Right now, it’s not professional at all. You do need spin doctors, and lots of money to get your ads out, especially since you might have to advertise on cable channels to gain a leg up to a different voter demographic.

Workfare is a term used by the govt to make it more palatable, just like IRs for casino resorts.

As far as I’m concerned, it is a form of welfare. This scheme is already used as part of the social welfare package in some other countries. Singapore simply borrowed from them and repackaged it to suit our needs (i.e., welfare is bad, so must become Workfare).

I agree with what you said about the employment situation in Australia.

Workfare is a scheme whereby one receives some additional cash if he or she works. That is different from social welfare schemes which include things like free or low cost of education or welfare money paid to those who are not working.

Secondly, the proposed Workfare is currently proposed for an initial period of three years. Hence, it is inaccurate to say the scheme is written in stone.

Even if the government decides to rescind the scheme, what can the lowly paid workers do? Hence, it will be naive to think that the government will not retract their scheme after it runs out three years later.

Howard’s Work Choices, not only benefits huge corporations but also reduce worker’s rights.

One cannot simply compare Work Choices in Australian to the labour situation in Singapore.

In Singapore’s case, the government has routinely disregard workers’ rights by banning independent trade unions and industrial actions.

Howard’s Work Choices has various clauses that makes workers more easily redundant. For example, employers can dismiss their employees under the “operational reasons” clause of Work Choices. Moreover, Work Choices also restrict union activities.

It is pretty clear cut that the Singapore government, unlike the Australian government, is not generally sensitive to worker’s rights and their plight.

One of the main reason is because Australians are still able to vote a party out of power if it feels the government is out of touch with the citizenry.

In Singapore’s case, citizens do not have that privilege, which I have convincingly put forth in my previous comment.

As I have tried to explain in my last post, let us not confuse our situation with that of Australia. Let us not confuse the terms. Let us debate and discuss the issues while looking at the bigger picture in general.

Matt, about Workfare, I don’t think the govt is planning to remove it in the future. They have already calculated (and rightly so) that in the age of globalization, welfare is needed for the bottom rungs. It’s not going to go away.

I cannot imagine seeing LKY/LHL worked up until their faces turned red in trying to explain why their policies are good. Well, I saw John Howard blow his top in parliamentary debate. I thought… wah so cool.

Kaffein

Daniel – Gerald’s got a strong point,we just have to look @ it from a different angle!Why don’t you contact the opposition party members to contribute or share yr thoughts,i’m certain they are willing to listen!Go ahead & give it your best shot!Cheers!

Gerald – Daniel has brought out some issues,a different scenario,we just have to give the opposition some time,or rather,we can also chip in,how does that sound,i’m sure if we all collaborate together to discuss significant issues,that should be morale booster for the opposition party,too bad i’m in England studying….but i’ll do what i can to contribute my part,not for me,but for the public!Cheers!

PS : I strongly feel its about time Spore needs to have a strong coalition govt!

We aren’t going to get far just hoping for the best man and best party to come along. When Dr Sun turn against Qing to liberat against oppression, did he wait for the best party and best man to come and overturn the dynasty ? Did he think that he has the best party ?

Nope. Neither should we keep condemning the opp party. We didn’t give it a chance to breed and we kill it before it can grow influential. A party can never be perfect and it is better to have one than none at all.

Politics is unfair and even more so in Singapore where there is no voice at all. But then just condemning and complaining about opp party doesn’t make politics any fairer. It just make thing worse, and all the more give the PAP mandate to do as it pleases, as it likes.

To join opp party is not a bed of roses given that PAP is paranoid about them. So why not encourage than discourage them ?

Everything need to have a first step. Why learn to fly when we learn yet to walk ?
Perhaps we should give opp party to nurture.

If the WP were as well-organised, and as good at challenging government policy as the Australian Labor Party, do you think they would be able to win more votes at the elections?

The point is that we have yet to see a good opposition on par with their counterparts in Australia. Yet we keep lamenting the unlevel playing field. Politics is unfair. Tough! Deal with it. If WP improves themselves, I’m sure more people will vote for them — At least enough to win a GRC!

The gov will very much like you to think you can do likewise and happy to let you think this way until when the time for election. In the election, the gov will do all sort of funny thing to prevent making election a fair process etc using carrot, using media, using excuses, using empty promise, giving threat, prevent you from voting (GRC), discredit opposition party, prevent main issue from been discussed etc. Don’t you Singaporean remember instead of address Singaporean’s issues in election, the establish play punk by focusing on the problems and credibility of opp party instead. Why not gov focus on their own credibility and problems instead ?

So given that now gov is so unpopular, why do you think the gov will give you the right to vote when the time comes ?
So please wakeup and stop giving lame excuses to comfort yourself. I doubt many will get to vote at all, and whose know the FT that stay in Singapore will get to vote for Singapore coffer. Remember, there is no longer such thing as Singapore citizen but Singapore resident !

Isn’t GCT says ‘this is all politics’ and LKY says ‘you can’t replace gov with election’ ?

So please, do yourself and others a flavour. Stop helping the establishment into misleading the republic that they can vote justly and fairly because to the establishment, the message is damn clear:
THIS IS JUST POLITICS !
Human right ? You got to be kidding. You want human right, then you better PayAndPay.

The Howard government, mind you, has been in power for 11 years. That is considerably a long time for any democracy.

When the Liberals are in power, they have brought the country to disrepute by becoming a stooge of the Bush administration in entering the widely unpopular Iraqi invasion, as well as being part of the NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Press freedom in Australia eroded under the rule of the Howard government. The country’s press ranking fell according to Reporters Without Borders and Freedom House.

Its security intelligence arm, ASIO, was compared to the secret police by former Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser. David Hicks and Dr Haneef’s case also dealt a very strong blow to the government’s public relations image.

The government also enacted a legislation that banned same sex marriage, the first in any developed Western democracy.

The press and academics, in my opinion, played a major role on the downfall of Howard. Academics, media and NGOs are in particular, frustrated at the erosion of press freedom and the increasingly strong arm tactics used to silence dissent. The news media have been extremely critical of the government.

Did Work Choices aka the industrial relations policy affect the elections? Certainly. Work Choices benefits huge corporations and has also become a bureacratic nightmare for both employers and employees.

However, I believe he was voted out due to a combination of factors (as I have stated above).

I think Australians generally want change, especially since Howard has been in power for too long. The discontent among the general electorate has grown to such an extent that it can no longer be contained, which revealed itself in opinion polls and this election.

Is there a lesson for Singapore? Unlike Gerard, I fail to see how the PAP can be replaced through periodic elections. Singapore, unlike in Australia, is an authoritarian state that has effective control of many sectors of society including a pro government media, amidst other factors which works against the Opposition and civil society.

As such, comparing Singapore, an authoritarian state to other democracies such as India or Australia, is like comparing apples to oranges.

Come election time, the PAP government steps up its efforts to destroy Opposition with defamatin suits while regulating communication through banning online forums, opinion polls, video broadcasts amongst other measures.

How do you expect Opposition parties to contest in such tightly regulated environments and under such unfair conditions and emerge victorious?

Many a time, our PAP leaders’s actions including our MM do not match their words whether in international or local politics. The “father-knows-best” policies appear to be out of touch with the ever-changing sensitivities of both the Singaporean citizens as well as those of our neighbouring countries.

I believe that if PAP’s starts losing a few seats in the next election or even if the opposition manage to deprive PAP of the 66.6% majority vote, then maybe only will they be awaken from the illusion that all is fine with the current govt policies.

Otherwise, I’m sure the PAP leaders will continue having the the same mindset as the offspring of one of the PAP MP “Get out of my Uncaring Face”!

Does that ring a bell in anyone’s ears?