SINGAPORE: The government supports, in principle, further steps to institutionalise the office of the Leader of the Opposition, Coordinating Minister for Public Services Chan Chun Sing said on Tuesday (Feb 3).
“However, as a relatively new institution, its roles, responsibilities and operating arrangements continue to be shaped by parliamentary practice, experience, and the conduct of those who occupy the office,” Mr Chan said in a written parliamentary response, on behalf of the prime minister.
“It would therefore be appropriate to allow these conventions to further develop and mature, so that any eventual codification in statute is informed by established and sound practice.”
Talk about whether the role of Leader of the Opposition should be institutionalised emerged after Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh was removed from the position following his conviction for lying to parliament.
Analysts had told CNA that they believe formally entrenching the role in law would properly define the privileges of the office.
The office of the Leader of the Opposition was first formalised by the People’s Action Party government in 2020, after the WP won a second GRC in the General Election.
As the first official Leader of the Opposition in post-independence Singapore, Mr Singh received confidential briefings by the government on select matters of national security and external relations, and in the event of a national crisis or emergency.
He also received double the allowance of an elected MP, the right of first response among MPs in parliament and more time for his speeches, equivalent to that given to political office holders.
These duties and privileges are on the parliamentary record, Mr Chan noted.
After Mr Singh was removed as Leader of the Opposition, the WP decided not to accept the prime minister's invitation to nominate another MP to the role.
The party said on Jan 21 that the position is a discretionary appointment that the prime minister makes, with no constitutional or statutory eligibility criteria.
The WP added that it is of the view that the leader of the largest opposition party in parliament is the leader of the opposition.
In response to questions from Nominated MP Neo Kok Beng on the criteria for an MP to qualify as Leader of the Opposition, Mr Chan pointed to several considerations.
“The LO (Leader of the Opposition) must uphold high standards of honesty and integrity, and command the trust and respect of parliament necessary to carry out the responsibilities of the office,” Mr Chan said.
“If for some reason the leader of the main opposition party does not meet the criteria, then another opposition MP can be considered.”
Some of these requirements may be explicitly set out should the office be institutionalised in the future, Mr Chan said.
“At the same time, there will always remain conventions of conduct and responsibility that cannot be fully codified, but which are nevertheless understood, respected and observed by all MPs,” he added.
Responding to Dr Neo’s question on whether the prime minister would continue to appoint a Leader of the Opposition if no elected opposition MP meets the criteria, Mr Chan said: “This is a hypothetical, and highly unlikely, scenario. There is a strong desire amongst Singaporeans for a greater diversity of views in parliament.”
Mr Chan noted that there are rules to ensure 12 non-ruling party MPs in the House.
The Constitution allows for up to 12 Non-Constituency MPs to be declared as elected. Under the NCMP scheme, introduced in 1984, the losing opposition candidates with the highest percentage of votes secured during a general election can be offered seats in parliament if the number of elected opposition candidates falls short of the minimum number.
“I therefore have little doubt that there will always be opposition voices in this House, and among them, members in good standing who are able to meet the requirements of the office and discharge its responsibilities with integrity and responsibility,” Mr Chan said.
Continue reading...
“However, as a relatively new institution, its roles, responsibilities and operating arrangements continue to be shaped by parliamentary practice, experience, and the conduct of those who occupy the office,” Mr Chan said in a written parliamentary response, on behalf of the prime minister.
“It would therefore be appropriate to allow these conventions to further develop and mature, so that any eventual codification in statute is informed by established and sound practice.”
Talk about whether the role of Leader of the Opposition should be institutionalised emerged after Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh was removed from the position following his conviction for lying to parliament.
Analysts had told CNA that they believe formally entrenching the role in law would properly define the privileges of the office.
The office of the Leader of the Opposition was first formalised by the People’s Action Party government in 2020, after the WP won a second GRC in the General Election.
As the first official Leader of the Opposition in post-independence Singapore, Mr Singh received confidential briefings by the government on select matters of national security and external relations, and in the event of a national crisis or emergency.
He also received double the allowance of an elected MP, the right of first response among MPs in parliament and more time for his speeches, equivalent to that given to political office holders.
These duties and privileges are on the parliamentary record, Mr Chan noted.
After Mr Singh was removed as Leader of the Opposition, the WP decided not to accept the prime minister's invitation to nominate another MP to the role.
The party said on Jan 21 that the position is a discretionary appointment that the prime minister makes, with no constitutional or statutory eligibility criteria.
The WP added that it is of the view that the leader of the largest opposition party in parliament is the leader of the opposition.
Related:
In response to questions from Nominated MP Neo Kok Beng on the criteria for an MP to qualify as Leader of the Opposition, Mr Chan pointed to several considerations.
“The LO (Leader of the Opposition) must uphold high standards of honesty and integrity, and command the trust and respect of parliament necessary to carry out the responsibilities of the office,” Mr Chan said.
“If for some reason the leader of the main opposition party does not meet the criteria, then another opposition MP can be considered.”
Some of these requirements may be explicitly set out should the office be institutionalised in the future, Mr Chan said.
“At the same time, there will always remain conventions of conduct and responsibility that cannot be fully codified, but which are nevertheless understood, respected and observed by all MPs,” he added.
Responding to Dr Neo’s question on whether the prime minister would continue to appoint a Leader of the Opposition if no elected opposition MP meets the criteria, Mr Chan said: “This is a hypothetical, and highly unlikely, scenario. There is a strong desire amongst Singaporeans for a greater diversity of views in parliament.”
Mr Chan noted that there are rules to ensure 12 non-ruling party MPs in the House.
The Constitution allows for up to 12 Non-Constituency MPs to be declared as elected. Under the NCMP scheme, introduced in 1984, the losing opposition candidates with the highest percentage of votes secured during a general election can be offered seats in parliament if the number of elected opposition candidates falls short of the minimum number.
“I therefore have little doubt that there will always be opposition voices in this House, and among them, members in good standing who are able to meet the requirements of the office and discharge its responsibilities with integrity and responsibility,” Mr Chan said.
Related:
Continue reading...