where it’s due, and why there is no censure of the leaders when mistakes are made.
When mistakes are made, leaders must take responsibility. When it is necessary, the leaders involved must step down – otherwise other measures such as voluntary pay cut or public censure are the norm in countries all over the world.
Why should our leaders be so extra special in that they must always appear to be right, and never to be criticized?
about 2 years ago
Yes, WKS should not resign. He is a rare talent and his role is very hard to fill by any one else. Although the failure of CCTVs, design flaws of the detention centre, lack of audits & checks and supervision appear to be systemmic, it is not. It boils down to the guards and their direct supervisors….and no higher up.
We should all learn to move on. I wonder why singaporeans are so concerned anyway? The billions lost in Shin Corp and nobody resigned, they lost in Global crossing and nobody resigned.
You should not compare with what you have to deal with – if you’re a project leader and your project failed because your team players are not doing their job properly, you are usually told to resign. That is a fact of life for many of us. But we should not measure our leaders by our own standards because they are different from ordinary citizens. Ordinary citizens we can find new ones, replace them easily but our elite leaders they are Singapore’s treasures.
Our leaders are only capable of honest mistakes not real mistakes. This is country where aged cleaners can be asked to go because younger cheaper ones from China are found. People are faced with harsh penalties when mistakes are made, a few wrong words can mean bankruptcy for some people. I think the people are asking WKS to resign not because of Mas Selamat alone, but because their own reality is so different from that our elite leaders – once again the ordinary people fail to appreciate the enormity of our nation’s loss if WKS were to resign when there is no need to do so. It is the fault of ordinary people should anything go wrong with Singapore, they are ones who are suppose to work hard to keep the economy going and our leaders are suppose to take the credit for the success of Singapore – failure is for the people down the line to shoulder.
about 2 years ago
AC,
Go read Animal Farm. See if you think its ending is what we are seeing in Singapore of late.
about 2 years ago
I think all involved should take some responsibility. Afterall, the minister is the one who sets all the policies, and oversees everything.
Maybe it is a little harsh to call for his resignation. But the sad fact is that even he doesn’t think he’s in the wrong, and never has he apologised once for the entire saga.
So, if, after the excessive manhunt, MSK is still not to be found. Who’s fault will it be?
Of course, its the entire SAF and Ghurka’s fault, plus citizens, who have not opened a big enough eye to spot him.
Not his fault, he sits on his high chair… cannot see anything except his bank balance.
about 2 years ago
Ok to cool down matters, I suggest DPM Wong transfer to other ministry such as Transport or Health, in order to save face rather than ask him resign. If MSK can’t be found another 3 years, then I think Wong KS will not stand for election for fear of dragging down pap, he will actomically retire quietly. Give him a chance,
about 2 years ago
the PM is concern that if we allow the line of logic subscribed by the crowd, none of the heads will be spared including his. so he said, let’s be real here, not all screw ups warrant a one way ticket to the chopping board all this country will go down( that’s true) . so in the minister’s case and according to his judgment( one man against the rest) mr wong should not be blamed. after all, mr wong is a valuable player in his team and the government can ill afford to lose such a pricey talent.
now at this juncture, there are many voices and mixed emotions. so who do we listen to and who should call the final shot? well, the elites will seek to hear from their own obviously. so some will say…hey…listen to so and so because this so and so impresses me. whereas for others, they seek the collective views of the vast majority.
will they hear the rumbles of the ground in the hearts of the people and sense THE VOICE? to me, that’s the definitive voice. and even if that voice goes against all rationality , it is still to be heeded. like in a marriage, you’re bounded by a common destiny for good or for worse. it is in this unyielding faith in that voice that will raise the bride to the level of the bridegroom( true leadership)!
so the days the elite group calling the shots are over – or should be over.
but of course, the power that be may still insist its ways are best. the people too can always insist on remembering.
about 2 years ago
A very sensible question for you, Aaron:
Diferrent hypothetical (or maybe not
) scenarios:
1. A cleark embezzled money of say 1million. The processes were in place but somehow there was a loophole.
2. A reservist managed to take out a rifle.
3. A company is making huge losses.
4. A deputy health minister failed to report an outbreak of diseases that could potentially kill more people.
Well, whom do you think should be sacked?
My take: It depends on the severity of the issue. For such an international failing of a lost terrorist, not only just any terrorist, but the #1 terrorist in Asia, whom do you think should take responsibility?
And what was the remedial report? Discipline the officer and the guards.
Duh. I rest my case.
Kaffein
about 2 years ago
Aaron :
Yea, I did Animal Farm for Literature when I was a student…
A quote from “V for Vendetta” that comes to my mind :
“Since mankind’s dawn a handful of
oppressors have accepted the
responsibility over our lives,
responsibility that we should have
accepted ourselves. By doing so,
they took our power. By doing
nothing, we gave it away”
It is high time that Singaporeans need to wake up to pay more attention to what is happening in Singapore, than to rely on blind faith that the PAP will always take care of us.
about 2 years ago
Here is another one of those strange logic imbued in this so-called choice:
Either way, we have a problem. It’s either we create a culture of aversion to mistakes or we create a modern day nobility.
The logic is strange in that:
(a) Firstly, “risk” by any stretch of definition means for a given action or even inaction, there is POTENTIALLY a negative consequence. So in the case of WKS, his job as a minister do come with a POTENTIAL consequence that he could be asked to leave the job. The risk is there and anyone, who wants that job must be cognisance of that fact, which means he/she must be prepared to take risk. Now if one were to make the job devoid of any negative consequences that what risk is one taking from the job?
(b) Second, we have to clarify to whom is the risk being mitigated by having a ministerial job that is effectively an unsackable? A minister job is, if it was in a representative government, is to take actions on behalf of the people to whom he represents. The action he/she makes has consequences. In WKS, the consequence of an ALLEGED terrorist on the loose causing “havoc” to Singapore — i.e. the negative one. By his action, which let’s just say, is to put in place a secure institution, and yet, through his own actions or in actions, failed to do so, result in MAS incidence. Now questions: who is taking the risks here? WKS or the people? Certainly not WKS since his job is secure. So it seemed, if we went by Aaron’s logic, we should make someone job secure so he/she personally don’t have to take risk, but it is all right for him/her take actions/inactions and others to bear the consequence. In other words, promoting a culture of “risk-taking-but-not-at-my-expense”!
(c) Thirdly, risk taking is an innate in the person not something that can be “created” by a third person. Every action/inaction a person makes will have consequence for him/her-self. At best a third party can do is to take the risk on behalf of others, which it seemed the PAP Government is doing — i.e. negative consequences, it’s the people’s complacency! Look at America, their government ministers get fired, and their presidents have to suffer humiliation to win office, and criticised all the time, but still people are coming forward to served. In Singapore, ministerial jobs are already cushioned from criticisms by controlled media and have only to suffer slightly rigged election, and still Singaporean are risks adverse — i.e. fearful of negative consequences. Again going by Aaron logic, it seemed the only logical way of making Singaporean not risks adverse is by taking away the risk — i.e. negative consequence — altogether. Then it comes back to point (b) who takes the risks!
about 2 years ago
Looking at the picture of MS, I doubt he could get thru that window.
You all neber had to squeeze between a rock and hard place before meh?
about 2 years ago
There is another problem in favouring the second argument; if we should only fault those who are directly responsible (for the mistakes), we should logically only reward those who are directly responsible (for whatever turned out right).
If the ministers are not directly responsible for most of the good things that happened, the ministerial pay-rise wouldn’t be justified.
I do not think he should be sacked but I do not think he should be absolved of all consequences (perhaps a pay-cut?).
about 2 years ago
‘Diamond Rice Bowl’ puts the situation succinctly. All authority and perks, but no responsibility.
But the citizens (those who were in contested areas) voted for the PAP and gave them carte blanche in exchange for relative security, a roof over their heads and sufficient food.
Unfortunately all that uncurbed power over the years has got into the PAP’s and government’s heads.
This would not have happened if not for their utter arrogance and complacency.
about 2 years ago
Dear Aaron,
WRDC report to ISD.
ISD report to MHA.
Mr Wong KS has a long working relationship with Mr Pang and he is perfectly confident with Mr Pang’s capabilities.
Mr Wong KS would have assumed that ISD Director Mr Pang will do his due diligence to ensure that there are regular audits to check on the security of WRDC facilities & the SOP in WRDC.
The lack of regular auditing and checking will definitely lead to complacency and a false sense of security. That is the reason why any self respecting organization would conduct their internal & external auditing to prevent any possible wrongdoing.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the WRDC superintendent will make bad judgment and the guards at WRDC were not following the SOP which led to the success of Mas Selemat escaping. Not to mention that not all windows in WRDC toilets are fenced and CCTV are working.
Just because Mr Wong KS & Mr Pang do not have direct control over the Gurkha guards or they are not expected to fix the toilet windows or the CCTV, does it mean that both of them are not responsible for this lapse at all ?
For your comment.
about 2 years ago
I don’t think this whole thing has anything to do with risk aversion. In most countries where ministers and high ranking officials are asked to take responsibility, never resulted in risk aversion.
about 1 year ago
Ciekawa strona, bede ja odwiedzal czesciej, pozdro