Are we paying too much for too little accountability?

Are we paying too much for too little accountability?

The recent Geylang Serai food poisoning has shown once again the word “accountability” does not exist in the dictionary of the PAP.

In spite of glaring oversights and lapses on the part of NEA and the management committee of the market, none of them have been taken to task as of yet.

Predictably, the brunt of public fury is forced upon the poor Indian Rojak hawker who is conveniently made the fall-guy to cover up the mistakes of others.

Though the exact cause of the food poisoning has not been established, he has been prosecuted by NEA for “lapses in food and environmental hygiene”.

As usual, the mainstream media is always too quick and eager to find a scapegoat in order to whitewash the role of the authorities completely.

This follows the usual pattern of the PAP’s response to major blunders which are too big and obvious to be shielded away from public view by their SPH spin doctors.

In 2003, the SARS outbreak was blamed squarely the few Singaporeans who brought the virus back from China and the poor hygiene standards of the population.

Nothing was mentioned of the fact that our crowded public hospitals with lack of isolation cubicles helped facilitated the transmission and spread of the virus.

It is only after the epic healthcare disaster was over that steps were taken to rectify the problem by building isolation cubicles in each ward.

Last year, the escape of famed terrorist Mas Selamat Kasteri was blamed on the negligence of the lower-ranking officers. MM Lee even had the gall to castigate Singaporeans for being “complacent” as if we let the terrorist escaped.

The Home Affairs Minister did not even sound apologetic over the mistake when speaking about it in Parliament. An “independent” panel filled with ex-establishment figures including one of his subordinates was set up to placate Singaporeans.

The end result: the junior officers were sacked while the top honchos remain secured comfortably in their respective positions to this day.

When GIC lost million of dollars of our hard-earned reserves, the culprit is not its Chairman who invested in ailing U.S banks at the wrong time, but the global financial turmoil not withstanding the fact that some SWFs like China’s have made a profit from the crisis.

There were no questions asked and nobody stepped forward to account for the mistakes made. Singaporeans were given an empty promise that the losses will be recouped in 10, 20 and 30 years time.

If we examine these past incidents in detail, we will realize the PAP will almost always find somebody to take the full blame of their mistakes be it a person or an external event.

The state media will then be called in to clear up the mess up by showing how hard the government is working to resolve the problem while no questions will ever be asked about its culpability.

A few weeks later, the issue will be dead and buried. Singaporeans will move on and continue to pay the PAP top salaries to run the country.

Is this the kind of accountability we should expect and accept from the PAP which regularly touts itself as a “good, clean and transparent” governent? Are we paying too much for too little accountability?

Accountability in public service simply means to explain one’s actions to the people and to assume responsibility for them.

How often are we consulted on important policies affecting our livelihoods? Did the PAP government ever bother to explain them in detail? I don’t mean paying lip service to insult our intelligence like the lame defence of the new Public Order Act by Law Minister K Shan.

There are many ways to show that one is accountable for mistakes made. In most cases, a mere acknowledgement or a simple “sorry” will suffice.

When Barack Obama made an uncharacteristic error over the appointment of his Treasury Secretary, he went to the people and apologize to them on TV - “I am sorry, but I screwed up”. Did the apology make him any less of a leader?

On the contrary, my respect for Obama was multiplied tenfold. He is a humble leader who is accountable to the people he serves and he deserves every single cent of his annual salary which is only one-fifth of our Prime Minister’s.

Closer to home across the Causeway, former Malaysian Health Minister Dr Chua Soi Lek resigned from his ministerial position last year when video clips showing him having sex with a lady half his age in the hotel were leaked to public and it was not even related to his work.

Real leaders are not afraid of admitting their mistakes because they know they owe their positions in office to those who voted for them and will not hesitate to resign if this is indeed the will of the people.

A good, accountable and transparent government does not need to indulge in self-praise all the time. It prefers to leave the judgement of its work to the people.

Is the PAP government accountable to Singaporeans? Is it transparent and honest with the people? I seriously doubt so.

PAP apologists have always defended the PAP’s “track record” to cover up for their shortcomings, but past achievements do not guarantee future success.

Furthermore, the PAP can only take half the credit at the most. Without a hardworking, docile and intelligent citizenry, it is unlikely they will be able to build Singapore to what it is today.

In fact, Singapore may be a better place to live in now if we have more alternative parties in Parliament to provide input and fine-tune the policies before they are implemented.

Years of one-party rule with literally no challenge to its political hegemony has made the PAP complacent. It doesn’t see the need to account to anybody because they can never be removed from power with the system they put in place and so public opinion counts little for them.

To put it bluntly, Singaporeans can “go and fly kite” if they are not happy with the PAP. That’s the sad reality of life in Singapore: we are totally helpless against a power-hungry regime which is bent on remaining in power at all costs.

An athlete will only achieve his/her peak in the presence of intense rivalry. Consumers will only benefit from lower prices when there is fierce competition between different companies.

The lack of any meaningful political competition will lead eventually to the stagnation and demise of the PAP and Singaporeans are going to pay a dear price for its implosion one day.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27174.1