I refer to the report “Parliament Michael Palmer resigns over “grave mistake”” (Channel NewsAsia, Dec 12).

It states that “Mr Michael Palmer, Speaker of Singapore Parliament and MP for Punggol East SMC, has resigned over “grave mistake” of improper conduct”.

According to the Merriam – Webster online dictionary, improper means “not proper: as not in accord with fact, truth, or right procedure” and conduct means “the act, manner, or process of carrying on”.

“Improper conduct”?

…. Can not giving a straight answer in Parliament as to how many Singaporeans

visit the two casinos and how many visits they made, vis-à-vis that for permanent

residents (PRs) and foreigners, be considered as “improper conduct”? (“Parliament: Replies that never answer the question? (Act 3)”, Nov 17)

…. Can not giving a straight answer in Parliament as to whether Electronic Road

Pricing (ERP) rates have increased or decreased, be considered as “improper

conduct”? (“Parliament: Replies that never answer the question? (Act 2)”, Nov 16)

…. Can giving the statistics in Parliament that the number of new citizens granted in

2011 was a 5-year low, when arguably in fact the number had actually increased –

which was only discovered when NCMP Lina Chiam asked a question, be

considered as “improper conduct”? (“NCMP Lina Chiam’s question discovers more new citizens last year?“, Oct 10)

…. Can refusing to lift the whip in the Parliamentary debate on ministerial salaries,

be considered as “improper conduct”? (“Whip: To lift or not to lift? What is a

“matter of conscience”?“, Feb 10)

…. Can the refusal to disclose the losses of the Government Investment Corporation

(GIC) in Parliament in reply to MP’s questions, be considered as “improper

conduct”? (“GIC losses – foreign media more important than Parliament?”, Mar

16, 2009)

…. Can the refusal to answer MPs’ questions on Temasek Holdings citing the reason

that it does not serve any strategic purpose whilst agreeing that it was “a matter of

public interest”, be considered as “improper conduct”? (“A mockery of

Parliament”, Aug 20, 2009)

…. Can the refusal to disclose in Parliament the losses of Temasek Holdings during

the 2008/2009 financial crisis despite repeated questioning by MPs, be considered

as “improper conduct”? (“Temasek Holdings – “not required” to disclose?”, May

21, 2011)

Private lives vs public duty?

So, which is the bigger issue?

Politicians’ “improper conduct” in their private lives or their arguably in a sense, “improper conduct” in the discharge of their public duty?

Leong Sze Hian