George Go needs to understand what it really means to build trust

To Tan Tee Seng

George Goh’s remarks were very disappointing.

He said, “You can’t check the government situation‘, he continued to talk about ‘heart’, ‘brain’ and ‘trust in government’ in Ho Chin’s tone. Ashinin’s Facebook post.

I think rich people need friends with power. It’s such a shame to ruin the momentum he could have built on his own. So how is he going to compete with someone who has worked in government for at least 22 years?

Trust in government does not mean surrendering or prostrate to power. It is a belief in the credibility and capacity of governing structures for the benefit of the people.

Confidence in government must be earned by the governor. A five-year term doesn’t mean you can do anything for five years.

Trust is contingent on acting in the interests of the subject. Ultimately, a functioning democracy is the foundation of this trust.

Application of the principle of checks and balances is aimed at achieving this end. In other words, if the president can’t “check the government,” the presidency is dysfunctional.

Under the constitution, the president must be nonpartisan and elected by popular vote. This is his kind of two-factor authentication of independence. Nonpartisan so that the government of the time can be checked. Because they are elected by popular vote, they have the moral authority to stand up to their elected representatives.

Just to be clear, if you’re still not confident talking to a high-paid person, you’re getting paid more than the president in the people’s taxes!

It is very strange to hear this story that the president is not political or intends to “check the government”.

What they mean by “cooperating” is synonymous with “don’t challenge the status quo” and “do what they say no matter what or you’ll mess up the country”. is clear.

The point of having an elected president hold the second key to the reserve is to ensure that the government is accountable to the people.

There is a desperate need to usher in more democracy in Singapore. PAP does not adhere to democratic principles such as accountability.

The way the PAP amends the constitution on a whim as if it were his personal diary, the presidential office has undergone major changes over the years. This office is currently neutralized. And even so-called independent candidates don’t have the stamina to stand up to white-coated bullies.

Given the PAP government’s unfettered control and lack of real channels for feedback, Singapore’s presidential election has become a long-awaited kind of referendum for its citizens.

in the First presidential election of 1993Former deputy prime minister and PAP-selected Ong Ten Chong won 58.7% of the vote, while reluctant Chua Kim Yeo won 41.3%.

This followed a historic breakthrough for the opposition in the 1991 general election, when three SDP MPs and one Labor MP were elected to Parliament.

There were no presidential elections in the next two terms (1999 and 2005).

This was followed by another political breakthrough in 2011, when fellow former Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan was elected Singapore’s fourth president with 35.2% of the vote.

How will mature voters articulate their demands this time?

Since the electoral presidential system was inaugurated, election results have clearly shown that the PAP’s presidential candidates have not been overwhelmingly popular, if at all. Because the public perceives that the president should be able to hold the PAP government accountable.

Ong Ten Chong’s slim win rate against unofficial candidates who haven’t even campaigned, and minority Tony Tan’s win, spoke to voters’ expectations.

Whoever wins must hold the government accountable. If Mr. George Goh cannot meet this standard, he should leave immediately.

If he’s serious about the contest, perhaps he should reconsider his campaign theme.