The three ministers are members of the same political party. For the assessment to be free from bias, conflict of interest or undue influence, minister Teo is clearly not the right person to lead the inquiry.
I served NS and reservice with this mans son. In a Battalion, his son led his own platoon that had no link whatsoever to the battalion which has all of us wondering what is his sons platoon doing in our battalion other than taking up space? and over the reservice years up his rank faster than any other officer did. You cant trust these people with what they say, watch what they do and you will see the differential treatment they and their families receive over other commoners.
@@stickymoney Who are we kidding. You just saw what happened regarding Ridout, These people can pull rabbits out of their asses, theres just no point and if you want change, vote them out.
@@horologyenthusiast8523WP also kena owned by PS convening disciplinary panel on the khan’s case. Even though TCH is prata king to cover up, hes right in this video. SL, PS and faisal needed to recuse themselves. But sooner or later PAP also will get caught pants down when opposition improved. The ministers used wife and children to rent out their properties for profit.
Of all people, the government has to choose TCH to oversee the review. Same party member, ownself check ownself, again and again, PAP never learn, will never change.
Ms He is asking are you, TCH, the best, most suitable or only person to handle the investigation? TCH, are you telling the whole Singapore you are the best candidate to handle the investigation? It's not whether are you involved in the matter but are you the most suitable candidate? A third party honorable candidate who is not involved with PAP or any opposition party will be an excellent choice.
@@chaotiongsai Opposite party is competitor of ruling party, it's naturally conflict of interest. You better go and find how the system in western democracies are.
Using a private organisation as an example is not only poor but irrelevant. Private organisations use their own funds to conduct their own investigations, are still answerable to shareholders and the law they operate in. But here we have ministers from the same party conducting checks on themselves that is less than transparent and yet claims there is no conflict of interest.
They can only use TCH or LHL. TCH is better in speaking for covering up. If let independent panel check, the ministers reputation not safe. There may not be wrongdoing but it can easily recommend process is not transparent and those properties not advertised by SLA for years hence winner bid price so low, then ministers never inform public beforehand. These are lapses an independent panel will say out.
It is obviously a conflict of interest just to have TCH who is from PAP act as an “independent” reviewer for his two PAP colleagues. The very fact that PAP don’t understand that this arrangement in itself is a conflict of i interest is a big joke!
There shd be perhaps a committee comprises of 2 pap, 2 wp mps, 1 tcb, 1 sdp, 1 rp, etc, n 2 retired judges totally NOT on pension scheme so no fear of repercussions.
Even a primary school kid will know that TCB was definitely not suitable to lead the inquiry. It is so obvious that TCB was defending his two comrades with his own interpretation on conflict of interest.
The problem with TCH's approach to this saga is his attempt to stop full disclosure of all relevant facts like the rental received by the two ministers for their GCB.
@@michael8372 No use. PS cannot get the job done. He as a lawyer should have pursued when KS at first did not answer clearly the handphone question and after vivi replied clearly his phone was seized or not seized then only he made a clarification something like his phone read by them but later returned to him. So seized or not seized? Deleted? Is cpib proper procedure to seize all phones first?
@@LonganLeeI think he wants to preserve his own political career at the moment. 😂 so soon after the RK debacle, he perhaps wants to lay low and not stir the pot too much for now
Why not third party, or international unrelated ans trusted body, as this shall make the whole episode come out well and clean? The two highly paid minsters putting themselves in such a position that need to be investigated that could have been avoided very easily shown that they have judgement problem. WP Singh was too kind by referring it as optics problem.
yup. Having decided that it was okay previously, it means that if he finds something wrong now, he would have failed earlier. So he is clearly conflicted and ought not participate or lead in the inquiry. Cannot be clearer than that.
Ask Singaporeans if they are satisfied with PM or SM TCH's explanations over the Ridout matter, many will say no. Ask any Singaporeans if they are satisfied with LM Shan and FM Vivian's explanations you will most probably get expletives as standard replies. TCH's explanations on conflict of interest and "not taking part in the transactions" are poor at best. Slyvia Lim nailed him.
I was having upmost respect for all my ministers, until I see their millions dollars pay and wonder how many will still stay in public service if we normalize those pays to that of a peasant
Exactly her question is same as mine, isn't this another actual conflict of interest example? And no,this is not the same as an public organisation,this is the parliament and the government..you are showing your actions to the citizens now😐
The Cabinet is Unworthy of Trust ! From PM to Ministers the rideout episode is an embarrassment to the PAP Party. Transparency for disclosure is being blanketed & blocked . PAP's intergrity is eroding. Basic Humility & Decency in ruins. Shame on You Cabinet ! Continued Pressure must persist on the rideout fiasco. Bitter lesson at the polls!
@ct8447 Abuse of power on Responsibility and Accountability is what has been manifested by the PAP Minister's and MP's to defend their own. PAP has lost Public faith on integrity and Credibility. These two Ministers must step down and be removed swiftfly their conduct on rideout is appalling -to regain public confidence.
Put it simply at that time, no one knew this matter would have blown up. Hence, he put the matter to rest. When this matter had blown up, whether he likes it or not under the direction of PM, he has to relook at the matter. Whether SM carries out his duty independently without fear or favour, I leave it to the public to make an assessment.
If you had an organization (CPIB) which convenes a disciplinary committee (PAP), and the persons (SM Teo) who convene the disciplinary, take part in the disciplinary committee themselves. That's a conflict of interest. I'm just applying what was said by him.
😂 worker party supporters are very stupid without critical thinking. If law say no problem mean no problem. That why set up law mAh. Just like soccer the offside rule, all follow, line man say no offside mean no offside la. Even our CPIB after VAR proof all was done legally . Knn WP want to kelong huh?😂
@@leechengho8407 yes, so unless the people are shown where and why their replies are not good enough, this episode is wasted. So maybe a channel can specialise on just pointing out where and why their replies are problematic else how can average Joe discern by themselves?
The debate here is all on procedural rightness. However, a civil servant renting from a government bodies, without disclosure to the public out front, and was raise later, will always raise doubts among the public, no matter how you explain.
😂 worker party supporters are very stupid without critical thinking. If law say no problem mean no problem. That why set up law mAh. Just like soccer the offside rule, all follow, line man say no offside mean no offside la. Even our CPIB after VAR proof all was done legally . Knn WP want to kelong huh?😂
@@ngteckhoh simi sai conflict of interest? Did the minister gain anything from renting the GCB which done accordingly? No la. So WP are just trying to divide Singaporean.
Wow, Wow, SM Teoh said he did not approve of his rental. Does he mean that the ministers involved in the black and white house rental committed wrongdoing?
Shocking shanmugam is,the one who,always hit back the opposition debate & debate you see what happened so vote in more opposition if there Oppo didn't voice out this investigation will never happened pap is too strong we can't give so much power we need equal or least number of opposition in the old pap under lky was,solid with principal now all different i see
There are no perfect solution as nobody's perfect, except to have a mutual monitoring system at parliament, in our government, etc, having to monitor one another. To be effective, we cannot have 80 paps versus 10 oppo. We need to have 45 vs 45 to achieve balance of power so that this mutual monitoring can bring justice, fairness, equality and prosperity to all commoners, not just for those elites.
Does this mean that Opposition parties are free to head reviews of their own members in parliament if the same structural reasonings quoted here remains intact? Isnt this really a matter of looking into the presence or lack thereof proper disclosure practices at the government level who should hold themselves accountable to the people of the country? why has this devolve into a debate on whether there is financial gains in renting the properties? financial gains are subjective, isnt it? and what's to say that all privileges needs to be financial in a nature to be an abuse of rights? If they can stop being so defensive and admit to an oversight for one simple incident instead of hanging dearly to an incomprehensible need to appear faultless on their ivory towers, i believe most singaporeans will be glad to let matters rest and move on.
1. Opposition parties are allowed to conduct their own investigation especially when one of them is caught lying in parliament. 2. CPIB was conducting their own separate investigation on the Ministers. 3. Get your facts right
@@noproblematallmate YES of course everyone is allowed to conduct their own investigation. Including my own grandmother. BUT my point is focusing on the person presiding over the case in parliament , i.e the yardstick to present the defining conclusion as a whole to the nation in a parliamentary session. This has the effect a conclusive impression imposed to the people which could in fact override all preceding investigations taken (nevermind that CPIB is also a government agency, which is besides my point). So in this case, given that the conclusive presentation in parliament was headed by a member within the same party.... Would this not present a vested interest by said person to conclude in a certain manner (or at least risk that)? --> Hence pls get your diction of english and context right. Happy to correct you further if needed.
@@go2cts PAP’s standard which means opposition also can do this. Pritam, sylvia and faisal needed to recuse in their DP on khan and according to PAP’s standard can use Jamus and He ting Ru for the DP. Its still conflict of interest lah, they are in same Sengkang team and same party. According to PAP this has no conflict of interest lol..point is always need an independent panel then ppl are satisfied. PAP not gonna do this as they will be exposed.
The issue is not conflict of issue. The issue is why is the addition land of 160k free.. according to sla.. there is a min land rent... for all. Incl nparks or hdb.. there is cost for all
@@noproblematallmate cpib report to whom? Why don’t they report to a committee which led by opposition to question the government in parliament? But report to PMO where there’s lesser degree of independence in appearance??
@@sherlockrhee5597 CPIB is run by civil servants who certainly can be opposition supporters as well. So they are neutral parties. Are you a foreigner? You don't know this? Why report to Opposition? You know the agenda of opposition parties for sure?
@@noproblematallmate wow. Starting to point finger at a bogeyman! Come on, our votes are traceable and thats less likely public servants will turn into opposition voters, lol. Like you, what’s the agenda of ruling government? absolute power corrupts absolutely,!
@@noproblematallmate All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than other!!!! You want to be the dogs to the pigs, it’s your choice. Other have their freedom to be Benjamin and bird!!!
When,you govern a,country must be equally whether you are minister or whoever .. When apply laws there Is no special treatment our late lky is a,example when he made a,law he make sure he & His people follows those abide then has to face the consequences who doesn't that's rule of life.
His analogy explains the hypocrisy itself. The chairman would have a vested interest in covering up any issues that had arisen, or at the very least try to sweep it under the rug as he is still beholden to the shareholders. And any mistakes by his subordinates, especially after their actions have been cleared by him, would reflect on the chairman himself.
The only then foreign minister geroge yeo son...was 1 of the humble minister son i ever seen...he was under me as a sgt..he does not like to be treated as a white horse and does whatever the rest is doing..only the high rank people dont dare to punish him.. Overall..he is a down to earth guy..nice chap
Indranee rajah keep asking opposition to apologize why must they apologize hmm they opposition laying facts shamugam & Vivian bala,Allegations on ride out rd is truth the public knows that's & also posting it social media is,to let public knows what is happening it's call democracy & nothing wrong with that doesn't mean they cleared now,the allegations is not true yes it's facts hmm it's,call,clarity
SM Teo's analogy is not analogous. Regretably the logic is flawed, the 2 ministers might want to vacate and move even if only to bow to public opinion. That's the lesson taught by Lord Ram.
3:32 they are ministers they will ace the system for profits not for themselves but their descendants. Gov always talk about legacy. Just like the monarchy...
We now after almost 60yrs finally hv an Official Leader of the Opposition. Isn’t it now also Time to also hv The Office of an Ombudsman so PAP can avoid to Continue making Mockery of Parliament ?…
She raised a good point, why ownself check again the past ownself check ownself? Question is, did she genuinely challenge the ownself check ownself system or was she putting up a show to demonstrate ownself check ownself check ownself, just to prove that ownself is not ownself? But if this ownself is not the other ownselves, then one worries for this ownself. Let’s open our eyes and record it in our head to see if this ownself is still part of the big ownself or if this ownself will become herself in the next GE.
Man - Singapore is a country; how can you take a company as a comparable model. In a company model, the disciplinary party is internal and non independent ~ are you implying that our juridical Supreme Court must play servitude towards the government??? T, u r a SM; a highly intellectual ~ get your basics correct. You are the leadership on this matter; whether it is black or white must be clearly drawn - there can be no gray areas.
😂 worker party supporters are very stupid without critical thinking. If law say no problem mean no problem. That why set up law mAh. Just like soccer the offside rule, all follow, line man say no offside mean no offside la. Even our CPIB after VAR proof all was done legally . Knn WP want to kelong huh?😂
Look how different this review is from the one done on Reesah Khan case. No threats, no drama, just on the surface job. So obvious this is not the right people to run the government despite their efficiency.
When Pinky already said he was the one who reviewed and approved the Ridout purchases, who is Big Nose to say no then? Clearly, Big Nose is not independent. 😂
@@noproblematallmate let's assume we trust cpib. Of course we do. But Trust alone is not enough because humans are not infallible. Some public servants of the Republic of the singapore have been found guilty. Why not you say you also trust them? As Indranee said something like a Corrupt person will not raise his hands up to tell the world, "hey, I committed a crime" . Something like dat. Not her exact words of course. Crimes are usually done in secret. You dunno meh? That's why Corruption Index is called Perception of Corruption as no country can find out Every case of corruption. What is not Reported cannot be known by the dafts. Ah Kong called them Dafts what. You which school one? Ministry of Funny? If your boss instruct you to be 50cents, would you not do it? If he say, give you a dog biscuit per 50 posts, you sure take it right? Self Interest mah. Wanna debate on Altruism? I waiting to bait a 50cents to debate on Altruism
I have no problems with Teo's integrity. But his use of a corporate example where a company appoints its own "independent committee" is a suboptimal example and embeds the same suboptimal circumstances. Why not think of a way that ensures party favouritism has absolutely zero chance?
@@noproblematallmate The CPIB falls under Prime Minister's office. So PAP party head is the big boss on one hand and senior PAP colleague is the other inquirer. The use of the word independent is stretched. I do not accuse anyone of failing to provide an accurate finding, but shows that Singapore's parliamentarian process is as they say, biased, like the way they redraw GRCs for domination.
@@joseki6644 CPIB reports to PM but investigations are led by civil servants. You want to say that all of the CPIB officers carrying out the investigation signed a pact to keep some secret between themselves? What are you smoking? There is no way for a secret to hold for long. Paper cannot put out fire. If there is a secret, it will be revealed by human.
The three ministers are members of the same political party.
For the assessment to be free from bias, conflict of interest or undue influence, minister Teo is clearly not the right person to lead the inquiry.
Do spare a thought that the voters are singaporeans
@@LonganLee what exactly is your point?
Minister Teo was a decoy. CPIB was conducting their actual investigations behind the scene and the public didn't know. You guys are too naive
I concur
@@LonganLeeyou mean therefore it is ok cos sinkies are a daft bunch?
I served NS and reservice with this mans son. In a Battalion, his son led his own platoon that had no link whatsoever to the battalion which has all of us wondering what is his sons platoon doing in our battalion other than taking up space? and over the reservice years up his rank faster than any other officer did. You cant trust these people with what they say, watch what they do and you will see the differential treatment they and their families receive over other commoners.
Well said.
Nepotism, favouritism, ownself appraise ownself
Would be very interesting if someone can build on this real-life case study, provided that it's true.
@@stickymoney Who are we kidding. You just saw what happened regarding Ridout, These people can pull rabbits out of their asses, theres just no point and if you want change, vote them out.
@@horologyenthusiast8523WP also kena owned by PS convening disciplinary panel on the khan’s case. Even though TCH is prata king to cover up, hes right in this video. SL, PS and faisal needed to recuse themselves. But sooner or later PAP also will get caught pants down when opposition improved. The ministers used wife and children to rent out their properties for profit.
Thks for sharing. we must all speak up and not be afraid anymore
Of all people, the government has to choose TCH to oversee the review. Same party member, ownself check ownself, again and again, PAP never learn, will never change.
Ms He is asking are you, TCH, the best, most suitable or only person to handle the investigation? TCH, are you telling the whole Singapore you are the best candidate to handle the investigation? It's not whether are you involved in the matter but are you the most suitable candidate? A third party honorable candidate who is not involved with PAP or any opposition party will be an excellent choice.
Like n appreciate your downright comments, very straightforward n precise.
If a person from PAP is not suitable, then a person from the opposite is also not suitable in the other way. Who can be a better choice?
@@Wilson24678Who says someone from opposite party not suitable? You better go and find how the system in democracies are.
?
@@chaotiongsai Opposite party is competitor of ruling party, it's naturally conflict of interest. You better go and find how the system in western democracies are.
Using a private organisation as an example is not only poor but irrelevant. Private organisations use their own funds to conduct their own investigations, are still answerable to shareholders and the law they operate in. But here we have ministers from the same party conducting checks on themselves that is less than transparent and yet claims there is no conflict of interest.
They can say anything they want. Ownself clear ownself
They can only use TCH or LHL. TCH is better in speaking for covering up. If let independent panel check, the ministers reputation not safe. There may not be wrongdoing but it can easily recommend process is not transparent and those properties not advertised by SLA for years hence winner bid price so low, then ministers never inform public beforehand. These are lapses an independent panel will say out.
Comparing oranges with apples.
KAKISTOCRACY AT PLAY
It is obviously a conflict of interest just to have TCH who is from PAP act as an “independent” reviewer for his two
PAP colleagues. The very fact that PAP don’t understand that this arrangement in itself is a conflict of i interest is a big joke!
There shd be perhaps a committee comprises of 2 pap, 2 wp mps, 1 tcb, 1 sdp, 1 rp, etc, n 2 retired judges totally NOT on pension scheme so no fear of repercussions.
Even a primary school kid will know that TCB was definitely not suitable to lead the inquiry. It is so obvious that TCB was defending his two comrades with his own interpretation on conflict of interest.
Who is TCB?
@@meklavier4664
I think it's typo error n should read as TCH (SM Teo Chee Hean)
Am I right or not?
@@meklavier4664 Teo Chee B _ _.
Haha
SM is independent, he have no affiliation whatsoever to the current party 💩😂😂
So very insulting to think Singaporeans are fools !
If not satisfied with the TCH's explanation then vote for Opposition at the next GE. VTO.
Vote more oppositions to check on them...😂
The problem with TCH's approach to this saga is his attempt to stop full disclosure of all relevant facts like the rental received by the two ministers for their GCB.
COI! COI! COI!
And how to prove the claim that renting his queen something GCB he is not earning from the Rental difference?
@@michael8372 No use. PS cannot get the job done. He as a lawyer should have pursued when KS at first did not answer clearly the handphone question and after vivi replied clearly his phone was seized or not seized then only he made a clarification something like his phone read by them but later returned to him. So seized or not seized? Deleted? Is cpib proper procedure to seize all phones first?
@@LonganLeeI think he wants to preserve his own political career at the moment. 😂 so soon after the RK debacle, he perhaps wants to lay low and not stir the pot too much for now
@@RaseYourProbs he already cleared of wrong doing
Why not third party, or international unrelated ans trusted body, as this shall make the whole episode come out well and clean? The two highly paid minsters putting themselves in such a position that need to be investigated that could have been avoided very easily shown that they have judgement problem. WP Singh was too kind by referring it as optics problem.
Teo your answer is not acceptable
Well done He Ting Ru. ❤❤💪💪👍👍👏👏💯💯❤❤
I really love you Ms Ru. You are soooo beautiful
yup. Having decided that it was okay previously, it means that if he finds something wrong now, he would have failed earlier. So he is clearly conflicted and ought not participate or lead in the inquiry. Cannot be clearer than that.
Now in latest version, new addition:
Ownself perceived oneself (in terms of perceived conflict)😊
can we remove Baey YK already, he is ALWAYS struggling to stay awake.
Busy waking up Early in the Morning; don his UGLY TIGHT SPANDEX to cycle
Ask Singaporeans if they are satisfied with PM or SM TCH's explanations over the Ridout matter, many will say no. Ask any Singaporeans if they are satisfied with LM Shan and FM Vivian's explanations you will most probably get expletives as standard replies. TCH's explanations on conflict of interest and "not taking part in the transactions" are poor at best. Slyvia Lim nailed him.
Ownself check ownself
oxley saga, indian becomes malay President drama, Keppel scandal, SPH scandal, now this - consistently treating sporeans like new born babies.
exactly!!!
Valid questions asked.
Well the fact that all 3 are from the same party itself defines conflict of interest..! Need we say more..!!!!
SM Teo was one of the very few Ministers I had some respect for, this changed my mind.
I was having upmost respect for all my ministers, until I see their millions dollars pay and wonder how many will still stay in public service if we normalize those pays to that of a peasant
Respect for money
@@yingyang2405who does not love lots of money.
I love one of past GE period video where he was filmed pointing finger at someone and like telling him sternly something😅
It's could possibly changed many S'porean's minds too.
Unconvicing Explanation! Ownself Check Ownself!
Exactly her question is same as mine, isn't this another actual conflict of interest example?
And no,this is not the same as an public organisation,this is the parliament and the government..you are showing your actions to the citizens now😐
The Cabinet is Unworthy of Trust !
From PM to Ministers the rideout episode is an embarrassment to the PAP Party.
Transparency for disclosure is being blanketed & blocked .
PAP's intergrity is eroding.
Basic Humility & Decency in ruins.
Shame on You Cabinet !
Continued Pressure must persist on the rideout fiasco.
Bitter lesson at the polls!
WP James lim famously said, cannot give them a blank cheque. Ownself check ownself is not acceptable.
@ct8447
Abuse of power on Responsibility and Accountability is what has been manifested by the PAP Minister's and MP's to defend their own.
PAP has lost Public faith on integrity and Credibility.
These two Ministers must step down and be removed swiftfly their conduct on rideout is appalling -to regain public confidence.
Put it simply at that time, no one knew this matter would have blown up. Hence, he put the matter to rest. When this matter had blown up, whether he likes it or not under the direction of PM, he has to relook at the matter. Whether SM carries out his duty independently without fear or favour, I leave it to the public to make an assessment.
Put it bluntly, the public, especially the young n well educated are certainly not in favour of their findings.
@@leechengho8407 now it's only a matter of how many voters have conscience , hi standard in morality and ethics
Wp alway right pap stepdown
In the corporate world, there is such a thing called external audit.
If you had an organization (CPIB) which convenes a disciplinary committee (PAP), and the persons (SM Teo) who convene the disciplinary, take part in the disciplinary committee themselves. That's a conflict of interest.
I'm just applying what was said by him.
😂 worker party supporters are very stupid without critical thinking. If law say no problem mean no problem. That why set up law mAh. Just like soccer the offside rule, all follow, line man say no offside mean no offside la. Even our CPIB after VAR proof all was done legally . Knn WP want to kelong huh?😂
😂😂😂👍
Rally all Singaporeans to defeat arrogance Government. VTO
This is one of the toughest questions posed
Yep, that's why they're incapable to answer, so they just dance around it as usual, quite comical actually lol
@@ezek7 it begs the question , why the majority ?
@@LonganLee i suppose its because monkeys must stick together as they need to preserve their colonies
Yes, we all agree n yet they're able to spin a web of unimaginable mamas' stories hopefully thinking we've only peanuts' brains.
@@leechengho8407 yes, so unless the people are shown where and why their replies are not good enough, this episode is wasted. So maybe a channel can specialise on just pointing out where and why their replies are problematic else how can average Joe discern by themselves?
The debate here is all on procedural rightness. However, a civil servant renting from a government bodies, without disclosure to the public out front, and was raise later, will always raise doubts among the public, no matter how you explain.
😂 worker party supporters are very stupid without critical thinking. If law say no problem mean no problem. That why set up law mAh. Just like soccer the offside rule, all follow, line man say no offside mean no offside la. Even our CPIB after VAR proof all was done legally . Knn WP want to kelong huh?😂
The issue is conflict of interest.Let the people judge on election day
@@ngteckhoh simi sai conflict of interest? Did the minister gain anything from renting the GCB which done accordingly? No la. So WP are just trying to divide Singaporean.
When the angels leave, the devils will come out. This is my parting shot and I would like to rest my case here.
Wow, Wow, SM Teoh said he did not approve of his rental. Does he mean that the ministers involved in the black and white house rental committed wrongdoing?
The arrogance of people who think they are invincible but only mortals
Because he was appointed by PM?
I quite like this he ting ru!
Shocking shanmugam is,the one who,always hit back the opposition debate & debate you see what happened so vote in more opposition if there Oppo didn't voice out this investigation will never happened pap is too strong we can't give so much power we need equal or least number of opposition in the old pap under lky was,solid with principal now all different i see
Ownself investigate ownself.
Ownself exculpate ownself.
There are no perfect solution as nobody's perfect, except to have a mutual monitoring system at parliament, in our government, etc, having to monitor one another. To be effective, we cannot have 80 paps versus 10 oppo. We need to have 45 vs 45 to achieve balance of power so that this mutual monitoring can bring justice, fairness, equality and prosperity to all commoners, not just for those elites.
Speak with conviction. Is there a need to keep referring to the script?
Own self checking
😊you accepted that, who are you to accept as they are in your own party. It conflict of interest.
Does this mean that Opposition parties are free to head reviews of their own members in parliament if the same structural reasonings quoted here remains intact?
Isnt this really a matter of looking into the presence or lack thereof proper disclosure practices at the government level who should hold themselves accountable to the people of the country? why has this devolve into a debate on whether there is financial gains in renting the properties? financial gains are subjective, isnt it? and what's to say that all privileges needs to be financial in a nature to be an abuse of rights?
If they can stop being so defensive and admit to an oversight for one simple incident instead of hanging dearly to an incomprehensible need to appear faultless on their ivory towers, i believe most singaporeans will be glad to let matters rest and move on.
1. Opposition parties are allowed to conduct their own investigation especially when one of them is caught lying in parliament.
2. CPIB was conducting their own separate investigation on the Ministers.
3. Get your facts right
It’s too late. PAP has fouled up the plot.
@@noproblematallmate
YES of course everyone is allowed to conduct their own investigation. Including my own grandmother.
BUT my point is focusing on the person presiding over the case in parliament , i.e the yardstick to present the defining conclusion as a whole to the nation in a parliamentary session. This has the effect a conclusive impression imposed to the people which could in fact override all preceding investigations taken (nevermind that CPIB is also a government agency, which is besides my point).
So in this case, given that the conclusive presentation in parliament was headed by a member within the same party.... Would this not present a vested interest by said person to conclude in a certain manner (or at least risk that)?
--> Hence pls get your diction of english and context right. Happy to correct you further if needed.
@@go2cts PAP’s standard which means opposition also can do this. Pritam, sylvia and faisal needed to recuse in their DP on khan and according to PAP’s standard can use Jamus and He ting Ru for the DP. Its still conflict of interest lah, they are in same Sengkang team and same party. According to PAP this has no conflict of interest lol..point is always need an independent panel then ppl are satisfied. PAP not gonna do this as they will be exposed.
SM Teo was trying to defend the indefensible !
It will only sullied his own reputation.
He has reputation?
All the complains now completely useless unless you vote them out in the next election. Otherwise shut up.
The issue is not conflict of issue. The issue is why is the addition land of 160k free.. according to sla.. there is a min land rent... for all. Incl nparks or hdb.. there is cost for all
A person with rational mind will know that TCH's explanation was least convincing.
What else could he say.
So what can you do? 60% chose to vote him.
Ownself check ownself.
Even in Malaysia, parliament still got 公账会lead by opposition to check the government.
Our CPIB did conduct investigation too just FYI because you are clearly lost.
@@noproblematallmate cpib report to whom? Why don’t they report to a committee which led by opposition to question the government in parliament? But report to PMO where there’s lesser degree of independence in appearance??
@@sherlockrhee5597 CPIB is run by civil servants who certainly can be opposition supporters as well. So they are neutral parties. Are you a foreigner? You don't know this?
Why report to Opposition? You know the agenda of opposition parties for sure?
@@noproblematallmate wow. Starting to point finger at a bogeyman! Come on, our votes are traceable and thats less likely public servants will turn into opposition voters, lol.
Like you, what’s the agenda of ruling government? absolute power corrupts absolutely,!
@@noproblematallmate All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than other!!!! You want to be the dogs to the pigs, it’s your choice. Other have their freedom to be Benjamin and bird!!!
When,you govern a,country must be equally whether you are minister or whoever .. When apply laws there Is no special treatment our late lky is a,example when he made a,law he make sure he & His people follows those abide then has to face the consequences who doesn't that's rule of life.
His analogy explains the hypocrisy itself. The chairman would have a vested interest in covering up any issues that had arisen, or at the very least try to sweep it under the rug as he is still beholden to the shareholders. And any mistakes by his subordinates, especially after their actions have been cleared by him, would reflect on the chairman himself.
If there is nothing wrong, why need to unleash the whole government machinery to explain. The public is stupid or blind?
Why can't they get a 'truly independent' person to make it independent no ambiguity?
Seriously ownself check ownself
Wayang Review 😅 VTO PAP ! The Voters do the review !
The only then foreign minister geroge yeo son...was 1 of the humble minister son i ever seen...he was under me as a sgt..he does not like to be treated as a white horse and does whatever the rest is doing..only the high rank people dont dare to punish him..
Overall..he is a down to earth guy..nice chap
Company got outside auditor to audit.
Not ownself check ownself.
Good news, company do not need auditors to check anymore. They can ownself check ownself in future.
Indranee rajah keep asking opposition to apologize why must they apologize hmm they opposition laying facts shamugam & Vivian bala,Allegations on ride out rd is truth the public knows that's & also posting it social media is,to let public knows what is happening it's call democracy & nothing wrong with that doesn't mean they cleared now,the allegations is not true yes it's facts hmm it's,call,clarity
SM Teo cannot lah
SM Teo's analogy is not analogous. Regretably the logic is flawed, the 2 ministers might want to vacate and move even if only to bow to public opinion. That's the lesson taught by Lord Ram.
ownself check ownself..... ownself rent to ownself......and we thought they advised sex in small places....
Dun let Aunty Teo know ah😅
These bungalows are huge for playing hide and seek too.
@@yingyang2405 can bollywood film guy chase sari?
3:32 they are ministers they will ace the system for profits not for themselves but their descendants.
Gov always talk about legacy.
Just like the monarchy...
He didn 't give actual answer.
We now after almost 60yrs finally hv an Official Leader of the Opposition. Isn’t it now also Time to also hv The Office of an Ombudsman so PAP can avoid to Continue making Mockery of Parliament ?…
She raised a good point, why ownself check again the past ownself check ownself? Question is, did she genuinely challenge the ownself check ownself system or was she putting up a show to demonstrate ownself check ownself check ownself, just to prove that ownself is not ownself? But if this ownself is not the other ownselves, then one worries for this ownself. Let’s open our eyes and record it in our head to see if this ownself is still part of the big ownself or if this ownself will become herself in the next GE.
Should appoint opposition members to do the investigation
It seems that his broad explaination covers all questions ... How so very convenient and hypocritical of him
All I can add is this exercise is futile and hogwash
Their souls are already corrupted. God told me ❤❤❤❤❤❤
A person behavior and gesture act like a gangster .... such personality will serve Singapore well ???!!!
👍
Tell me how and what can go wrong when "ownself check ownself"? 😂
Man - Singapore is a country; how can you take a company as a comparable model. In a company model, the disciplinary party is internal and non independent ~ are you implying that our juridical Supreme Court must play servitude towards the government??? T, u r a SM; a highly intellectual ~ get your basics correct. You are the leadership on this matter; whether it is black or white must be clearly drawn - there can be no gray areas.
Has this case come to a closure?
Ownself chk ownself is a violation of the Ministerial Code of Conduct!!
PAP voters take note of the word ownself 😁😂
The word to vote for 😂😂
Will a common citizen be let off ? Think!
😂 worker party supporters are very stupid without critical thinking. If law say no problem mean no problem. That why set up law mAh. Just like soccer the offside rule, all follow, line man say no offside mean no offside la. Even our CPIB after VAR proof all was done legally . Knn WP want to kelong huh?😂
The answer is so obvious. 2 sets of laws: 1 set for PAP and another for SGs
Look how different this review is from the one done on Reesah Khan case. No threats, no drama, just on the surface job. So obvious this is not the right people to run the government despite their efficiency.
@@yingyang2405 u stupid huh? RK told lie. Minister follows rule to rent . RK is wrong doing, minister is doing everything legally.
@@yingyang2405 agree
He should have retired long ago. But they gave him the title of Senior Minister, getting millions of dollars and does nothing to benefit the nation.
Very brave rebuttal 👍
Woman of substance !
The very fact that am law min and foreign minister
Kakilang or kakistocracy
Well thought questions. 也瞄也黑！
Ownself check ownself is not conflict of interest to PAP come on , there's precedent already !
Why don't you just admit that there are conflict of interest.. Knnbccb Teo chee bye.. Senile minister just take pay and follow lee hsien long..
When Pinky already said he was the one who reviewed and approved the Ridout purchases, who is Big Nose to say no then? Clearly, Big Nose is not independent. 😂
Ownself check ownself......TCSS lah
Use international court then no doubt about conflicts
Why?
Ownself check ownself ...cannot ah?
Who dare say...cannot...you..you or you?
Who holds the mandate?😆😆😆
Someone need to wake up Lee Kwan Yew and bring him back. Singapore really need his leadership.
Shall I recap what LKY ever mention before his passing that he will get up from his grave n right d wrong of anyone flawed in d PAP
It's how Putin explained the war on Ukraine is just a Special Military Operation. Change words here and there to suit their narrative.
He is not answering to the question. The question is been diverted.
Cukup la stop trying so hard
We will check ourselves lah
Cos we trust you mah😅
Sm teo is internal investigation la. CPIB already did their own review on the matter. You don't trust CPIB?
@@noproblematallmate let's assume we trust cpib. Of course we do. But Trust alone is not enough because humans are not infallible. Some public servants of the Republic of the singapore have been found guilty. Why not you say you also trust them? As Indranee said something like a Corrupt person will not raise his hands up to tell the world, "hey, I committed a crime" . Something like dat. Not her exact words of course. Crimes are usually done in secret. You dunno meh? That's why Corruption Index is called Perception of Corruption as no country can find out Every case of corruption. What is not Reported cannot be known by the dafts. Ah Kong called them Dafts what. You which school one? Ministry of Funny?
If your boss instruct you to be 50cents, would you not do it? If he say, give you a dog biscuit per 50 posts, you sure take it right? Self Interest mah. Wanna debate on Altruism? I waiting to bait a 50cents to debate on Altruism
We will handle cpf money ourself lah. Please give back all when turn 55. We can ownself check ownself.
@@chuak.c7349 they have too much power. Sorry, next life
Making sense of Bullshido
Eyelid Mc Droopy : "Come, come. Come! Let me bring you walk many rounds around my ginormous garden!"
😂 circus
Is it the beginning of the end of PAP?
I have no problems with Teo's integrity. But his use of a corporate example where a company appoints its own "independent committee" is a suboptimal example and embeds the same suboptimal circumstances. Why not think of a way that ensures party favouritism has absolutely zero chance?
He was the party internal investigation. The external party conducting the investigation was CPIB. How can you guys be so noob?
@@noproblematallmate The CPIB falls under Prime Minister's office. So PAP party head is the big boss on one hand and senior PAP colleague is the other inquirer.
The use of the word independent is stretched. I do not accuse anyone of failing to provide an accurate finding, but shows that Singapore's parliamentarian process is as they say, biased, like the way they redraw GRCs for domination.
@@joseki6644 CPIB reports to PM but investigations are led by civil servants. You want to say that all of the CPIB officers carrying out the investigation signed a pact to keep some secret between themselves? What are you smoking? There is no way for a secret to hold for long. Paper cannot put out fire. If there is a secret, it will be revealed by human.
@@joseki6644👍👍👍😊you r right
How about Edwin tong pay not enough minister???
What a lot of crock !
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂