Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Availability of elected MPs

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Availability of elected MPs

At the SDP party, I met a guest who works in a family service center. She told me that in her constituency, the elected MP was too busy and could not attend the Meet the People session. This weekly session was handled by the local chairman, who is an unpaid volunteer. But the constituents preferred to see the MP and was disappointed that the MP was not available for several weeks.

In my view, it is better to have elected MPs who can devote their full time to constituency work and to actively debate government policies in Parliament. Some MPs may also initiate legislation to improve the lives of the people.

Two MPs in Singapore are already working full time, to my knowledge. They are Low Thia Khiang and Chiam See Tong. I hope that the next general election will see more MPs being elected that can perform their duty on a full time basis. The monthly remuneration as an MP is quite generous and is sufficient for a MP to make a living.

I have watched the the members of the US congress expressing their views on legislative issues over Bloomberg and CNBC television. They are well informed of the issues at hand and of the views of their constituents.

Who will you vote in the next general election? Give your views in this survey.

Tan Kin Lian

23 comments:

Anonymous said...: I think for PAP, all other things being equal, they would prefer candidates who have achieved much in their career prior to politics as they equate this as hallmarks of capability and talent. That explains why some have no time for Meet the people sessions after they became MPs because they are too busy with their main job.

Maybe the PAP has some doubts, rightly or wrongly, that ordinary folks with ordinary career are talented and capable people, although they may have lots of time for the constituents if they were to become MPs. Also if they were to choose MPs from this group, there would simply be too many of them to choose from and this would also be a problem. Not to forget there may be a quantum jump in their income from their previous job if these people were to become MPs. Politics thus become a path to get rich, which is also not appropriate.; February 28, 2010 9:41 AM
Anonymous said...: REX comments as follows,

I would like to make a general comment.
Many of us already have many productive and useful ideas how to improve or tweak policies to benefit the country more. This is evidenced in the interesting commentaries submitted to the various blogs proliferating these days.

Of the brilliant people who come up with these ideas, my guess is that the large majority of them are successful in their work, well educated and travelled. They are humble and really nice people and have creative energy and passion. They have the capability to contribute policy-ideas and lead lively debates in parliament and make singapore a better place.

But how many of them can accept nitty gritty work like sit down as an MP and speak to the auntie with a problem with the HDB or a problem with a divorced husband and other microsopic social problems?

Personally, i enjoy creating ideas to help improve the system on a global basis. But, to sit down on a micro level and speak to hundreds of people a month with similar problem, to be honest, is it not like 大材小用?。

So i can understand why MPs give excuses and said that "they are busy". Whilst it may be true, it can also mean that the MP lacks interest at the micro level to deal with the issues, so he delegates to others. Of course some of them use this as an excuse, in the first place these scums under-dogs of the government, are neither good at managing on global basis nor on micro level, Singapore's affairs!!!!

Chiam and Low - they are doing their job very well in the area of meeting the people. But then, are they doing their job well on the "global" basis as explained above, i.e. at parliament level to debate with PAP at a high level the global policies? I think they have failed very very very badly in this department.

It is very difficult to find an all rounder, someone with the intellect to handle the global aspects, and at the same time really bother with microscopic issues which basically involves redirecting the troubled people to the proper channels most of the time, exerting some power of the MP to wield results. (It can be boring, like a doctor treating people for a cold everyday).

This post is not targetted to defend the pap mp's who skip the meet the people sessions. It is meant as a general observation of the difficulties of balancing the objectives of "excellence at the global level" as well as "passion to deal with microscopic issues". It applies to any politician.

rex; February 28, 2010 10:01 AM
Anonymous said...: "The elected MP is too busy to meet the people" !!! Incredible.

If you accept the point that;
Singaporean people = Singapore

then this MP is obviously too busy for Singapore.; February 28, 2010 10:08 AM
sgcynic said...: It is an irony to pay $18000 a month for part-time MPs who who are too busy for their constituents and have to rely on an unpaid volunteer to do their job.

We should also scrutinise if the MP is one who is holding on to mutliple directorships. If he/she cannot cope with multiple portfolios, the he/she must be relinquished.; February 28, 2010 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...: I used to have a professor teaching us that often missed lectures because have to attend PAP meeting. My thought is nobody can hold so many portfolio without any compromise. The MP need to ask himself / herself what is his / her passion; serve the people and take that as a career and not part-time here and there. In the end, everyone related will suffer to some extent. Mr Tan is correct to point out that the MP monthly allowance (5 figures) is sufficient to enjoy a good standard of living. In fact, I think they are already in the top income bracket; many professionals, doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants don't even earn that much. And if we compare it with other countries, we will STAND OUT at the TOP. I had admired Mr Chiam all along for his commitment and dedications all these years; I believe this is one big reason the ruling party can never win over him no matter who they send unless Mr Chiam quit himself for his personal reason. I had met him several when I was living in PP, and he come across as a very sincere, committed and dedicated person which most PP residents will agree. S'pore need more of this kind of committed person; not so many part-timers. It should be a case like citizenship; you are S'porean or Not; no half half and see how later. That's just my thoughts as a S'porean.; February 28, 2010 12:26 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: I have received 45 replies to the survey in 4 hours. There is good response. I shall post the results when 50 replies have been reached.; February 28, 2010 2:05 PM
Anonymous said...: George says:
An MP who has no time for his constituents is guilty of fraud and negligence. I am not surprised if he also misses most of the sittings of parliament because of work.

WHAT THEN IS THE 'WORK' OF AN MP IN TERMS OF HIS BEING A REPRESENTATIVE OF HIS CONSTITUENTS?

If he routinely failed to turn up for his MTP sessions or attend parliament then he is earning GAHJI BUTA - paid his MP 'allowance' but allowed to play 'traunt'. Now what sort of an example is he or she setting for Singaporeans, esp. students and young adults (if an MP can do it, why not I?).

Ultimately, the fault lies squarely with his party for allowing such a state of affairs. My guess is that it must be a precondition set by the MP before he agrees to stand for election. This say much about the ruling party dedication or in this case lack of it, towards the people of Singapore.; February 28, 2010 2:11 PM
Anonymous said...: A commentor a few before me said:
"Chiam and Low - they are doing their job very well in the area of meeting the people. But then, are they doing their job well on the "global" basis as explained above, i.e. at parliament level to debate with PAP at a high level the global policies? I think they have failed very very very badly in this department."

I agree wholeheartedly. There are so many questions the 2 MPs could have raised in parliament on so many issues that would leave the ruling party stumped. But instead, they choose not to do so and disappoint people like me who voted them in.; February 28, 2010 2:36 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm writing in response to REX: 10.01am. REX's point being an MP who can manage at the "micro" and "global" level.

While I don't entirely disagree with REX, may I also draw your attention to the thesis "Wisdom of the crowds."

The book is about the aggregation of information in groups, resulting in decisions that are often better than could have been made by any single member (expert) of the group.

SOURCE:
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

The point being that we need both types (micro and global)of MPs here in Singapore. Just as we need both our left and right hands.

I would suggest to the constituents of the absentee MP. Vote out the current MP and vote in the unpaid volunteer who is actually doing all the work.

In the corporate world, a boss can unashamedly claim credit for the hard work of his employees. But constituents should not allow for such behaviour from their MPs.

For your info and irony, MPs call each other "honourable gentlemen" in parliament.; February 28, 2010 3:00 PM
Sacked said...: Your MP is similar to your Union representative.

Sometimes available, most times not.
They collect allowances and do nothing.

Would you prefer they make plenty of noise in meetings but still no action?

Meet the people seesions is very much like counselling work. You need plenty of emotional space. All who queue to see you have a problem that they hope you will solve for them. It is very taxing.

And they have high expectations of you since you are the MP. However, the MP cannot overrule car park offences etc.. or else the rule of law becomes a joke.

They can at best write an appeal on your behalf. I know, I was sacked from my job after an inquiry.. for an act that was untrue. But my MP could only refer my case to MoM.. nothing else.; February 28, 2010 3:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Our MP in central Singapore did not
contact us at all after the meet the people session, when we asked for help early last year.
So much for the PAP MP.; February 28, 2010 4:58 PM
Anonymous said...: REX comments further,

i noted the comments of people who demand that an MP, having access to superscale salary, ought to demonstrate the passion and interest to meet the ordinary folk and help them with their daily troubles in meet the people sessions week after week for years on end..

Then there are the demands that an MP must also be a fiery charismatic orator who can take on the likes of LKY in a air con high class setting parliament room.

Is it humanly possible to find someone who can do both, enjoy both, i wonder? Think of a fantastic and intellectual like Francis Seow, he will be an excellent MP in the Parliament. But i cannot imagine him sitting down to listen to 50 Ah Bengs a week at the meet the people session pouring out specific problems in dialect with a translator. Surely we will not dismiss good, smart people like Francis Seow for being a bad MP, if he does not "meet the people"?

It just doesnt add up, some people's talents and pursuits, are better seen in certain places.

Therefore, I actually don't totally disagree with the idea that MPs could get some proxy to settle mundane meet the people sessions ON CONDITION that they demonstrate their intelligence and skill in Parliament setting.

REX; February 28, 2010 9:16 PM
Anonymous said...: If the MP does not meet the people, how can he represent us? How does he know our problem?; February 28, 2010 10:21 PM
Anonymous said...: REX comments as follows,

"If the MP does not meet the people,how can he know the problem".

Times have changed. Internet is the answer. MP can easily gauge the extent of the problem through internet, not necessarily going into specific personal details, though it will help tremendously. But in my opinion, on condition that an MP is really top calibre, able to change things through intellectual debate and creative ideas, it is might be difficult to demand to bog him down too, with 50 Ah Bengs a week complaining about microscopic problems like unable to get flat, numerous nitty gritty stuffs whcih in fact make that MP a traffic policeman directing the counsellee to the correct department and shaking up the correct department to do its job. MP is human, how you expect him to be interested in 100 personal problems channeled to him each week ? Why would he be interested in your personal problem? He is not god.

It is a balance between macro and micro functions. I feel that in Singapore, we have too many macro problems to be tackled and the first step is to get a good MP to handle that, even if he is not very good at the micro's. I said before, Chiam and Low are excellent at the micro's but they fare very very very very badly at macro's. That is why they work so hard for nothing!

When you solve problems at the macro level, micro problems will go away.
If you don't solve problems at the macro level, you could spend your whole life meeting 50 ah bengs a day and these counsellees will still keep coming to you, it is very unproductive.

I am not defending the PAP MP's but this is a general thought of how an MP should function to serve Singapore most effectively. The first step is they have to be dynamic and have the ability to tackle PAP in debate with creative witty and smart ideas to shame them. If you can't do that, half the battle is lost, even if you are good at befriending the auntie and uncle at the meet the people session.

rex; March 01, 2010 8:00 AM
Anonymous said...: MP - Members [Part-time]

Cabinet Minister - Confirmed Members/Confirmed Millionairs.; March 01, 2010 1:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Reference REX's comment: "When you solve problems at the macro level, micro problems will go away."

It's a nice theory. Does not seem to be working in practice.

The PAP government has been working away at Singapore's "macro" problems for a very long time. Every year, their solution is essentially the same - Workers, please work cheaper, better and faster. Scholars, please, no need to be corrupt. We will pay you world class salaries.

REX's comments sounds too much like the notorious "trickle down" theory of Reagonomics (supply-side economics).

"Trickle-down economics" and "trickle-down theory" are terms of political rhetoric that refer to the policy of providing tax cuts or other benefits to businesses in the belief that this will indirectly benefit the broad population.

Proponents argue economic growth flows down from the top to the bottom, indirectly benefiting those who do not directly benefit from the policy changes.

In the 1890's, "trickle down theory" was called the "horse and sparrow theory."

If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.

SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics; March 01, 2010 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Rex comments as follows,

the theory is still correct, if you solve the problem CORRECTLY at the macro level, the micro problems will diminish (ok not go away totally).

But the government solve the problems all WRONGLY!!! The cheaper better faster mantra is absolutely revolting and incorrect. Instead of finding ways to create employment for locals, it brings in foreigners to compete with locals to get cheaper better faster!!

Instead of conserving, consolidating, and carefully managing our small land and population, it opens the floodgates to huge wage of immigrants without discussing with the academics, intelligentsia, politicians. They think we are "sheep" and so they do what they like.

We are stuck with the casino's too!!! More micro problems coming up, broken families from gamblers begging for state help going to MPs when they find no way.

That's why Chiam and Low has no time to do anything else other than listen to myriads of ah peks ah sohs an aunties grumbles. I pity Chiam and low. Chiam worked till half dead so old, just to solve micro problems, it wasted away half his whole life.

rex; March 01, 2010 3:19 PM
Anonymous said...: I meet my MP during the Meet the People Session. It was only the 3rd visit then I got to meet her personally.

I was terribly disappointed when I saw her doodling and nodding asleep while I was telling her my problem.

At the end, my problem remain unsolve because there was no follow up action on her part; she just acted like a clerk -note down my complain and sent letter to the ministry she deem fit.

Oh sorry, (re-pharse) the volunteer noted my complain, type the letter to the Ministry they deem fit and she just sign BLINDLY!!!; March 01, 2010 4:57 PM
sgcynic said...: I do not disagree with Rex's point that some MPs are more people-oriented and able to relate to residents while others do not "meet the people" as they are more suited for Parliamentary work. For the latter, "they have to be dynamic and have the ability to tackle PAP in debate with creative witty and smart ideas to shame them".

I guess many(?) of the PAP MPs are neither people-oriented (as least as a listener and people's representative) nor involved in Parliamentary debates. They come across as "yes-men" and party-line toers. So, we need more people with diverse "talents and pursuits", whom the PAP is unable to recruit. The answer is obvious. We get from other parties.; March 02, 2010 12:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Dear REX 3.19pm.
Thank you for responding to my point. Concerning your thesis;

"the theory is still correct, if you solve the problem CORRECTLY at the macro level, the micro problems will diminish (ok not go away totally)."

I would offer the alternative view.

If you solve the problem correctly at the MICRO level, the macro problems will diminish. This is essentially the heart of the Japanese Kaizen method of method.

SOURCE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaizen

My point being, all MACRO problems started life as a micro problem. A macro problem is simply a micro problem with a cancerous growth rate. Eventually, a tipping point is reached, and the micro problem mutates into a macro problem.

I'll probably use TKL's latest post "Hefty bank charges, 7.10am" to continue to highlight the unfairness of the "trickle down" theory.; March 02, 2010 7:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Ref REX's comment "I pity Chiam and low. Chiam worked till half dead so old, just to solve micro problems, it wasted away half his whole life."

Their life are not wasted. They made a difference ... one (micro)starfish at a time.

The Starfish Story

adapted from The Star Thrower
by Loren Eiseley (1907 - 1977)

Once upon a time, there was a wise man who used to go to the ocean to do his writing. He had a habit of walking on the beach before he began his work.

One day, as he was walking along the shore, he looked down the beach and saw a human figure moving like a dancer. He smiled to himself at the thought of someone who would dance to the day, and so, he walked faster to catch up.

As he got closer, he noticed that the figure was that of a young man, and that what he was doing was not dancing at all. The young man was reaching down to the shore, picking up small objects, and throwing them into the ocean.

He came closer still and called out "Good morning! May I ask what it is that you are doing?"

The young man paused, looked up, and replied "Throwing starfish into the ocean."

"I must ask, then, why are you throwing starfish into the ocean?" asked the somewhat startled wise man.

To this, the young man replied, "The sun is up and the tide is going out. If I don't throw them in, they'll die."

Upon hearing this, the wise man commented, "But, young man, do you not realize that there are miles and miles of beach and there are starfish all along every mile? You can't possibly make a difference!"

At this, the young man bent down, picked up yet another starfish, and threw it into the ocean. As it met the water, he said, "It made a difference for that one."

SOURCE: http://muttcats.com/starfish.htm; March 02, 2010 8:08 AM
Anonymous said...: REX comments To anonymous @3.19

I guess the "kaizen" principle you quoted is that of staff-suggestion-scheme kind of thing wherein, one begins with a small idea at ground level, and raise up to high level.
For this to work, take note that, we face the same problem again - "raise to high level". Chiam See Tong and Low Thia Kiang, i am sure in their expereince, they are aware of numerous common threads and problems of the masses. Why didnt they raise to high level? Instead, they continue to belabour themselves, helping each individual "starfish" as per the ananalogy of our frined at 8.08am's post, to go back to the sea. Congratulations to them, i think they were excellent starfish savers.

But much more could have been done on macrobasis. Carrying on the same analogy, if we want a total solution to bring all the starfish back to the sea, we have to work at the macro level, organise a bulldozer or a 10,000 man brigade, 一次过, resolve the problems as many as possible in one go,by tackling it at high level - in Parliament, not in the meet the people sessions.

Macro level is difficult because you have to challenge the PAP in the face. Micro problems may be solved on case by case basis, but it is VERY tiring.

I may give yet another example. I imagine that there are numerous old people who seek the MPs for help because they lost their live savings and the banks don't want to compensate and FIDREC didnt help enough. If the MPs Low and Chiam had been more active to pressure the PAP in parliament, as did the opposition party in Hongkong, then, dont you think the micro problem of each ah beng seeing the mp bec his life savings vanish, will be reduced? Nip the problem in the bud the right way in Parliament, you actually can solve more problems down the line.

rex; March 03, 2010 7:34 AM
Anonymous said...: "GIC converts UBS notes into shares, suffers paper loss of US$5b"

Wonder what the MPs would say? Again, the same outcome. For things done by own party, keep quiet, sit down and look at the floor. If opposition say something about the above, join hand shoot them down, mock at them, trade some insults and let opposition know that they don't understand financials....

But what is there to understand about losing US$5billions tax payers money. Who is accountable?
Tony Tan?

To get money to help citizens, lots of discussions, studies etc then a small amount given. For lost of US$5 billion, no one is accountable, just some bad luck. MPs will not ask for accountability as they dare not to open their $12,500 per month mouth.; March 05, 2010 4:12 PM

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Availability of elected MPs

23 comments:

Blog Archive