Thus far, our Government has exercised financial prudence and great restraint in spending the reserves.
But this is not the norm elsewhere.
We see cautionary tales of elections descending into auctions, with political parties competing with each other to promise greater largesse from the nation’s coffers.
THE EXAMPLE OF GREECE
In Greece, political parties engaged in a “disastrous competition” to offer patronage, cronyism, nepotism, and welfare populism. Once the populist policies were set in place, it was difficult to turn back as it would be “political suicide” for any party to do so. The end result was economic and political bankruptcy and a younger generation that finds that its future has been mortgaged.
In Greece, political parties engaged in a “disastrous competition” to offer patronage, cronyism, nepotism, and welfare populism. Once the populist policies were set in place, it was difficult to turn back as it would be “political suicide” for any party to do so. The end result was economic and political bankruptcy and a younger generation that finds that its future has been mortgaged.
Australia is another example.
They have tightly contested elections in rapid 3-year electoral cycles. One party comes up with a programme, the other offers more, each trying to outbid the other. This has led successive governments to continue spending accumulated surpluses from a resource boom, which are, by now, gone.
They have tightly contested elections in rapid 3-year electoral cycles. One party comes up with a programme, the other offers more, each trying to outbid the other. This has led successive governments to continue spending accumulated surpluses from a resource boom, which are, by now, gone.
WE INHERIT THE WESTMINSTER SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
The strength of this system is the “[near] complete fusion, of the executive and legislative powers”.
This promotes efficient governance, and allows the country to move quickly and effectively, with clear direction and purpose.
The Westminster system may be contrasted with systems of government that strictly separate their constituent branches (such as in the US). The price, however, of strict separation is inefficiency, and sometimes even paralysis or deadlock.
The United States experienced this very recently in 2013. Political fights over healthcare laws led to a budget impasse that resulted in a 16-day shutdown of the US Government.
During this time, about 800,000 federal employees were indefinitely furloughed, and another 1.3 million were required to work without known payment dates.
During this time, about 800,000 federal employees were indefinitely furloughed, and another 1.3 million were required to work without known payment dates.
EVERY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT HAS ITS OWN STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES.
The system we inherited permits swift and effective decision-making, but it also means that, if a government chooses to act irresponsibly, there are very few restraints on it, and things can go very wrong, and very quickly.
As then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew cautioned at his 1984 National Day Rally, “… all the reserves are available. The larder is wide open, you can raid it”.
Any government, including a temporary coalition, would have complete access to all levers of power and decision-making, with “untrammelled power” to abuse the reserves and public services.
Irresponsible Governments may use Singaporeans' savings to buy short-term popularity, or appoint friends in high places to exploit these for personal gains rather than for the public good.
A single 5-year “spending spree” could bankrupt us and dismantle everything that we have built.
Parliament decided that the most effective solution for Singapore was to establish an ELECTED PRESIDENCY WITH SPECIFIC VETO POWERS.
The Elected Presidency plays an important custodial role in safe guarding our key assets, in a way a purely parliamentary process cannot.
It also deters political parties from making wild promises at Parliamentary elections. They know that even if they come to power, they cannot splurge our past reserves on populist measures.
The Elected Presidency was first conceptualised in the 1980s, to guard against the risk of a profligate government squandering the nation’s reserves.
The Elected Presidency plays an important custodial role in safe guarding our key assets, in a way a purely parliamentary process cannot.
It also deters political parties from making wild promises at Parliamentary elections. They know that even if they come to power, they cannot splurge our past reserves on populist measures.
The right and responsibility to govern the country would remain with Parliament and the Cabinet.
The President would have no power to initiate action, and no policy-making role.
The President would have no power to initiate action, and no policy-making role.
HE HAS NON-EXECUTIVE CUSTODIAL POWERS OVER 2 IMPORTANT AREAS
They are: the spending of past reserves and key appointments to the public services.
THE SYMBOLIC ROLE OF PRESIDENT AS UNIFIER AND SYMBOL OF OUR NATION REMAINED UNCHANGED AND UNDIMINISHED.
- Excerpt of speech by DPM Teo Chee Hean.
What right does a president who is appointed by the government say 'no' to democratically elected government that has the mandate of the people to govern and make decisions?
For the president to be able to say 'no' to a government that has the mandate of the people, the president himself must also have the mandate of the people to act. Therefore the president cannot be appointed. He has to be elected.
Why can't we just appoint the President and vest him with custodial powers?
What right does a president who is appointed by the government say 'no' to democratically elected government that has the mandate of the people to govern and make decisions?
For the president to be able to say 'no' to a government that has the mandate of the people, the president himself must also have the mandate of the people to act. Therefore the president cannot be appointed. He has to be elected.
No comments:
Post a Comment