Orchestrating of candidacy to the post of President

This comment, initiated by me on 11 Sep 2016, can be found in REACH, a govt website, under the article captioned: Raise Criteria To Ensure Relevance And Expertise.

Scrap the presidency. President Tony Tan was reported to be totally unaware that the govt had committed a loan of $5 billion to the IMF without his knowledge or sanction; when this matter was queried by a member of the public, the loan commitment was treated as a fait accompli, ostensibly without any further questioning or probing by the President into how or why such an apparent violation of protocols had occurred, at such a high level in govt administration.

Does the current President have useful records of all the wealth or assets being managed by the govt? When President Ong Teng Cheong requested for such information he was flatly told such records weren’t available and that it would take so many man-years to produce them. It was evidently a case of the cat coming out of the bag; what an eye-opener it was: the govt admitted it was unable to provide the President with information of the assets under its control.

If the govt was unable to provide information of its assets-holdings, how was it possible to expect the President to function as a protector in preventing these assets from being squandered recklessly, unlawfully or erroneously?

What guidelines or parameters have been established, for govt spending that would require prior consultation with or approval from the President?

So by raising the eligibility criteria from $100 million to $500 million we are assuming, without factual basis of course, that a person running a $500 million company is more capable than one running a $100 million company? See comments [comments section] by Thia Ting Tiew.

False presumptions or assumptions can lead to false alleys, of course. Are some people so ignorant that they have not heard of CEOs and other senior executives being fired for dishonesty and/or mismanagement, by institutions with a paid-capital or assets far in excess of $500 million?

I don’t think anyone can rationally argue that an executive from a company with a $100 million worth of assets is less capable than one managing, say, a $500 million company, unless they have been living in ignorance, with a narrow-mindedness that is hard to match.

And though this is not expressly stated, it may be true to say that the govt is orchestrating the entry of candidates for the presidency from GLCs [govt-linked companies]. At least it looks like it, from the surface.

Leave a Reply

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: