Mr Yaw, will you please step forward please….will anyone in WP step forward?

As some of you may already know through the grapevine and courtesy of our beloved rag, the ST, Mr Yaw is embroiled in a sexual controversy – as it stands, there seems to be no information and at this point, it is simply a rumor (so they say lah).

However, if the “rumor” proves to be true (maybe this is a case for agent Scully and Mulder), this naturally raises the question: should Mr Yaw step down as the MP for Hougang in the name of the greater good?

To be perfectly honest with all of you – I really cannot see how WP will be able to keep it’s credibility as an the opposition party intact, if they failed to act decisively on this issue. However what remains curious to me is why even the decision makers in the WP have decided to remain mum over this issue. Perhaps they fear in trying to defend Yaw, this may diminish their very own credibility, because let’s face it, no one wants to be linked to a serial skirt chaser – in summary, its indefensible.

Looking at the broader issue, this should never be confused as a test for Singapore – those who claim it is may not realize that the sexual escapades of politicians have been around since the dawn of man. If anything, this a test for the whole of the internet: How we decide to regard Yaw’s horizontal hobbies, will set the tone for our future political engagement with NOT only the PAP, but also for all social and political actors who are recepients of tax payers monies – what we as netizens must be mindful of is the need to be clear, consistent and coherent in our outlook. Understand this! We cannot have two or three rules for engagement without confusing ourselves and others – this simply means, we need to buy into the idea of ONE rule book for all, irrespective of political lineage – if the internet fails to craft a unanimous response as to how, we expect Yaw and the WP to manage this fall out – then it could be said, we run the risk of playing a very confused social political game where we may even run the risk of having differing moral and ethical standards for different parties i.e if it is a PAP MP fucking around, then he is good to game, but if it is the opposition, then he deserves slack along with maybe the right to a private life  – in short one rule for the opposition and another set of rules for the ruling party. Question: is this what you want? A confused internet?

This I shall leave to you, the perceptive reader to decide for yourself.

Besides, I really do not buy into the idea, what one decides to do with one’s private life is a matter that is best left to the parties concerned. That may well be the case, if Mr Yaw works in the private sector as his personal life then will have very little bearing on the public sphere. But since he receives a sizeable salary as a MP paid by taxpayers and happens to be a public figure – he is by default first and foremost a public servant and should never be allowed to hide behind the elemental right to privacy, especially, if his actions threatens to reveal a character flaw that may suggest he may not be suitable for a public role.

Central to the issue is the question of “judgment” of the public office bearer – as how a public servant decides to live his life is not so easily separated from his vocation as a MP i.e if a leader cannot even conduct a simple strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threat analysis before he decides to unzip his pants for a quickie, then how in fucksake can he be expected to act wisely when it comes to deciding on policy issues? Could that be the reason why we don’t usually allow people who regularly break out in tongues when they are stressed to be air traffic controllers – or allow people who regularly hear voices to captain a commercial jetliner – my point is when in comes to public figures, it’s a misconception to believe their private life can be hermetically sealed off from their public roles – both are inseparateable, one of the same reality even as they not only provide insights as to the quality of their judgments, but also the level of their maturity and intellect that allows voters to make an informed decision  – if that person cannot even make a good call with his personal life, how then is he supposed to perform his public duties in a manner that inspires trust and confidence from the voting public?

Again, this is a question that I shall leave to you the perceptive reader.

That in a nutshell is why Mr Yaw should at least have the balls to set the record straight by coming out from his cupboard and clarify this issue to those who have placed their trust in him.

Failing to do so or worse still hoping that the internet will just suffer from a spot of amnesia will just militate against WP and the opposition camp in the long term – as a failure to act decisively to clear the air is likely to create blanks where others are only too happy to exploit to their advantage (and you cannot blame them either, you created perfect conditions for rumors to fester) – coupled to that, WP is a new kid on the block and the last thing they need right now is to come across as a shambolic outfit that’s so out of touch with prevailing sentiments that they are even prepared to support a weak and untrustworthy character who is so childish that he doesn’t even feel the need to set the record right.

As netizens, we would do well to craft our own parameters of what we consider acceptable and unacceptable behavior from politicians – do we want a political sphere where the private and public life of politicians are so well delineated that we end up with characters such as Silvio Berlusconi – best known for his long list of criminal affiliations with the mafiaso. Wonder no more why his famous tagline is, “my private life has nothing whatsoever to do with my performance.” – or do we want to settle for a walking contradiction like Newt Gingrich – a serial skirt chaser who seems to spend more time before the ethics committee than really doing any real work while getting rich from corporate kickbacks. And once again, no guesses what his broken tagline happens to be “my private life has nothing whatsoever to do with my performance!”. Yes, you guessed it,– perhaps Mr Yaw will go down in history as the only politician in Singapore where his tagline also happens to be, “my private life has nothing whatsoever to do with my performance!”

Meanwhile, let’s wait and see – but one thing is certain, unless, we, in the internet set about the business of crafting a clear list of do’s and don’t’s from what we expect from public office bearers – then don’t be surprised one day, if we find ourselves none the wiser whenever sex and tangled sheets revelations reappear again – perhaps when it happens next to a PAP MP, we will all one day exclaim prosaically,

“His private life has nothing to do with his performance…let’s move on.”

You read, you decide and you live with the consequences. As for me, I’ve given my two cents. He should go and if he doesn’t someone should force him to walk the plank – life is very simple, don’t make it more complicated than it is.

Darkness 2012

————————————————————————————————-

“The WP is new. The key word here is “new.” Being new means people generally like to get to know you better. This is natural in politics as it is in business. People are always interested in what you stand for and what are your goals and how do you expect to reach your way points – that means when a new party like WP encounters a crisis – how they respond to it is very important. The serious men of this world will look at this aspect of crisis management. They will gauge how is conflict managed? What are the trade off? Pay out? Penalties? Etc. Serious calculations are performed with one goal – to determine the métier of that party and to see whether they can be entrusted for bigger things. But let us see what they have done, so far – they have kept mum on the issue – even Sylvia Lim has gone off the radar, as for Yaw, he is nowhere in sight – I think, I have seen enough. I think it is very clear to me, these people have absolutely no idea how to manage themselves, let alone others or for that matter craft a coherent strategy how to resolve this issue – one thing can be said from this, this hardly inspires confidence – I think PAP now looks very attractive. I think you can say what you want of them, but one thing they don’t do is hide underneath their beds and pretend that the world is well and fine whenever there is a crisis. We would do well not to ally ourselves with people who cannot manage themselves and others – what if people call us stupid and irresponsible. Then it will be very hard for us to influence others. It will be impossible for us to do serious things. Whatever the internet decides on, one thing is patently clear to me – we need one rule book for all – that means, if this Yaw chap gets away Scott free – so should a PAP MP in future or for that matter any other politician – tell me, is this what you really desire? Don’t think life is so simple whereby you can promulgate double standards and hope to be judged differently from others – that is not possible under the sun of the internet.”