On 28 August, Straits Times reported that Ms Sylvia Lim asked in Parliament about why the WP could not get a police permit for a mass cycling event at East Coast Park. The response given by Senior Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs Assoc Prof Ho Peng Kee was that the East Coast Park is a recreational park for Singaporeans and their families. It is not meant to be used by a political party to promote its cause. Apart from displacing the usual recreational users...it is an open area where there is greater potential for breach of the peace, public disorder and unruly behaviour. He said that police required political events to be held indoors or in stadiums where problems could be contained, adding that the WP could consider these venues. The policy applied to all political parties, he said.
Prof Ho also answered to Mr Low Thia Khiang on another question with 'You may be well-behaving, but there may be other people whom you come across when you cycle who may stop you, may want to debate with you and that may attract a crowd, and therefore will result in problems the police want to avoid.'
But I was puzzled by reading these two sentences "Thousands thronged the park yesterday for the PAP carnival. Mr Lee and a host of ministers and MPs made their entrance on bicycles, much to the delight of the spectators." in the front page of Today's Strait Times - "Unite to take on the best, PM tells table tennis body".
Why am I Puzzled?
1) According to Prof Ho East Coast Park is not meant to be used by a political Party but how about West Coast Park?
2) PAP Carnival? Isn't this consider political party event?
3) Political events to be held indoors or in stadiums, is West Coast Park considered indoor?
4) The police is worried that people might stop Mr Low Thia Khiang to debate and may attract a crowd, resulting in problems, but wouldn't the PM cycling in West Coast Park cause more danger as even more people would be likely to speak to him?
Isn't this a sign of unfairness and double standard?
Prof Ho also answered to Mr Low Thia Khiang on another question with 'You may be well-behaving, but there may be other people whom you come across when you cycle who may stop you, may want to debate with you and that may attract a crowd, and therefore will result in problems the police want to avoid.'
But I was puzzled by reading these two sentences "Thousands thronged the park yesterday for the PAP carnival. Mr Lee and a host of ministers and MPs made their entrance on bicycles, much to the delight of the spectators." in the front page of Today's Strait Times - "Unite to take on the best, PM tells table tennis body".
Why am I Puzzled?
1) According to Prof Ho East Coast Park is not meant to be used by a political Party but how about West Coast Park?
2) PAP Carnival? Isn't this consider political party event?
3) Political events to be held indoors or in stadiums, is West Coast Park considered indoor?
4) The police is worried that people might stop Mr Low Thia Khiang to debate and may attract a crowd, resulting in problems, but wouldn't the PM cycling in West Coast Park cause more danger as even more people would be likely to speak to him?
Isn't this a sign of unfairness and double standard?
Posts
2 comments:
Agree, absolutely. But will have the courage to say the emperor is not wearing any clothes.
It is surely double-standards. Not the first time it has happened, and definitely won't be the last.
Brace yourselves, in the future, for maybe even triple/quadruple-standards.
Post a Comment