Another PAP MP bites the dust

After the 2011 GE, Michael Palmer had to resign as MP, speaker of the house and from PAP because of his affair. This time round, it’s David Ong. I think this is starting to form a trend. I wonder whether this will be the “new normal”?

Of course, that is absurd.

But what is interesting is what else is common in both instances. Previously, PAP was blasting WP about Yaw Shin Leong’s affair. Not long after that Michael Palmer resigned for his affair. This time round, no affair on WP’s side for PAP to blast. But they were blasting Lee Li Lian for not taking up the NCMP post. Then now David Ong resigns as MP.

Looks like karma works very fast on PAP. Of course, this time round, it’s a lot worse. Why?

Punggol East residents who voted for Lee Li Lian weren’t voting for her to be NCMP. They were expressing their wish for her to be their MP. So it can be argued that she actually isn’t letting anyone of those who voted for her down by not taking up the NCMP post.

As for David Ong, 73% of residents of Bukit Batok voted for him to be their MP. That he is now resigning as MP is, in no uncertain terms, definitely letting down those who have voted for him.

Therefore, between Lee Li Lian and David Ong, David Ong certainly is the greater disappointment. And, by extension, it casts the PAP in rather bad light. As a friend on Facebook mentioned: “To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, to lose one MP due to personal indiscretions may be regarded as a misfortune, to lose two looks like carelessness.”

That said, I don’t think PAP will lose Bukit Batok. Bukit Batok has been pretty staunchly PAP for a very long time. I don’t think enough of them will be that upset about this incident to turn against the PAP. So… I don’t think we’ll see any SDP MP any time soon.

Honestly though. I think this whole “MP must resign if they have personal indiscretion” thing quite silly. It’s personal! It’s an affair (pun intended) between two consenting adults right? Why should that matter? You mean David Ong’s any less competent as an MP just because of his personal indiscretion? You mean he can’t take care of his residents as well? You mean just because of his personal indiscretion, David Ong is any less capable as a Town Council chairman? Where’s the logic in that?

Bill Clinton had an affair with a White House employee. Did he step down as President of the United States? Nope. Congress tried to impeach him. But not for the affair per se, but for alleged perjury and obstruction of justice. The result? Bill Clinton was acquitted and stayed on till the end of his term of office.

So why is it that here in Singapore, we feel that an MP MUST resign if he had a “personal indiscretion”? Do we expect all our MPs to be flawless saints? Are we that naive?

Unless of course, there is more to this story that the mainstream media is reporting. That somehow, David Ong’s “personal indiscretion” affects his ability to be an MP. I can only think of two ways that this could be the case. First, David Ong, like Michael Palmer, had an affair with someone from PA who was working in Bukit Batok constituency. Second, David Ong had an affair with one of his grassroots leaders.

If either of these were the case, then I can understand why it may make it difficult for David Ong to be an effective MP. Otherwise, I really can’t understand why David Ong had to resign. Especially if he had been doing a good job as an MP.

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Another PAP MP bites the dust

  1. I too think we should stop this moral policing. The PAP should also stop lecturing others about clean politics, about their definition of integrity, about all the other BS. Their candidates are politicians. Period. You mean these pure souls must be protected from criticism. And also , we had heard enough of this “Asian” values crap. Let’s begin to accept politicians for what they stand for. There is nothing special about being a PAP candidate anymore. So, stop acting and time for all politicians to declare where they stand in terms of policy and solutions for real problems. Frankly, I don’t care how much about these so-called moral values. Seriously, these politicians are just normal human beings. His sex life should be a private affair; I know there are a lot of people here who will disagree and expect our politicians to lead “pure” lives. We are expecting politics to be like Dettol – to kill 99.99 % of all bacteria. Just not possible

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Well, we are a people who expect actors to be 100% truthful all the time and cannot even understand a marketing gimmick so… Yah. Not the most realistic.. But that’s what happens when the only identity you have is that you believe you live in utopia.

    Like

  3. If an immoral person who vowed in marriage to be faithful and in life turn out to be false, how can he or she be trusted? Newspaper reported he is a “christian?” and yet commit adultery? What more in secularism where no morals are the norm? It is sad that both lives and others around them are hurt in illicit affairs and immorality runs rampant and unless adults behave in moral values we see a serious decline in character and integrity. Who can we trust in positions of leaderships if they cannot be faithful? Granted those who argues personal and public BUT character integrity is key here.

    What a joke, newspaper calls it “personal indiscretion” a watered down version to confuse the public. Just print ADULTERY. Call a spade jack a spade jack.

    What is uncanny is the number of politicians (in public positions) are not ashamed or shy about committing adulteries!

    By the way they act in secrecy of such adulterous affairs when both are married and had children in their prime age would be tempted to commit acts of infidelity.

    Like

    • How is it logical to conclude that just because someone had an affair therefore he cannot be a good MP? Nelson Mandela had numerous affairs too. Yet no one would dispute the fact that he was instrumental in leading South Africa out of apartheid and healing the rifts in an erstwhile divided nation.

      Like

    • What more in secularism where no morals are the norm?

      Secular doesn’t mean no moral. And “Adultery (anglicised from Latin adulterium) is extramarital sex that is considered objectionable on social, religious, moral or legal grounds.”. Adultery is not solely defined in a religious context.

      Like

  4. Pingback: Daily SG: 14 Mar 2016 | The Singapore Daily

  5. Well.Its not just the affair but the deeper implications. Look at the positions they hold. Wendy is not so dumb to go after a face like that unless, spreading legs opens doors. Simple as ABC my dear Watson. Anyway this is historical news for those in the grassroots in BB

    Like

    • That position, I agree with. If the affair makes it awkward for David Ong to work with the people in the constituency, and thus makes him less effective as an MP, then yes. He ought to go. So it’s not just that he had an affair per se, but specifically who he had an affair with.

      Oh… so grassroots people in Bukit Batok knew about this a long time ago? But only now then PAP took action? Hmm….

      Like

    • @Joker: Must say, I find your perspective somewhat compelling …. but I still I have one nagging question … would you have been more accommodating if that “face” was in fact more attractive than actually you think it is ..??

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s