SINGAPORE — The President should be obliged to consult the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) on all fiscal matters relating to the country’s reserves and all key public-service appointments, said the Government, agreeing with recommendations by the Constitutional Commission on the Elected Presidency (EP) on these aspects.

The Government also agreed with the recommendation to extend the scope on parliamentary override: If the President vetoes any fiscal matters related to the reserves and any matters related to key appointments, they are subject to an override by Parliament.

However, it opted to retain the existing threshold of support needed from the CPA for a parliamentary override — a simple majority — instead of adopting the calibrated approach recommended by the commission, where the threshold is pegged to the level of support among the council for the President’s decision.

It also decided against adopting the proposal to publish the President’s opinion on all decisions where he exercises his veto — this should not be done where appointment or fiscal matters are concerned. The former would subject a candidate to the glare of publicity, while the latter might involve market-sensitive information, it said.   

Instead, this could apply to just Supply Bills, Supplementary Supply Bills and Final Supply Bills, which are Bills that involve expenditure.  

These views were spelt out in the White Paper released yesterday, detailing the Government’s response to the commission’s recommendations issued last week. 

Currently, the President is required to consult the CPA on only some fiscal matters regarding the reserves, and the vast majority of key public service appointments, and parliamentary override is only allowed in certain circumstances. In addition, Parliament cannot override the President’s veto, if the majority of the CPA agrees. 

If a simple majority of the CPA disagrees, then Parliament can override it with a two-thirds majority.

The calibrated approach for parliamentary override suggested by the commission is based on two scenarios. 

If the President exercises his veto, and the CPA is evenly split but its chairman uses his casting vote in the President’s favour, then Parliament can override it only with a two-thirds majority.

But if the majority of CPA disagrees with the President, Parliament can override the veto with a simple majority.

However, the Government said this may “unintentionally emphasise or even politicise how individual members of the council, particularly its chairman, have voted, instead of the collective judgment of the council as a whole”. 

Elsewhere, it agreed with the commission’s proposal to add two more members to the CPA — one appointed by the President and the other by the Prime Minister — in tandem with the CPA’s expanded scope of work. 

It also accepted the recommendation to extend the timeframe for the President to exercise his veto powers from 30 days to six weeks, but said the original timeframe should be retained for certain financial and time-sensitive matters such as Supply Bills.

The 30-day timeframe should also be retained for the continuance of detention or restraining orders, and the conduct of investigations. 

For “exceptional” cases classified by the Government as urgent and requiring an immediate decision, the deadline should be shortened to within 15 days of the proposal being sent to the President.