This was the letter of response on ST Forum: (words in green fonts are my personal opinions)
Why WP didn’t get permit for event
Tuesday, 9 September 2008
I REFER to last Thursday’s letter by Mr Tan Ghee Gay, ‘Why ‘no’ and ‘yes’?', regarding police decisions with respect to the Workers’ Party’s (WP) proposed mass cycling event last year, and the carnival on Aug 31.
Police do not issue permits for outdoor political events in public places due to the potential for disorder and unruly behaviour. This applies to events organised by all political parties. For this reason, police rejected WP’s application to hold a mass cycling activity in East Coast Park, to commemorate its 50th anniversary in September last year.
My Tay, could you please kindly explain how come GE rally is approved? Its outdoor, held by political parties and in public places...
The event on Aug 31 was very different. The permit was issued after taking into account the organiser and the nature of the event. It was organised by the PAP Community Foundation, which is a registered charity and not a political party.
The PCF logo has got the PAP logo in it, it is hard for people to not relate it to a political party. For the past events that I had done with WP, if its an event that we don't wish to politicize it, we will make sure all of us not wear the party t shirt with the party logo. Because when we wear one with the logo, our aim is to create political awareness. Hence PCF should change their logo to prevent future misunderstanding.
The event was not assessed to have the potential for disorder and unruly behaviour. It was a carnival that involved children and families from various kindergartens and educational institutions.
The WP's 50th Anniversary cycling event is not one that is attended by gangsters and terrorists! It may and will also involved families and children, so why does it have a potential for disorder?
The Prime Minister, as guest of honour, and a few other guests, made their entrance by cycling a short distance. During the event, a sum of $664,000 (which had been raised earlier) was distributed to 17 charities, including Beyond Social Services, Children’s Aid Society and Chung Hwa Medical Institution.
Mr Paul Tay, I think the last few sentences is not relevant to the topic of discussion. Why the need to state the donated amount, etc? To further prove that PCF is a charitable organisation?
DSP Paul Tay
Assistant Director (Media Relations)
Singapore Police Force