WP “turned its back on a scrap”?

Zuraidah Ibrahim, who incidentally is the sister of Minister Yaacob Ibrahim who wants to censor the Internet, wrote a piece in the Sunday Times.

It’s titled:

stzi

It would take much time to rebut the things she said. So, I won’t. (Jentrified Citizen has rebutted her here.) But to show you the carelessness and laziness with which she wrote that piece, I’ll just point out one of her assertions.

She wrote:

“This is not the first time that the WP has turned its back on a scrap. When the Aljunied town council’s finances were debated in May, clear evidence was presented to show that the WP did not go through a tender process when it appointed its managing agents, who happened to have close party ties.”

I don’t know where Zuraidah has been but if she had just done some simple research, she would realise that WP did not “turn its back on a scrap”, not the one she mentioned, anyway.

She would know that WP in fact issued two statements explaining why and how it appointed FMSS as its MA. One of these statements was to rebut what Khaw Boon Wan had raised in Parliament in May this year. And she would realise that in fact it was Khaw who did not respond and kept silent.

Zuraidah has confused the PAP not accepting WP’s explanation with WP not explaining at all. The two are quite different. As deputy editor, she should know. How come she doesn’t? Only she knows.

And if she is raising the “close party ties” the MA owners have with WP, then surely she must – if she is fair – also mention that the PAP’s relationship with AIM is more than just “close party ties” – that it is in fact a severe conflict of interest, AIM being owned by the PAP itself.

But her piece is not to point out the shortcomings of the PAP in the matter. It is to pretend to be a piece of fair political commentary. Except that it is not. For if it is, she would not have made the erroneous assertion that WP had “turned its back on a scrap” and used the FMSS example to back up her point.

WP, in fact, did not turn its back on the matter. It issued two statements to defend its actions. Whether one agrees with its actions or not is another matter. But it is false to say that WP “turned its back” on the matter.

As deputy editor, one would expect her to choose her words carefully. On second thoughts, maybe she did choose her words carefully.

It is also worth noting that the WP had responded to PM Lee Hsien Loong’s statement in which he said that the entire Cabinet stood by Vivian Balakrishnan’s position in Parliament. PM’s press sec issued a short statement in response to WP’s statement. WP decided not to go on with the bickering. I don’t think anyone would say that this is WP “turning its back on a scrap” either.

Let’s not forget that the PAP is free to continue to attack WP. The fact that it too has stopped should tell Zuraidah something about who is “turning its back on a scrap”. The clue: the PAP was coming off as being extremely “bo liao” and petty in the matter.

Anyway, here are the two WP statements – one in 2011 and the other in 2013 (after Khaw raised the matter in Parliament):

5 August 2011:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/aljunied-grc/media-release-aljunied-hougang-town-council-media-statement-on-appointment-of-ma/195388610522361

16 May 2013:
http://wp.sg/2013/05/clarifications-by-wp-mps-on-fmss-during-town-councils-debate-in-parliament/

————–

Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery;
None but ourselves can free our minds.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “WP “turned its back on a scrap”?

  1. Come on,it’s an integrity issue, to merit the attention and support of the entire cabinet, to bring up in the Parliament, to warrant the voluntary waiver of Parliamentary privilege in a challenge to sue. Yet the PAP turn its back on a scrap? It is indeed an integrity issue!

  2. Were the mechanics of misinformation a lot better in the past or are we just much better informed? Surely, Ms Zuraidah didn’t think that she would escape ridicule, and possibly reprisal for such a stupid article.

  3. Let me cite another coincidence – ‘correspondent’ Lee Shu Shyan is the sister of MOS Lee Yi Shyan.

  4. Why doesn’t she or her kind question the way the death of Dinesh was handled or complete silence by the PMO after the AG report. Sadly our reporters are all nothing but pea brained ass lickers

  5. Any editor, who is related to PAP ministers by blood or water, in Straits Times trying to justify their salary for writing crap with strong agenda, Zuraidah Ibrahim took the cake. It is not even some material worthy of a penny, readers can largely ignore or discard those PAP propaganda sample piece.

What say you?

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