Public Opinion Pros

Main Menu

  • Home
  • Public communication
  • Public education
  • Public consultation
  • Public library
  • Public service

Public Opinion Pros

Header Banner

Public Opinion Pros

  • Home
  • Public communication
  • Public education
  • Public consultation
  • Public library
  • Public service
Public education
Home›Public education›‘Puzzled’ that foreign interference bill was pondered for months without public consultation: Pritam Singh – Mothership.SG

‘Puzzled’ that foreign interference bill was pondered for months without public consultation: Pritam Singh – Mothership.SG

By Lenny A. Brown
October 4, 2021
0
0

Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

Opposition Leader Pritam Singh spoke a few choice words during the debate on the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill (FICA) on Monday, October 4.

During his speech in parliament, the Workers Party (WP) member said it was “totally incongruous” that the government did not seek public comment on the controversial bill, while acknowledging that the Singaporean public today wants more checks and balances.

He also said he was “puzzled” how the government chose not to undertake a public consultation before the bill’s first reading, given that it had many months to think about it.

He also presented a list of proposed amendments tabled by WP members to the bill, aimed at improving the accountability, fairness, transparency and efficiency of the bill.

No public consultation on the bill

Singh said the government should have solicited public comments on the bill, noting that there has been “considerable concern” over the speed at which the bill has been introduced to parliament.

He said that in March 2021, Vice President Christopher De Souza asked what the Home Office (MHA) would do to deter foreign interference in Singapore’s internal affairs.

In response to this, then-Second Home Minister Joséphine Teo said legislative levers might be needed and stressed the need to consider additional measures to guard against foreign subversion of politically important individuals and entities.

According to Singh, Teo also said that the public had an important role to play in shaping the proposals, and Singh stressed that this had not materialized because the government had not held any public consultation on the draft. law in the six months between Teo’s statement. and the first reading in Parliament on September 13.

“This omission contradicts the official position of the Second Home Secretary, who was to rely on the public to shape the bill, which must surely include its guarantees,” Singh said.

He went on to say that while most Singaporeans would have easily supported the Foreign Influence Bill if they were consulted, most would also be in favor of Singapore courts acting as a check to ensure that executive power is exercised legally, appropriately and fairly.

WP wants a different appeal mechanism for FICA

Singh said the PM’s starting position is that the threat of foreign interference is “neither a figment of the imagination, nor can it be ruled out,” and that the government can demand “potentially intrusive” powers to intervene in the appropriate case. .

However, he also said that with exceptional executive power comes a need for strict oversight, and that powers this broad and broadly defined require the legislation of equally robust oversight mechanisms to prevent potential abuse of power. .

In particular, Singh challenged the appeal options of the FICA Bill, which allows FICA guidelines to be appealed to a review tribunal, whose decisions are final and cannot be challenged in court.

Singh said the PM rejects such an appeal mechanism and proposes an amendment that will allow an appeal to the Home Secretary and then to the High Court with full judicial review, which Singh said would introduce more transparency .

He also suggested that in cases where national security is threatened, there could be a provision for a private hearing.

Lack of non-legislative measures to counter foreign interference

According to Singh, there is also a lack of non-legislative measures to deal with foreign interference, such as educating the public to resist malicious information efforts.

He referred to a political report released by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in April 2021, which stated that raising awareness of information manipulation in government and the public is crucial in combating foreign interference.

For example, foreign campaigns to influence public opinion during the 2017 presidential campaign in France failed, as the French government had raised public awareness of information manipulation and blunted disinformation efforts by focusing the public attention to the perpetrators.

Singh said the government was “arguably unclear” on how Singaporeans should deal with foreign interference without resorting to legislation. He added that the government should work with the public in a much more participatory manner, to strengthen the resolve of the people of Singapore against foreign interference.

“The apparent lack of integration of legislative and non-legislative measures to combat foreign interference is in my opinion a critical omission in our public discourse on this subject,” Singh said.

If the PAP was not in power, will the deputies want the amendments in place?

Singh concluded his speech by stressing the importance of public comment on the bill and warned the government not to “close the door” to a select committee, which can gather public comment and examine oversight mechanisms. , among others.

He said he was “puzzled” that the government had been thinking about introducing the bill for many months, but had not undertaken any public consultation before it was tabled for its first reading in parliament. .

Singh called on his fellow MPs to consider the PM’s proposed amendments and posed an interesting final question to everyone in Parliament.

“I call on the members of this Assembly to seriously consider the proposed amendments and ask you if you would like these amendments to be put in place if the PAP (Popular Action Party) was not in power. The amendments are in the best interests of Singaporeans and Singaporeans, regardless of who is in charge, now or in the future. “

Follow and listen to our podcast here

Top image via MCI / YouTube.


Source link

Related posts:

  1. Sustainable Public Education: David Barrett Running for Ward 8/9 Public School Board
  2. American Public Education, Inc. Completes Acquisition of Rasmussen University
  3. Vaccinations against Covid and public education: the example of Edo
  4. GOLDSTEIN: Public education is bursting with money, report says
Tagspublic consultation

Categories

  • Public communication
  • Public consultation
  • Public education
  • Public library
  • Public service

Archives

  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • May 2018
  • July 2017
  • May 2017
  • June 2016
  • October 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2011

Recent Posts

  • Evanston Public Library announces summer reading programs for children Evanston Public Library hosts reading programs for young people
  • Flint Public Library reopens after multi-million dollar renovation project
  • Singapore launches public consultation for health reform on preventive care
  • OfReg public consultation on updates to outage reporting rules
  • 2022-05-16 | NDAQ:APEI | Press release
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions