I’m very concerned about this. We have already seen how police had brushed away “minor” injuries as a civil matter, rather than criminal. There are also reports of sloppy investigative work.]

=-=–=-=-=-

Could you give some clearer examples of them ‘brushing away’ cases?

I have some experience with their handling of minor offences. I cannot comment here for obvious reasons.

I wonder with more people in this dot, how well are they maintaining low crime rate? The way statistics is collected is important and interesting to me.

#1 lifeobzervr, You got this spot on. I am sure WP’s would welcome you as an editor. But I don’t think that has change their intentions or beliefs; albeit the effect and impact of the speech could be magnified many times over.

Nonetheless, I am always glad that WP has always taken the neutral approach. The last thing any sensible people want is to see WP oppose for the sake of opposition.

I understand and appreciate TOC helping spread the words of WP members doing this will only divert readers away from the Hammer.

Link to Sylvia Lim’s speech in the Hammer
http://www.wp.sg/wordpress/2009/05/singapores-security-and-evolving-the-political-system/

I am also surprised, with shortage of policemen, they can still mobilised so many of them against the Chee’s family, surround them and gag them into submission. Mas Selamat never gottens such “priviledges” as the Chee’s. We should roughly now how our men-in-blue were deployed, to protect the elites, resulting in shortages of our poodles.

I’m very concerned about this. We have already seen how police had brushed away “minor” injuries as a civil matter, rather than criminal. There are also reports of sloppy investigative work.

rather than spending money to broadcast of singapore’s “low” crime rate, they shld concentrate on improving the public perception by actually doing some solid work.

btw, “solid” work does not include work done against the marxist 22/ dr chee / jbj etc

Frankly, at this point in time, the weight of Opposition’s presence is not in Parliament. It should be out in the real world. Beautiful speeches without clear reform agenda are meaningless. It’ll be good to hear consistent views ‘from the people’ speaking of WP what is said in parliamentary speeches. There is a huge crisis facing workers whose collar is in the colour of the shirt WP is donning. Unfortunately, it is the collar of the colour of the shirt PAP is wearing that becomes WP’s fascination.

An Opposition is No Opposition if their agenda is only a degree or two different from the Ruling Party. Halimah Yaacob in the Ruling party has had more consistent Worker’s Agenda tabled. It is important that Opposition parties begin to float policy proposals that will adress significantly the quality of lives of citizens under the median mark.

The Oppositions have to show substantively that there is an alternative… better still show that there are many alternatives. Otherwise, the presence of more opposition members in parliament who are as dysfunctional as the ‘walkover – free ticket’ PAP MPs, (i.e. hardly speaking, unable to critically address the impact of policies beyond the imagination of those visible to them and even when speaking couldn’t help but tow the cabinet’s position with a tinge of paraphrasing so as not to look like a plagiarist) would be a convenient case example to kill off any future arguments for the need for more Oppositions in parliament to ensure better ‘check and balances’.

On the other hand, I have all this while been suspecting that the SDP has also been “infiltrated” after its founder, Mr Chiam, has been “kicked out” unceremoniously.

The same trend also goes for PAP during the early days of its foundation.

Her speech is many times better than pap juniors who has not battled during election. Anyway, she made a very good conclusion:- “the ultimate beneficiaries of such changes should be the people and not political parties, the people’s views on these changes should be actively sought before they are finalised.”

Thus no point criticising how she drafted her speech, and we the citizens of Singapore are not putting words into action in support of her and the alternative parties. The oppositions can only said so much in parliament, the balls are in the peopel’s hand to make change we want to see.

Sylvia’s using the Late JBJ as an example is lame. The fact of the matter is that WP after JBJ is not the same WP during JBJ’s time. WP seems to be posing itself as the Waiting Party rather than Worker’s Party. The theme’s being raised by WP seldom depart from those by the ruling party. Thus the consistency for the Worker’s agenda is rather abysmal. The worker’s agenda is not just about questioning employment figures or effectiveness of PAP backed programmes such as SPUR. Surely WP can be more creative in forwarding the Worker’s Agenda.

Perhaps, the best measure for Sylvia and her team to prove that breaking down the GRCs into full SMCs is to convince Singaporeans that WP will be able to attract and field credible minority candidates and argue for the 3 SMCs to be created be in a cluster so as create a SMC election contests effect. At this point- the best location for the cluster would be the Nee Soon – Sembawang area. With Nee Soon East and Nee Soon Central already SMCs. Nee Soon South from AMK GRC should be freed to be an SMC. Two other SMCs should be drawn out from Sembawang GRC.

However, at this point, I have my doubts that WP would even field a minority candidate in an SMC contest.