Singapore’s opposition is still not united,look at Malaysia,by being united they have turn the tables against National Front.

P.S. Latest news,Ho ching has been replaced,finally our hard earned money bleeding has come to a stop temporarily.

This reads like a naive article displaying little knowledge of the true workings of Sg politics. The irony of writer’s views is that they come straight from the PAP books – the sad thing is they are precisely what will WEAKEN the opposition if followed.

For Opp members to enter parliament is to be trapped there, muffled, lest defamation lawsuits follow, just like what happened to JBJ *IN* parliament. As LKY admitted: if Chee Soon Juan had ‘behaved’ himself like Chiam and Low did, he (LKY) wldn’t have had to bankrupt Chee to keep him out of Parliament (reflect on what these words mean).

Winning 40++% of Opp votes is not new. It happened in Aljunied GRC when Francis Seow ran for it. But how an avg of 40% of disconcented voters can lead to 98% dominance of PAP? Well, as Goh Chok Tong admitted, GRC is to allow PAP to have upper hand.

As LKY admitted of the Elected Presidency: if the PAP gets voted out in a ‘freak’ election, the ‘President’ can hold it for one term, two at most. After that the army has to go in (reflect on what these words mean).

PAP wants you to believe Parliament is the only way to attain political viability. That’s incorrect. The ability to form govt in parliament and the ability to engage in politics in the wider society are complementary things. But in Singapore the latter is severely curbed and that should not be. (think of the numerous ways the PAP exercise control to strengthen its grip on Singaporeans)

To say ‘opposition parties must be of utility to the electorate’ is laughable when the PAP’s whole point is to deliberately weaken if not crush oppositional politics, and the exact opposite standards applies when it comes to the PAP: the PAP makes the people useful to itself rather than the other way round.

Perhaps the writer isn’t well-acquainted with material in this regard. I suggest he reads up on these areas.

All these said, I don’t subscribe to the view that Opp parties in SIngapore must unite. They all have different strategies and objectives, and they should. WP can work on entering parliament just as SPD can work on freeing Sgreans as it has done. At the end, Singapore society benefits from all their different contributinos.

Francis,
you are right. With diverse strategies of opp parties, they will caught the PAP by surprise, and it is very effective because the head of the ruling clowns just couldn’t handle situation out of chao. The clowns are designed to handle thing in structure and orderly manner. They forget that they are paid high salary to handle chaotic situation, otherwise why should anyone pay them so high if thing always work in order ? Any difference from Just collect money like ERP system ?

“Right now we have Low, Chiam, Steve… . We can deal with them.
Suppose you had 10… opposition members in Parliament. Instead of
spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, I’m
going to spend all my time thinking what’s the right way to FIX them,
to BUY MY SUPPORTERS VOTES, how can I solve this week’s problem and
forget about next year’s challenges?”

Even with paltry opp parties, the clowns just could handle them. It prove that those clowns just don’t have the substance to deserve a place in the government, let alone their pay.

I disagree! Opposition parties should look within as well as outside. i am supporting the American’s global petition for FDA to reform. If it gets reformed, lesser dangerous everyday foods (like the Melamine milk scares etc) will get made and exported.

Look not only from within!

Hi Francis, I’m the contributor of this article. I’ll try to respond to as many comments as possible.

I wish to challenge the view that ‘For Opp members to enter parliament is to be trapped there, muffled’. Think. The mainstream media does not provide fair coverage to the opposition parties. It’s only in parliamentary debates, when the opposition MPs speak out, that most Singaporeans get to hear their views. Currently, the opposition parties lack publicity. They must attain it through legitimate means – the parliamentary way, and not through negative publicity.

“PAP wants you to believe Parliament is the only way to attain political viability. That’s incorrect. The ability to form govt in parliament and the ability to engage in politics in the wider society are complementary things”

I agree with your last sentence, that they are complementary things. But if opposition parties stay outside Parliament, what use can they do if they have the best policies but no power to publicise, influence the govt or even implement them?

“think of the numerous ways the PAP exercise control to strengthen its grip on Singaporeans”

I don’t profess to be an expert, but I’ve written on it before – you can check up on http://eternal-hap.blogspot.com/2009/01/pap-political-dominance.html.

“To say ‘opposition parties must be of utility to the electorate’ is laughable when the PAP’s whole point is to deliberately weaken if not crush oppositional politics, and the exact opposite standards applies when it comes to the PAP”

If they aren’t useful to the electorate, Singaporeans won’t vote them in. Similarly, if the PAP isn’t useful, Singaporeans won’t vote them in.

“WP can work on entering parliament just as SPD can work on freeing Sgreans as it has done. At the end, Singapore society benefits from all their different contributinos”

Fine, SDP can carry on their work. If that’s their intention, I’ve nothing to say. But are you sure society benefits from SDP’s work? There are many methods to achieve a goal, and I suspect SDP (and the PAP) has forced it into a corner, with limited operational space.

Find way out:-

Party Leaders (Chairman and Secretary General) unable to come, we can invited Political Leaders from CEC for the forum

Political Leaders unable to come, we can invited party members as a guest of the forum.

Now is year 2009, people who born before 1957 already more than 52 years old. In year 2019, they are more than 62 years old. This mean people who arround 40 years or below will take over Singapore Politic in ten years time.

Wish and wait for old generation to unite is a hope and dreams, it is better young people plan for their own network and unite for future leadership.

“With diverse strategies of opp parties, they will caught the PAP by surprise, and it is very effective because the head of the ruling clowns just couldn’t handle situation out of chao”

Perhaps. But are you talking about a coordinated ‘diverse strategies’ ?

Hi eternal ,, I think your responses have already been rebutted if not demolished in Chee Soon Juan’s book: A Nation Cheated.

If that’s too political for you, try Lee’s Law: How Singapore Crushes Dissent by Chris Lydgate.

Otherwise there’re the books on Sg’s judiciary and media system by Francis Seow published by Yale Uni Press.

I donch mean to pour cold water.
In terms of Reality,
even high quality blogs like TOC and others receive attention of only a few thousand or hundred fans.
I hope many turn out for your forum tomorrow.
As seen in the buget debate, there is a real valid reason for the existence of alternative parties.
However, this is singapore, whose citizens, in general and in majority, have no experience in this kind of things like attending such forums or even just simply voice up on social issues that affect many. But give it say 20 more years, maybe the situation could be different.

In short, for now, there is only 1 obstacle for alternative parties and its not the lack of talent. Why do i say this?
well, how can there be not even 1 more suitable alternative mp in parl?
definitely there is! and am sure its more than 1!!
The problem is people in general do not and would not attend speeches like that held in HLP.

The problem is also not the lack of debatable topics. Believe me there are plenty!

Without people turning up. There is no beginning in the 1st place.
Thus, I could not understand why this job of getting people to attend speeches has failed miserably? At least, I do not see much thing done in this aspect.
Are these alternatives serious in their career?

Donch be mistaken, I do respect some alternatives like WP given their achievements, though little.

Eternal (or Aloysius), I forgot to say, my objections and opinions nonetheless, you did well by writing it. That’s the first step for you yourself to challenge your own assumptions.

Thanks for your suggestion. However, I’d prefer you rebutt my responses personally. If you can’t….it’s all right then.

LKY gained power also through elections, although he piggyback on Barisan socialis.

For the opposition to gain power, they must also do it through elections.

It will be a long,ardous task. Who says grabbing power is easy.

“Perhaps. But are you talking about a coordinated ‘diverse strategies’ ?”

If the gov know that this some form of coordinated effort, wouldn’t the gov likely to accuse the opp party of conspiracy theory, and likely to create trouble for “compliant” opp parties too. Not that we do not know that the government is a paranoid.
My guess is that the gov will close one eyes to whatever “compliant” parties do as long as there is no true unity and collaboration among opp parties to pose threat to the gov.

“LKY gained power also through elections, although he piggyback on Barisan socialis.
For the opposition to gain power, they must also do it through elections.”

So you think LKY is so stupid to repeat the history of 1959 ? Remember that PAP is once a opp party too and hence he knows that a incumbent small party can just be effective to crumble established and dominant party, hence he ensure that no small party can follow the path of PAP in 1959 by making sure that opp party all play by the rules and do whatever to destroy anyone that pose a threat. As long as he and his party control the media, the press, military, government, judges, executive power, police,electorate department, he knows that he has all the upperhand. How can you even call it a election if it is a joke ? Vote ? Not when the gov knows that they win time. Isn’t the last election, they are so confident of winning that they become complacent and lapsed ? Do you think that the next election they will be stupid and complacent again ?

#5, i think ur’e wrong when u say:

“The mainstream media does not provide fair coverage to the opposition parties. It’s only in parliamentary debates, when the opposition MPs speak out, that most Singaporeans get to hear their views.”

NMP Siew spoke in pariament and his what he had to say afterwards:

“When Mr Low Thia Khiang spoke earlier in the day, he had six PAP MPs stand up to question him, and that is being covered in the MSM, including the CNA website and on TV. Curiously, the CNA and TV coverage absolutely omits any mention of my exchanges with the PAP MPs. ST does have a short reference to my disagreement with the Jobs Credit scheme, but with very little detail. It also looks a little odd, that they used my photo to lead the story but there is only a one-line reference to my speech. I’ll wait and see what is published tomorrow. [update 1: I thought the coverage in ST and TODAY turned out to be, on the whole, quite fair]“ — http://siewkumhong.blogspot.com/2009/02/budget-2009-speech-on-budget-statement.html

anyway, what press coverage are we talking about when the SPH is led by ex-DPM and a bevy of secret police officers. LOL

after watching the budget debate videos,
I have renewed respect and confidence in the Alternative MPs.

While it is true that out of 80 plus people in the house,
there is only 2 of of them, for this debate, I think 2 is more than sufficient. They are doing an excellent job. But they should not stop there. Press on.

I think the Alternative Political Parties (I prefer non-ruling political parties as Alternatives instead of Opposition) are doing fine.

Two Alternative MPs are able to take on so many brilliant brains in the ruling party. What if there are twenty of them. It would be good for the people if there are more Alternative MPs in Parliament.

Well done, Alternative Parties! Keep up your good works and press on.

Hi ya’ll,

First let me clarify that i am not affiliated to any political parties whether PAP or oppositions. What i say here is my own view.

I have been a long time reader of TOC and although i do not agree with many article i feel overall the writing is good and can be consider seriously.

What i want to say here is although i am not really in strong support of PAP at this stage, i feel some oppositions are not very credible.

The opposition i am talking about is SDP of course. SDP has never gain much support of the people and i don’t see SDP making any progress at all.

The article by Aloysius Foo highlight very well what is wrong with SDP. For example he say SDP reputation is beyond hope due to Dr Chee Soon Juan series of nonsense acts like civil disobedience and defaming our leaders like PM Lee and MM Lee. I agree with Aloysius Foo totally.

Aloysius Foo also says SDP lacks credibility like for example all its budget proposals are unsounds and unsustainable. This is very true.

Aloysius Foo also said when SDP did poorly in election, Chee Siok Chin went to challenge the result in court! Is SDP a credible party that we can trust? I believe Aloysius Foo answer is NO NO NO!

Aloysius Foo also said SDP is more towards reaching out to Barack Obama or showing off its leaders in court trials. Is this the sign of a good political party? NO NO!

SDP presence hamper all the other oppositions. that is why until now i have not firm my mind to decide PAP or oppositions very clearly.

I think TOC do not need to give any publicity to SDP forum on 7 Feb.

I am glad TOC is taking the right stand and not give SDP a voice. It is power hungry people like SDP that need TOC to do the work for them, not the other way round.

Please TOC keep up your good works and do not ever be sway by SDP propaganda in destroying our oppositions like Workers Party.

Loo J.

16) Jacky

Two Alternative MPs are able to take on so many brilliant brains in the ruling party. What if there are twenty of them. It would be good for the people if there are more Alternative MPs in Parliament
……………………………………………………………………

I was at the PAP rally at Raffles Place during the 2006 GE. PM LHL revealed that the PAP would allow a maximum of only 10 opposition MPs in parliament. If there are more than that it would be difficult for him to carry out his duties beside dealing with so many opposition members. He said he would FIX them up.

“What i want to say here is although i am not really in strong support of PAP at this stage, i feel some oppositions are not very credible.”

The main thing is not whether the opposition is credible or not since they are not given a chance to prove themselves yet. Are the ruling party any credible or trustworthy now ? if they are not, why not even give opp party a chance to prove themselves ? Are people waiting for next Obama which by then if he ever appear our reserves will have depleted pathetically ? Remember with the ruling party, there is totally no accountability and responsibility to the public. None at all. Mistake go scott free and they think they are above the law by sprouting nonsense. The good thing is at least in opp party, we can ensure that there is check and balance.

I recall some old man says that opp party will have depleted the reserve in 5 years time. That I believe him, but is it still better than PAP who deplete the reserve in 2 year’s time and we seeing it happen right in front of us ? We are the laughing stock of the world now. What a heavy casualties we suffered all thank to the PAP and their intransparency and inaccountability.

I think it is fairly fortunate that the WP and the SDP has adopted their own approaches to the current problems in Singapore’s political system (I had wanted to say “democracy”, but I am feeling a little spiteful right now).

I believe I understand the motivation behind the SDP’s general approach of civil disobedience to help Singaporeans realize the horridly uneven playing field in Singapore’s political scene. Unfortunately, I agree with the author that without a well-grounded plan for national governance, I think Singaporeans would still not vote the SDP into power. The resulting sympathy and sense of fair play should the SDP succeed would only go so far. What is a well-grounded plan? Take a look at the SDP’s 5-point proposal to the budget –

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/1845-budget-spending-not-transparent-sdp-proposes-alternative-5-point-plan-

Reasonable where some of the ideas go, but zero description of the details of how they would help. For example – on GST. How much is halting GST receipts for 2 years expected to cost the government? How much of the money saved by forgoing GST is expected to benefit which proportion of the population and by how much? Is the population expected to save the money gained by forgoing GST or will it allow them to spend more? How did the SDP team come up with the figure of 2 years? I would have expected them to have at least used the currently debated FY 2009 budget document as a base template to extrapolate the figures were their plans adopted to analyze and present the intended effects. By simply stating what they believe the effects might be, the SDP’s 5-point plan is frankly no different from any typical PAP non-transparent, non-accountable approach to announcing policy to the population. If they wish to continue fighting the PAP’s lack of transparency and accountability, then they need to either do their homework or show that they have done their homework transparently without being asked.

Anyway, back to my original point, I believe it is “fortunate” that if the SDP succeeds in its goals of highlighting the injustices, the WP is working its way toward actually being able to benefit from that success. Then again, both are still fairly far off their targets.

Loo J. #17 -

You summarize what I *used to* feel about Dr. Chee and the SDP. Thanks to other netizens, it is clear (to me, now) that the SDP approach does have its role to play in shaping a better political environment for Singapore.

I do not agree with your argument that the TOC should work against publicizing the SDP’s activities. They are taking a road of non-violent civil disobedience and while not all of us are comfortable with it, we can still wish them well on that journey. It is not as if they are inciting violence and hate.

I would go one step further and urge the TOC to publicize interesting PAP events as well that may be worth attending to neutral or pro-PAP viewers. Makes for a genuine and more comfortable venue for civil discourse in the TOC imho.

If SDP is good they would have recognised that Dr. Ron Paul made a better choice for USA President! haha Obama DID nothing to force a reform on FDA. And he has not yet made any real policies that benefited USA (according to Twitter members at Twitter.com ) since his inauguration although I believe he was sincerely angry with Wall Street chiefs. (Americans are slowly feeling that things have not changed much.)

Anyway back to where the comments left off, TOC has no need to work against any opposition party. MPs in opposition parties – what have they been doing since they weren’t elected? Given up? Any “proof” they have ppl’s welfare at heart?

I will naturally support the opposition party who has been ACTIVE these past few years. But were there any, that I may be unaware of?

And do something practical for the people, other than spouting ideas, platitudes and condemning PAP.

In HK, the Democratic Party is helping the minibonders with legal advice and court action. Here other than Goh Meng Seng (in his personal capacity), no opposition party is helping.

Imagine the public gdwill if the WP, SDP etc had individually or collectively tried to help?

- Hi Jacky, “I think the Alternative Political Parties (I prefer non-ruling political parties as Alternatives instead of Opposition) are doing fine.”

The term doesn’t really matter, but I’d prefer we stick to the conventional usage of ‘opposition’, instead of being uniquely Singapore again ;)

- Hi Loo. J, don’t worry, the SDP is not the sole opposition party in Singapore. “SDP presence hamper all the other oppositions. that is why until now i have not firm my mind to decide PAP or oppositions very clearly. I think TOC do not need to give any publicity to SDP forum on 7 Feb”.

But it’s still fair to give them publicity, to see what they can offer and whether they are changing. Anyway opposition parties suffer from a lack of publicity, as I mentioned in the article, and the New Media, like TOC here can help them out.

- Hi Daniel, “if they are not, why not even give opp party a chance to prove themselves ?”. Well, is there any governing party in the world which will GIVE their opponents a chance to prove themselves? The correct question to ask is shouldn’t the opposition parties give themselves a chance to prove their capability? This will ensure they use the most effective strategies to maximise their limited space.

- Hi Chee Wai, “If they wish to continue fighting the PAP’s lack of transparency and accountability, then they need to either do their homework or show that they have done their homework transparently without being asked.” You’re absolutely right about this.

More importantly, their 5-point alternative budget does not restore economic growth and employment, and they seem more interested in scoring political points and trying to be populist, by claiming to be ‘people-centric’. They lack a viable proposal, which will hinder their attempts to be relevant. Though they are the opposition, they don’t have to depart so far from the govt’s policies.

- Hi Minibonder, “In HK, the Democratic Party is helping the minibonders with legal advice and court action. Here other than Goh Meng Seng (in his personal capacity), no opposition party is helping.

Imagine the public gdwill if the WP, SDP etc had individually or collectively tried to help?”

Good idea. That’s one important way the opposition parties can gain publicity. But they have to maintain a balance between politics and genuine help.

What I would like to wish for from our opposition:

1) Have full time MPs who walk the ground and understand the people’s concerns. Represent the people truly and honestly. We don’t need half an MP and half a business director.
2) Mandate an independent elections department. No more gerry mandering please.
3) Restore public housing prices to sanity.
4) Restore the CPF back to its original goal which is for retirement purposes. Allow citizens access to their own hard earned monies especially in exceptionally bad times like these.
5) Treat this as a country first and not a business. Implement a Citizens first policy and value them truly. Let citizens see the true value of citizenship.
6) Cut GST to 5% or less and exempt the basic necessities. We don’t need regressive taxes with such a wide income divide.
7) Open up the mainstream media so that we can have a free press. No more govt propaganda please.
8) Set up a truly independent Consumer’s Association.
9) True transparency and access to public information for Citizens. No more second guessing our ‘paper losses’ in TCs and govt reserves please.
10) Use of ISA detentions only with 80% approval of our MPs plus our President and mandate to file charges after maybe 6 months or a year. We don’t want to live in fear of the powers of our secret service please.

Now is the best time for our opposition to sieze the ground. Please take full advantage so that our children will not have to go through the pain and scars that have been inflicted to us by our elites.

“Well, is there any governing party in the world which will GIVE their opponents a chance to prove themselves? The correct question to ask is shouldn’t the opposition parties give themselves a chance to prove their capability? This will ensure they use the most effective strategies to maximise their limited space. ”

This sounds like the bull**** spouted by the PAP. Taking the opportunities to prove yourself is predicated on the assurance that the opportunity is not TAKEN AWAY from you in the first place and the ground you stand on is not constantly gerrymandered by the PAP.

In dictatorships opponents are crushed. in democracies, opponents aren’t given a good time, but they have a fair (and much fairer) time than in Singapore.

Talking about limited space. Perhaps one should start questioning why the space is limited in the first place.

“Talking about limited space. Perhaps one should start questioning why the space is limited in the first place.”

Sure, then after finding the answer, what to do? The key is to operate within a given set of rules and do it successfully, rather than keep complaining or trying to ignore them.

That’s the wrong key. The set of rules are unreasonable and unfair and you do not work within it hoping to effect real changes. you also have to remove these unfair rules. Of course it’s always easy to chirp on the side of powerful and wondering why the weak are so weak.

#27, actually you can’t ignore them since everywhere you turn the law comes to cho cho you LOL cannot speak cannot think cannot write everything need permit one. only pappers no need to apply permit. can hold protest and cycling trips one. si double standard or not?

17) Loo J. on February 7th, 2009 1.38 am

I think you need not get so worked up.
I am also a neutral person.

We should not be attacking alternative parties.
We should be supporting the Idea of Alternative party – its role and importance.

Lets focus on the Commonality and get rid of negative thoughts.
Like this then can progress.

Majulah!

“Well, is there any governing party in the world which will GIVE their opponents a chance to prove themselves? The correct question to ask is shouldn’t the opposition parties give themselves a chance to prove their capability? This will ensure they use the most effective strategies to maximise their limited space.”

You answer that. There isn’t at all. But you fail to mention the drastic measurement dorminant party that blatantly use over the other to the point that law can be twist and turn to their liking.

It is not a question of whether gov will give opponent a chance to prove themselves, but whether it is right to abuse the law and authority to cite to their own power and appease their ultimate pay master, and destroy those openly who question them of such act. The act of questioning becomes the act of conspiracy that end as contempt of court ? Isn’t that absurb ? If a court already known blatantly as kangaroo court worldwide, why sue other of the fact instead of making the court more independently ?

YawningBread has once written a excellent article about how gov is using a game theory of tolerating a lesser threat to defence against a great threat.

” shouldn’t the opposition parties give themselves a chance to prove their capability?”
Did they not try to make their own opportunities to prove themselves but to be suppressed by the gov and not by the citizen ?
As why these opp parties wouldn’t want to work as one, my guess is the disagreement over each other strategy, and likely fear that government will retaliate over the unity (remember how it is that JBL can be cast out as MP so easily ?). But whatever the reason, let them sort out themselves. They should have known better than any of us since they have make a effort to reconcile that difference before.

Anyway, this aside, I hope that the question raised by MP Low will be answered and not move on as it always do.

“Sure, then after finding the answer, what to do? The key is to operate within a given set of rules and do it successfully, rather than keep complaining or trying to ignore them.”

So what consititute success ? citizen’s Voting or approval ? Is JBL successful ? As what ? So what if MP LOw play by the rule and question the authority ? I hope that this time Low wouldn’t just move on without the answer by the authority over his question on job credit. There must be followup through, though it always a move-on thingy.

It is always the same old thing. Certain Opp party play by the rule, and for a while look successful during parliament, catch MP and minister by surprise, and the citizen feel vindicated. but then, thing move on, and gahmen cast all the question raised by the opp party aside and continue their own way. Opp party now view as wayang party, even more so quoted and poke fun by the ruling party. So is the definition of been a successful opp party ?

So Let not say any opp party are complaining or trying to ignore them until we understand the thing and obstacle they going through.

18) Edward on February 7th, 2009 1.40 am

I was at the PAP rally at Raffles Place during the 2006 GE. PM LHL revealed that the PAP would allow a maximum of only 10 opposition MPs in parliament. If there are more than that it would be difficult for him to carry out his duties beside dealing with so many opposition members. He said he would FIX them up.

—————————————————-

Hi Edward,

PM LHL can go around fixing alternative MPs but if there are 20 or more Alternative MPs in Parliament, I believe in time to come the PM himself and his Party will be FIXED!

I am going to write a book entitled “The Fixing Game Both Can Play.”

To Daniel :

you know the problem is there is not enough opposition MPs to defend Singaporean’s interest.

We only get goodies when Election is coming.

The style of the opposition is not really essential now. Rest assured, if the style is not right, LKY will sue until bankrupt.

Having said that the 2 ex SDP MPs really didn’t make use of their opportunity when they are in Parliament.

if I compare their contributions (from their style) to Low TK’s contribution, I think many would say Low is better by far.

33) Jacky
I am going to write a book entitled “The Fixing Game Both Can Play.”
…………………………………………………………

If you are serious, I can help to contribute some content. Maybe the book should be entitled ‘PAP- the inside story’. It should include who and how pro-PAP businessmen who work for them are richly rewarded. How an NTUC staff member who took part against the PAP in the GE was sacked. How govt offices were told not to subscribe to newspapers like Singapore Herald because they were critical of the PAP govt and why all these papers were closed down.

The list is endless.

“if I compare their contributions (from their style) to Low TK’s contribution, I think many would say Low is better by far.”

Yes, that is only successful by citizen’s standard and perception. Just like Low ask about job credit scheme, is it EFFECTIVE ?

On the topic of what we want from the opposition, here is a big list I drew up some time ago. For everyone’s consumption and thought.

http://forum.yoursdp.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=123

For God sack! please all opp parties to be united as One Big Party and get the rid of the present papees, 44 years, how long do you people want to drag on?

33) Jacky
It should include who and how pro-PAP businessmen who work for them are richly rewarded.

I encourage all readers to visit ‘The unOfficial Yeo Cheow Tong Website’ to get a better insight into the working of the PAP behind the scene. You don’t read these from the ST.

38) tiredsingaporean
For God sack! please all opp parties to be united as One Big Party and get the rid of the present papees, 44 years, how long do you people want to drag on?
………………………………………………….
If you include self-government by PAP from 1959, it is already 50 years of authoritarian rule. I don’t think you can get rid of the PAP in the next GE. Maybe after another 5 GEs. By then Singapore will be bankrupt because the political leaders will be corrupt and working for their self-interest.The weak opposition in parliament and the brain-washed, complacent general public are aiding them towards our future collapse.

A South American country which reached First World status became bankrupt in less then 90 years. This country was a former colony and had a dominant party with a ruthless leader like Singapore.

Each and every citizen who believes in democracy and cares for future survival of Singapore should do their part beside just encouraging the opposition parties to unite. I pay subscription fees anonymously to the Hammer to be sent to pro-PAP colleagues. Once, I paid for some copies of the Hammer to be given to residents at a food centre. Take actions beside giving feedback to help the opposition parties. By taking actions I do not mean thinner and lighter.

Please visit the above-mentioned website to find who and how those who work for the PAP and senior civil-servants and army personnel are rewarded. It is right and proper to reward those who work hard for the nation but not those who work for their self-interest and to perpetuate PAP rule. Tell your friends and loved ones.

Politics in Southeast Asia seemed not consistent and has a bad image specially in our country, The Philippines.