Former NCMP Daniel Goh says WP convenes disciplinary committee to look into his posts on Raeesah Khan

Public, Party, Post, WP, Questions, Facebook, Leadership, Political, Committee, Workings, Goh, Member, Accountability, Inner, Interest, Raeesah, Values, Leaders, Disciplinary

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh, a cadre member of the Workers’ Party revealed in a Facebook post that the WP has convened a disciplinary committee to look into his Facebook posts on their handling of the Raeesah Khan saga. 

The committee wanted to hear his reasons and rationale for revealing in Facebook posts, the ‘inner workings of the Parliamentary caucus of the WP MPs and allowing ‘political opponents’ to have an inside understanding of how the WP operates, and for casting a cloud over the character of the leadership of the WP. 

The associate professor has declined to appear before the committee for an interview.

“I have nothing more to say about the questions that were publicly posted last year. I have been clear about the reasons and rationale in those posts,” he said. 

What did Daniel Goh post that led to a disciplinary committee?

The former NCMP had in a Facebook post on 3 November 2021, expressed shock and grief that Raeesah Khan had ‘blatantly lied multiple times in Parliament’.

He also said that the WP leadership must take some responsibility for allowing the transgression to happen and persist over several months. 

“In my experience, speeches were shared and reviewed among MPs and we might disagree and debate, but we would make corrections or drop things entirely according to the collective consensus. If a mistake was made, we would immediately move to rectify it. I hope the disciplinary panel made up of the top three leaders will recognise their responsibility IN this matter and accountability to the public ON this matter,” he wrote in his post. [emphasis from Daniel Goh]

In another Facebook post on 1 December 2021, he questioned the timing of Raeesah’s resignation and the inconvenient questions raised for the WP leadership. 

“Why resign now one month after the parliamentary apology and just hours before the CEC meeting when the disciplinary committee findings were to be discussed and a decision was taken? Did RK know the outcome already? How? What motivated her to resign only now? Did anyone of importance ask her to resign and why? All too convenient when so many inconvenient questions for the WP leadership remained unanswered. In politics, these can become a sticky ugly scent eroding trust” he wrote. 

"In issues of grave public interest, questions must be asked of the inner workings of any organisation."

In his latest Facebook post on the disciplinary committee convened to look into his posts, Daniel Goh said he had asked questions in his Facebook posts ‘as a concerned citizen and as a party member who believes that public accountability and integrity are non-negotiable values’ demanded of political leaders’.

“In issues of grave public interest, questions must be asked about the inner workings of any organisation,” said Prof Goh. 

"If asking those questions carry a price, I am willing to pay it, and count it inexpensive."

Prof Goh also asked the WP to make public the grounds of their decision and to explain any disciplinary sanctions they would impose on him.

'Too easy to fall into a cycle of pride and irresponsibility driven by a persecution complex."

He disagreed with the WP’s characterisation of the government (or any other political party) as ‘political opponents’. 

As opposition politicians working to advance public interest in a field dominated by the ruling party, Prof Goh said  it is ‘too easy to fall into a cycle of pride and irresponsibility driven by a persecution complex’. 

Here's Daniel Goh's Facebook response reproduced in full:

The Workers’ Party leadership has convened a disciplinary committee to look into my Facebook posts on their handling of the Raeesah Khan matter in Parliament. The committee has called me up for an interview:
 
“to hear the reasons and rationale behind the above public statements made by you as: 1) Your posts had revealed the inner workings of the Parliamentary caucus of the WP Members of Parliament, and allowed our political opponents to have an inside understanding of how the WP operates; 2) Your posts had cast a cloud over the character of the leadership of the WP.”
 
I have declined, as I have nothing more to say about the questions that were publicly posted last year. I have been clear about the reasons and rationale in those posts.
 
1. I have not been associated with party matters since I stepped down from my duties in early 2020. My Facebook posts were questions based on public information. The party leadership had not made any special communications with party members on the Raeesah Khan matter. I did not receive any additional information as a cadre member. The party leadership only came forward with more information on their handling of the matter after my posts.
 
2. I asked those questions as a concerned citizen and as a party member who believes that public accountability and integrity are non-negotiable values demanded of our political leaders. In issues of grave public interest, questions must be asked about the inner workings of any organisation. If asking those questions carry a price, I am willing to pay it, and count it inexpensive.
 
3. I have no intention of participating in party matters, including the Cadre Members’ Conference to be held in a few months’ time to elect the party leaders. I spent nearly 10 years working alongside many colleagues, building WP up as a credible political party, with the core values of integrity, service, and public accountability. In the same spirit of public accountability, I would ask that the party leaders make public the grounds of their decision and explain any disciplinary sanctions they would impose on me.
 
4. I disagree with seeing the government or any political party as “our political opponents”.
 
5. I do not understand what is meant by “cast a cloud over the character of the leadership of the WP”. It seems to suggest that my questions, rather than the leaders’ actions and responses, had caused people to lose their trust in the WP leaders.
 
As opposition politicians working to advance public interest in a field dominated by the ruling party, it is too easy to fall into a cycle of pride and irresponsibility driven by a persecution complex. The Workers’ Party had placed men and women in because we believed in looking beyond ourselves and the party itself to build a better and more just Singapore. The party must serve Singapore responsibly.
 
I hope that the values of public accountability, integrity, and service continue to be held uncompromisingly as core values of the party. May the truth prevail always.
Read also  Raeesah Khan resigns from Workers' Party. Why resign now, asks Prof Daniel Goh.
Read also  On Pritam Singh, playing victim and absence of shame in the Raeesah saga
Read also  Why the conduct of the 3 senior leaders of WP matters in meting out penalties to Raeesah Khan

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
On Key

Related Posts